I've been amazed by all of the products and services that have found their way to our marketplace. All kinds of products I've never heard of, and even non-physical goods have found their way here. The feedback system was designed with product shipment and receipt in mind (full explanation: https://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion.to/wiki/index.php/Feedback_Score). However, innovative buyers and sellers have found ways to gain what appears to be unwarranted advantages within the current system. For example, buyers are loading up on low cost digital goods to boost their buyer stats. One clever seller has been selling low cost lottery tickets to win product samples drawing in hundreds of transactions in a fraction of the time that it takes most sellers, leading others to do the same to keep up. When the system is compelling vendors to compete in strange ways like this, it is probably time to take a second look at it. I don't want the market to turn into a bunch of lottery listings. It's a cool idea for here and there, but seller's shouldn't have to do it to keep up. I think I have devised a way to adjust the feedback and ranking system to be more representative of the vendor's experience and the scale of their operation while still giving high volume, low cost seller's their due. However, instead of just making the changes unilaterally, I want to open up discussion and get everyone's input, especially the vendors who's rank will decrease as a result (low cost item vendors and bitcoin exchangers). The component of the feedback system that I want to change is the price weight (how much a rating counts toward a vendors feedback score and rank based on the price of the item). As seen in the wiki link above, the weight can be found by the following formula: 0.2*log(0.02*(price)+1)+1. This puts free and low cost items, such as listings for bitcoin exchanges, many digital goods, and lottery tickets, at a weight of 1. The weight then rises as the price rises, reaching a 50% increase at around $500. In my opinion, this is much too small an increase. Completing a $500 transaction, most likely requiring shipment of a physical good or some professional service, should carry much more weight than a simple digital lottery ticket, or downloadable e-book. My proposal is to put the weight of free items at zero, and increase the weight much more rapidly, up to 0.25 at around $10, 0.5 at around $25, 1 at $90, 1.5 at $280, 2 at $750, and so on. A visual representation can be seen here: http://www.onlinefunctiongrapher.com/?f=0.5*log(0.07*(x)%2B1)|0.2*log(0.02*(x)%2B1)%2B1&xMin=-40.642404416353166&xMax=593.9416316216038&yMin=-0.15783383043417978&yMax=2.098768235888415. The green line is the current way and the purple line is the proposed new way. So, for example, all else equal, a rating from a $90 transaction will count for twice as much toward a vendor's feedback score and rank compared to a $25 purchase. and 4 times as much as a $10 purchase. The net effect of this change is to put more emphasis on the total dollar volume a vendor does, and less on the quantity of transactions performed. To think of it another way, at one extreme, only quantity would matter and all transactions would be rated equally, whether for a lottery ticket on a gram of weed, or 3 kilos of fine Colombian flake. At the other extreme, there would be a linear relationship between price and weight, where a $100 item would count 100 times more than a $1 item. I think the change I am proposing is fair and will lead to more rational competition amongst the vendors, but as I said before I would like to hear from you all first. Let's try to keep discussion about tweaking the numbers to a minimum and focus more on the overall effect we want to produce in the market. clarification: this change would reduce the rank of low cost item vendors, but not affect feedback scores very much. Cases where it would affect feedback scores is if a vendor sells both low and high cost goods and has very different ratings from the two categories. For example, if a vendor sells some low cost ebooks and also high quality ecstasy, and has terrible reviews from their ecstasy deals but great reviews from their ebook sales, this vendor can expect their rating to drop as the bad reviews are weighted more and their good reviews rated less.