49 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by timmyfromspace
1,444 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by PicoMan
6 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by FranckCastle
96 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by TacoTues
13 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Sh4dowKill
2,113 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by Landhammer
257 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by Golwar
15,219 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by IronKnightAquila
127 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by Atro
12 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Blando
813 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by JustinPhan
90 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by philipdick
366 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by natz777
2,320 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by hyrokey
Thanks for the giveaway! ✔
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi, first of all, thanks for the giveaway.
I've noticed you haven't set a level restriction on your giveaways, may i suggest, that you do so in your future ones?
The reason is simple, there are a lot of bad accounts on this site, like autojoiners, multis, bots, win resellers and other rule breakers or just leechers, who doesn't contribute to the site at all, and most of them are found on level 0.
I even suggest to set a higher level than 1, because it will cost like 10 Cent to reach that level, even level 3 is pretty cheap to reach and will cost like 10 to 20 bucks, also being poor isn't an excuse for me, because i live below the poverty line of my country and even i managed to get to level 5 in few months.
Another advantage of setting the bar higher is, that you won't get bothered by all the annoying thank you messages from autojoiners with thank you script, that's why i set my bar even higher to at least level 4 and level 3 being the real exception.
You can even go right away and delete your giveaway to set it up new with a level restriction, if you wish to do so, deletion of running giveaways are accepted instantly.
I'm a person, who checks his winners, about ratio and also rule breaks and if you like to do so:
http://www.sgtools.info/activation
http://www.sgtools.info/multiple-wins
If you see red marks there, you can request a reroll for a new winner, just put the link into your support ticket
If you want to know how many users are on each level:
https://www.steamgifts.com/stats/community/users
with 970k users on level 0 85% of the accounts on the site haven't contributed with a giveaway and just there for leeching, another reason for setting up a level restriction.
If you got more questions, feel free to ask.
Have a nice day
Comment has been collapsed.
this paragraph hurt my eyes a bit
Comment has been collapsed.
okay
Comment has been collapsed.
the title is "steamGIFTS" not "steamWONDERTRADE". you're free to set your own standards for what you give, but its pretty rude of you to ask of people giving charitably to stop being charitable.
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm not asking, i'm suggesting, because of the many bad accounts
also gifting is usually mutual, think about it
Shell has something to do with sealife and Oxfam with oxes?
and it isn't called Steamcharity either
Comment has been collapsed.
if you think gifting is purely transactional i feel a deep pity for you
Comment has been collapsed.
maybe you mix up gifting with donating or just looking for excuses being a leech?
Comment has been collapsed.
nah, you mistake other people caring for each other without thought of profit as leeching
Comment has been collapsed.
sorry that i've mistaken you as a leech, since you care so much about this community, that you haven't done a single GA in 10 years
Comment has been collapsed.
hf dividng people to those who benefit you in the specific way you desire and to leeches
Comment has been collapsed.
they don't benefit just me, they benefit the whole site and community and i count myself to these people
i know how economics work, real free things don't exist, because someone always have to pay the price
and then there are bad accounts who suck keys out of the site and community, because they feel entitled to receive free things, leaving the burden on others back, that's just plain selfish and only a few would do this in RL, but because it's the interent, everyone thinks he can lose his manners
and it's not only about leaving the burden on other backs, you're also hurting the generous people, hint: there is a reason why this site has levels and we divert them and try to establish a healthy community, excluding the bad accounts
Comment has been collapsed.
and as i said before, you are free to set your own standards for what you give. that does not make going to people who share with all and telling them not to any less rude. if the fact that this option exists in this website hurts you too much, you are free to start one of your own that does not enable it. your personal standards are not the ones this website was specifically made for, forcing them on others for your own specific sense of justice is plain rude. demanding generous people adhere to your specific standards of generosity is a truly bizarre and selfish action.
