*DISCONTINUED* Rares List Guide (1 March 2019)

[The Last Raven]

I personally do not feel the need to add descriptions due to the fact that the information is being provided in the mass post that Takk is putting together. The title already explains “considering the evidence”. I feel like anything else added may be redundant or if it is worded certain ways (suggestive wording I believe I mentioned this a few pages back) it will skew results. I feel like the title/mass trade post explains the reason why we have those options pretty well.

If we were though to do descriptors I would suggest
Non tier - due to trade proof
Holly tag - due to trade proof
Middle tier - a compromise between conflicting trade proof

[EmberzTale]

I personally do not feel the need to add descriptions due to the fact that the information is being provided in the mass post that Takk is putting together. The title already explains “considering the evidence”. I feel like anything else added may be redundant or if it is worded certain ways (suggestive wording I believe I mentioned this a few pages back) it will skew results. I feel like the title/mass trade post explains the reason why we have those options pretty well.

I agree. I also feel that the options should be what was stated earlier in this post:

Considering the evidence in this post (link to post), what would be the best placement for the UR PEACH?
1. Non Tier
2. UR Holly Tier
3. A new tier between Non & UR Holly
4. I don't know but voting is fun

[ElementalInsanity]

I personally do not feel the need to add descriptions due to the fact that the information is being provided in the mass post that Takk is putting together. The title already explains “considering the evidence”. I feel like anything else added may be redundant or if it is worded certain ways (suggestive wording I believe I mentioned this a few pages back) it will skew results. I feel like the title/mass trade post explains the reason why we have those options pretty well.

See, though, my reasoning is because of this poll we have.
One of the arguments against this poll was because people may not have voted ‘educatedly’. Let’s be honest, not every person voting is going to look at the forty plus trades we have for evidence. Regardless of what the poll says with ‘considering the evidence’. So it doesn’t explain it enough, imo. We should have it explained on the poll itself too, along with urging people to look at the evidence.

And yes, we would need to be careful about wording. I still feel it’s important to add it in, though, in some form.

[The Last Raven]

I personally do not feel the need to add descriptions due to the fact that the information is being provided in the mass post that Takk is putting together. The title already explains “considering the evidence”. I feel like anything else added may be redundant or if it is worded certain ways (suggestive wording I believe I mentioned this a few pages back) it will skew results. I feel like the title/mass trade post explains the reason why we have those options pretty well.

See, though, my reasoning is because of this poll we have.
One of the arguments against this poll was because people may not have voted ‘educatedly’. Let’s be honest, not every person voting is going to look at the forty plus trades we have for evidence. Regardless of what the poll says with ‘considering the evidence’. So it doesn’t explain it enough, imo. We should have it explained on the poll itself too, along with urging people to look at the evidence.

And yes, we would need to be careful about wording. I still feel it’s important to add it in, though, in some form.

I understand what you are saying. Before I saw your response I edited my post to my suggestions if we did include descriptors.

I like the simplicity of the current draft of the poll but if there is that much concern about “educating” those responding to the poll then I am open to discussing the best way to add descriptions. I just want to keep from skewing the poll one way or another.

[ElementalInsanity]

I understand what you are saying. Before I saw your response I edited my post to my suggestions if we did include descriptors.

I like the simplicity of the current draft of the poll but if there is that much concern about “educating” those responding to the poll then I am open to discussing the best way to add descriptions. I just want to keep from skewing the poll one way or another.

Oh yes I totally agree. That’s why we definitely need to come up with neutral explanations that can’t sway to one way or another.

What you edited into your post is simple and what I’ve been in favor of personally, but haven’t heard other input of if we should do just that/add more, etc. =)

[Takk]

Currently with the trades I’ve gathered, a lot of the lower trades were common in ‘16 and early ‘17, with some swaying in between but not much
I’m also considering posting some canceled trades as well, some trades for a peach at non value. For example, there’s one where someone was offered a peach for their BEG (and another for a BA) that were canceled because the person was told the peach was worth 2 sorbets (underpay demand wise for BEG). The trade with date would be posted, next to it would say ‘canceled due to peach being valued at 2 sorbets’ or ‘canceled, person was told peach was worth 2 sorbets’ or should I leave any canceled trades out? I am using the fair trade thread to try and browse for trades during certain time periods. Posting canceled trades with no reason doesn't seem helpful... But it's feedback I think ---OR just posting canceled, high valued trades (UR Peach for UR Foal cancels for example)

I'll also keep my PM box open if anyone wants to speak to me about anything concerning this list ^^

[EmberzTale]

I think cancelled trades should be left out. Successful trades should be used in determing the placement of the peach.

[Burrito Bunny]

I think all trades which aren't clear attempts to ninja should be included. That way we can see if 1 of every 50 peach for non trade get accepted (For example), or if those trades are accepted most often.

[skyline]

I think all trades which aren't clear attempts to ninja should be included. That way we can see if 1 of every 50 peach for non trade get accepted (For example), or if those trades are accepted most often.

personally i think this is a fantastic idea. from my personal experience, not many people seem to be trading it
for any less than a non, so placing it anything below this i believe would confuse a certain few people,
and it would become one of the specifically demand based pets, and basically not go by it's list placement
at all. so i do believe tracing most recent peach trades from multiple users would be a great way to measure
this all out and finally come to a conclusion on where it should be placed, regardless of the poll's popular choice,
the main problem with the poll is the fact that people don't want to see it go for more than 2 sorbs
because they themselves don't own one. however people who do, value it no less than a non, i've never seen
anyone myself, who hasn't.

[Animall]

I think all trades which aren't clear attempts to ninja should be included. That way we can see if 1 of every 50 peach for non trade get accepted (For example), or if those trades are accepted most often.

personally i think this is a fantastic idea. from my personal experience, not many people seem to be trading it
for any less than a non, so placing it anything below this i believe would confuse a certain few people,
and it would become one of the specifically demand based pets, and basically not go by it's list placement
at all. so i do believe tracing most recent peach trades from multiple users would be a great way to measure
this all out and finally come to a conclusion on where it should be placed, regardless of the poll's popular choice,
the main problem with the poll is the fact that people don't want to see it go for more than 2 sorbs
because they themselves don't own one. however people who do, value it no less than a non, i've never seen
anyone myself, who hasn't.

Ahhhh thank you, I was going to point this out, but I didn't want to come off as "too elitist." Incorporating cancelled trades would be fantastic. Naturally, there are more people who dont/have never owned a peach and would like it to have a lower placement so its more accessible. Less people have actually owned the peach before, so theres going to be less "experienced" votes. Thats why Im hesitant on a new poll - its just another avenue for people to spread their opinions with no background knowledge (similar to the FTT issue discussed earlier).

At least if we give credit to cancelled trades, it really amplifies what the owners of the peach really value it at, and what they are willing to accept for it. This is a great idea.