You are putting too much weight on one snapshot of buyers and sellers for this suggestion - you have 3 sales at one value, all of which would be outliers, opposed to one sale which as only one deviates from the rest, and there is no rationale justifying that decision other than one snapshot of the classifieds at the moment of posting. For uncommon items, this may suffice, but for something as common as this taunt, it should not.

The irony here is that the market as it really was at the time may even have been worse than the one snapshot implies, but also that there should be many more sales here.

https://gladiator.tf/listings/6135e7d8bf46fefe41d5f45e Sep 6

https://gladiator.tf/listings/612c84e443af4d7a11587b66 Aug 30

https://gladiator.tf/listings/6121c07c785bd9eb99788114 Aug 22

https://gladiator.tf/listings/6119f5be600ecada5e1e16c1 Aug 16

The market at the time of these sales (the one on Aug 22 features one of your marketplace sellers (top one), by the way, so that one should be capped)

Incidentally, this means that it is not necessarily wrong that the marketplace sales here are outliers (or perhaps simply overvalued, judging by the buyout I found belonging to one of he sales), but it also means that there should be a wider array of data to work with here for which it seems a flat value likely should not suffice. For these suggestions, having an overview of the market at the time the sales happen is very important for decisions regarding outliers. Statistically, the data collected in your sales summary suggests 3.4 should be the outlier here, but the bigger picture says it is not. This is something we can find but something not everyone will be able to tell from seeing and reading the info provided, and as such it is something that would be useful to include in the suggestion, which you can reference in your decisionmaking/outlier rationale.

As it stands, some new data has popped up on glad.tf already, and in the current market, buyers and sellers have risen slightly, so it is probably best to revise this suggestion to more appropriately reflect the market during this time period.

As a final remark: I do want to commend the effort of sweeping through all histories; its a lot to go through and that is always appreciated. I do however want to urge you not to link histories with no sales - while sharing premium info on items involved in the sales used is unavoidable, it is best not to turn the suggestion into an item history free-for-all.

Closing here on account of my earlier comment.