Comment has been collapsed.
and as i said it below, most gifters are very thankful for my advice, because they were unaware of the sheer amount of bad accounts, that's like warning someone about a slippery floor, so that's not rude, it's the contrary, in fact you're the one being rude, like you set up the slippery floor and want people to get hurt and try to avoid people like me from warning others of it, so i don't see your point, why i should stop with it, because it will be uncomfortable for you
as i said, most generous people are thankful for my advice and as i'm generous myself, i also count myself to these generous people
why is trying to establish a healthy community selfish, you're lacking coherence here, the only one selfish here is you, trying to justify your selfish behaviour with pitiful attempts
thanks for your helpful advice, i already set a level restriction to my GAs
Comment has been collapsed.
as you see yourself as someone setting a slippery floor sign to prevent people getting hurt, i see you more as someone running along a marketplace, seeing others donating to a homeless person, and you rushing in saying that that homeless person wont donate to other people and therefore shouldnt be donated to.
i find my analogy more apt since the option to limit your giveaways isnt hidden from anyone, ergo any metaphorical harm on people giving away a game is genuinely hard for me to understand as analogous to this website, and also there is no barrier from you to trade as you see fit in it.
Comment has been collapsed.
thing is, this site isn't called Keycharity and your analogy sucks, because you're not lacking basic human needs, you have a home, food and heating, also a PC and energy and therefore money, most things homeless are lacking
but it would suit perfectly, when i would warn people from giving to beggers in disguise, which aren't really in need
yeah, you won't or wouldn't understand the consequences of your doings, as you still try to justify your behaviour, i'm talking of the impact on the community and people stop giving away things, because of bad accounts
also you completely ignoring the fact, that most users are very thankful for my advice and yet you insist on me limiting the level restrictions to my own GAs and not to warn other users
Comment has been collapsed.
and many users, such as i, are very unthankful for your advice. i didnt see anyone here that is thankful for your advice. youre confused, i dont see a need to justify my behavior. i only see your own need to chastise it.
you warn people of nothing, you simply declare that your own form of action is justice and not following it. you've explained that you dont follow those standards, and that to you the mass "thank you" comments are annoying. so? have you considered others might not mind the mass "thank you" messages, or even enjoy them? thats simply not a solid reason for the abolishment of level 0 giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
sorry, i was unclear, i meant most gifters, not most users, who cares about bad accounts anyway and the ones who maintain to swim with them in the pool of crap?
you're unthankful, because you don't see any fault in your behaviour and a level restriction would be uncomfortable for you, you're not contributing to the community, who gives a damn about you leechers, my message isn't directed to you
everbody looking at your account sees the "nothing" i warn people about, entitled people with attitude, who gets angry, if people try to cut their leeching and abuse
i think that people would enjoy spam is a very fabricated claim and it's not my reason to set a level restriction to at least 1+, i wrote it's another advantage to set that bar even higher
Comment has been collapsed.
nah, your standards are weird. i dont see why i should follow them. your claim that it is abuse to not follow them is what i oppose, i dont particularly care about it beyond that fact.
Comment has been collapsed.
my standards are weird to you, because you lack basic manners, i'm not surprised
Comment has been collapsed.
said the person calling to deny acess to giveaways due to personal bias
Comment has been collapsed.
bad accounts are the reaility, no bias
there is even a simple solution, invest like 10 Cents and get to level 1, but you rather prefer to swim in a pool of crap and argue with me
Comment has been collapsed.
your intuition that reciprocity is necessary for generosity is simply not universal. demanding others act as if it is just doesn't seem to have a sufficient reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
and as i said it before, gifting is usually mutual, but i think you won't get it and rather try to justify your selfish actions
Comment has been collapsed.
usually is not necessarily. saying you usually score a goal every time you kick the soccer ball does not necessitate that each time you'll kick it it'll necessarily score a goal.
Comment has been collapsed.
that's crap and maybe you see the whole thing too materialisitc, which isn't the case in reallife, but as there is no bonding or forming relationships on this anonymous site, the whole gifting thing is getting materialistic, because you can't pay back otherwise, or you decide to lose your manners and leech, almost no one would do this in reallife and those who do, will be excluded from society really fast, which should be the case here too
Comment has been collapsed.
my argument isnt about materialism, but egoism. which you simply cant grasp that some people are not exclusively motivated by. you see, some people are able to give out of good will and not out of interest for personal benefit. material or social. there are many trading sites, this isnt one of them. trying to act as if there is an ethical duty to make it one is what you fail to establish again and again. your demand for exclusion of those who dont meet your egoistic trade standards might exclude your own society from people, but you dont seem to argue for any necessary reason others should follow it.
Comment has been collapsed.
so you confess being egoistic? that's a step in the right direction
you're just assuming people will give out of good will here, because it would justifies your actions, i assume the opposite, because there is a level system and most people want to level up
i think the only one confused here is you, your sentences doesn't even make sense anymore and give me headache to understand, but that happens when you fail over and over again with your twisted arguments how to justify your selfish behaviour
Comment has been collapsed.
ethical egoism is the claim that all human ethical notions strive out of a desire for personal benefit. i am accusing you of holding that ethical stance. i do not argue that acts must be justified by any tangible benefit to the actor for them to perform it out of their own will. you claim they must for the production of either material or relational benefit. i say personal pleasure of the giver or justice does not demand either to manifest. i dont consider my behavior to be in need of justifying, and i dont see any reason in your writing that it should be beyond your personal opinion. that is the whole point of my argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
i think you're using a translator, because your sentences are really hard to understand and gives me headache
I also see no point in discussing this topic any further, because i said everything i want to say
Comment has been collapsed.
if you cant read ethical arguments, dont make a widely controvorsial ethical argument
Comment has been collapsed.
if you can't understand ethical arguments, don't make up some twisted crap no one understands
Comment has been collapsed.
you're free to google the terms i explained here and see how other people use them.
Comment has been collapsed.
so you're accusing me of ethical egoism, when i only have the wellbeing of the site and community in mind?
you clearly failed to acknowledge my previous arguments about economics, bad accounts and how they harm the community and site, but as i already said you won't get it either.
A lot of sites, who given away Freebies already died, because of greedy people, e.g. chrono.gg, some old users around here, can name more than i can, they also did unrestricted GAs and checked every entry, 40% had red marks or other infrictions
Not to mention i get a lot of blacklists from users, since i write this messages in picked GAs, which exclude me from their GAs, how does that work out with your argument, me being egoistic?
Not to mention you're accusing me of things, whitout any specific example, which makes your arguments very inconsistent.
I provide facts, numbers and solutions and you try to bring this on a philosophical level, blame me for something, which you aren't even right with, oh lord have mercy
Comment has been collapsed.
you've explained nothing about how free accounts harm this site and community. you only explained how you don't like it and perceive it as leeching. this site is alive and well for more than 10 years with free accounts. I don't see them as harming it in any way. your insistence that only some sort of exchange could justify any action is a form of ethical egoism. your own post here is the example for my claim. you brought no numeric statistics, only qualitative judgments of yes/no in regards to gifting games.
if you don't want to be nagged by philosophers, don't make ethical statements.
Comment has been collapsed.
as i said, you won't get it and so i won't write a wall of text, which you'll fail to understand, but you're wrong again, i already touched the topic with economics and how someone will always pay the price, even in RL a working population can support only a certain amount of poor people, it doesn't work when 10% support 90%, which is the case on SG
alive and well, not harming in any way? Lol, good joke mate, you are so wrong here, again, did you looked at the stats how the site is in decline for years? I obviosuly have way more insight and background to the history of the site, because i sozialized with old users very early and they will tell you, that a lot of very generous people left, because they were unhappy with the site, especially with the inactivity of the founder and taking actions against bad accounts
you're right leeching isn't against the rules to be explicit, but i also explained my reasons, which you failed to aknowledge, why i think they are bad and this is the only point you're right, this is my own take, but i will repeat myself a last time, my initial suggestion was setting a level restriction to at least 1, a level which can be easily reached with like 10 Cents, if people are even to stingy for that, well then i call them also bad, maybe it's because swimming in the pool of shit with all the bad accounts rubbed of, or they even had this attitude before, but you're the living proof, why i'm right classifying these accounts also as bad, you don't even get it, that your actions harm the site and community.
i read the definition of ethical egoism, i don't act because of self-interest and i'm repeating myself again, you try to take this to a philosophical level, without any examples, so your crap would be easier to understand, but i know why, because you can't even provide examples for the crap you're bringing up and just throwing some smart concepts around, mate just don't vent that much hot air, i'm not that stupid, not to see behind the curtain, and you're calling yourself a philosopher, you're a joke
As i already said, you're a waste of time, you fail to acknowledge my arguments over and over again, make false assumptions, implications and insinuations all over the board and hold that attitude, that it's your right to receive free stuff, not caring about others or the harm you're doing, the real egoist here is you, which you also fail to get, but i'm repeating my self again, just get lost
Comment has been collapsed.
you claim that the only just action is one in which the actor is repaid in some form for his performance of the just action. that is not a common perspective we share. a good action is good whether it profits its actor or not. if you want a counterexample of an act that is good without recompense, ill argue that caring for a hurt animal and releasing it is a good action even if the animal wont express affection or gratitude to the carer. the good in it is the reducing of suffering in itself.
also im abit confused to see "i wont write a wall of text" above a wall of text. after youve written a paragraph you can look back and edit it.
do you percieve the stocks of this website to have fallen? what stats are you even talking about lol. do people make fewer giveaways? doesnt seem so to me. maybe fewer free giveaways, but still a decent amount. if you noticed a lack of giveaways in above level 0 entry requirment i genuinely dont understand how level 0 users have any relations to that, since they are not allowed to interact with such giveaways
Comment has been collapsed.
and all i hear are excuses over excuses
you're always giving examples, where you assume, the one given gratitude towards is in real need, but that's not the case here, as i already mentioned earlier, are you on drugs or something, as you seem to have missed key parts of our discussion?
stocks like on the stockmarket, lol, you're a clown.
I'm talking of the stats everyone can look at, i see you even failed in a decade to take a closer look at the site and you try to argue with me, missing all the insights and background information i have?
yes, giveaways are in a decline and a lot of very generous gifters gone, god damn, do i have to repeat myself everytime, why don't you get it the first time, what condition are you suffering from?
Comment has been collapsed.
i suffer from being polite to bad actors, and once more: i dont accept your proposed standard lmao, i see no need to justify my actions by it.
Comment has been collapsed.
i noticed this already, you're carrying the attitude to be entitled to receive free things, don't care who pays for this, not seeing how you harm the site and community with your egoism and that's the point why i count leeches like you to the whole of bad accounts
this won't change when you try to take this on to a philosophical level and try to smear the blame on me, talking of concepts and other bull, when there are already true hard facts
a right, i'm repeating myself, waste of time, bye and get lost
Comment has been collapsed.
once more: how is taking what others give within the previously disclosed and never hidden standards of this website making me or anyone else a "bad account"? you decided this factor and have shown no reason that it is true
Comment has been collapsed.
with that conclusion you've drawn, everything is allowed to get free things, i won't be surprised, if you have multiaccounts everywhere, because your moral compass says: "it's free, i'm allowed to get as much as i want, because it's free and i don't care about others, who don't get a thing, because i'm so greedy"
I also mentioned that many sites died, because of that greed, you doesn't seem to care either, isn't that a perfect definition of egoism?
I further elaborated, that SG is in decline for years, but i'm starting to repeat myself, god damn, you don't seem to get it.
And that greed and egoism makes you a bad person and in the conclusion a bad account, it's not just me, who hold this stance, it's the common stance society holds.
I made the suggestion to set a level restriction to fight rule breakers, because there are so many of them around, the side effect is, you also get the people with a bad moral compass, you're the perfect example for this
Comment has been collapsed.
A: your wild speculations of multiaccounts based on 0 evidence is nothing but fearmongering
B: the stadnards of this website are the standards of this website. i havent read the whole of the terms and conditions, if they include a condition against multiaccounts then there is no problem with removing multiaccounts for breaking the contract users agree to in registering. paying users or nonpaying users.
from the merriam webster dictionary since you insist on abusing the concept:
egoism- a doctrine that individual self-interest is the actual motive of all conscious action.
your denial of charity works from an egoist philosophical perspective (which is distinct from an egoist personal perspective, i am specifying because you seem to have a hard time distinguishing between the two), it does not work from a utilitarian one. rule utuilitarian or not.
Comment has been collapsed.
maybe get your head out of your books and try to learn how life really works, i think you're lacking there.
I never denied charity, i just said that MOST users...
i don't care about your accusations anymore, child making a fuss about 10 Cents
right, it doesn't work from an ulitarian one. full stop, no arguments, because of what and why, i take this as serious, as if you would state, the sea is pink
Comment has been collapsed.
oh boy, i took a closer look at your philosophical concepts and my advice is, don't talk about things you don't have a clue of, because it leaves you looking like an idiot
as i already mentioned, i have the wellbeing of the site in mind, so there isn't egoism involved at all on my side, but maybe you mixed up things and wanted to tell me that you hold the stance of ethical egoism?
I think the philosophical concept, which suits me best is rule utilitarianism and it also proves, why you're opposing me, because you're excluded because of lacking morality
Comment has been collapsed.
your narcissism cant seem to look beyond your own personal affairs, ethical egoism isn't "everyone should do what benefits me" its "all actors only do what they do because it benefits them". you call for what the critiques call a "utility monster", the discontinuation of pleasure you yourself deem as unworthy because of your obsession with transactions. you have done nothing to prove that such actions diminish pleasures in others, and simply barged in trying to convince people to deny others because of your superiority complex. which to me, again, looks like a guy blocking person A from donating to person B because of his narcissism and will for all egos to be satisified by exchange alone, and no acts of actual givings due to good will in itself.
Comment has been collapsed.
right, debunked egoism, now the next accusation is narcissim, as i already said, vent a little less hot air, it will let you look like an idiot
you're assuming everyone here, which is doing level 0 GAs is giving because of good will, but which isn't the case, which shows my positive feedback from gifters, who were just unaware of the trash level zeros are
After my suggestion this gifter is enlightened and can continue doing level 0 GAs, because they are doing it out of good will, or set a level restriction, because he was unaware.
your accusation of narcissism snaps back to you here, because you're looking like someone, who tries to block me from enlightening others and makes it possible that people truly give out of good will
What are your fears for acting like you do? That people stop giving out of god will, a claim that you're fiercly holding, because they don't give out of good will in the first place?
Comment has been collapsed.
i am trying to block you from reducing utility. again you keep claiming that people do not give out of good will and only due to an intent to profit in some orthogonal way. you keep saying "the website is in decline" what the fuck do you mean by that? are its stocks down in the market? does it make less ad revenue? should we care about either?
Comment has been collapsed.
you still haven't found the statistics?
https://www.steamgifts.com/stats/community/giveaways
Comment has been collapsed.
i see the statistics have risen with the years. what the hell are you crying about? you want a peak like 2017? thats a factor for irl economics, not meager website internal economics
Comment has been collapsed.
oh boy, you're really fubar, if you see a rise in the recent years
there is a difference between crying like you about 10 Cents and me stating facts, yeah but whom do i even talk to, could also have spoken to a wall
funny how you mention you differ between irl and website internals, but only apply it, when it suits you best, why shouldn't this be valid for your philosophies?
Comment has been collapsed.
do you consider internal website economy to be independent from irl economy? do you think this dependancy goes both ways, that if this website somehow collapses (which the statistics you provided show no reason for estimating) that'll relate in any way to actual irl economics? or to fit with the analogy: do you think people giving charity are ruining the economy of the whole world? because the answers to all of these questions seem obvious to me. do you want this website to be a spam of 10 cent games, the very few of which are 1 song soundtracks or dlcs for some shitty freemium games, or some meaningless pixel project some guy just chucked at steam for the lols? your perception of good is so skewed and obssessed over this meaningless standard you fetishized of "leeches" that you see nothing beyond it. pretty pathetic tbh
Comment has been collapsed.
god, your reasoning gives me headache, because it isn't near to be conclusive and it's twisting things we talked about
where is that charity coming from, do you still think this site is called Charitykeys and why do you throw it in the blender with economics, yes economics, not economy, are you still sober?
I already gave you a brief example of how economics work (like too much people taking charity, can harm in different ways, like in numbers or in trusthworthiness, when people, who receive charity aren't really needy, causing people giving less and that's a thing irl) and you say it isn't comparable and i told you your philosophies aren't comparable then either and now lacking arguments you make charity reappear like a bunny from the hat, when i already debunked your claim, that most people here aren't that charitable as you would like to have them
of course this website would be a spam of 10 cent games, because you said so and it shows your thinking assuming everyone would act like you would do, abusing everything to the max, but that won't happen at all, because you're way too stingy for even 10 cent
Comment has been collapsed.
you are discussing an action that you claim needs to be carried out for justice, but you refuse to connect it with ethics. you discuss a market, and refuse to connect it with economics. i'm done wasting my time to try to make your foul mouthed mess see reason.
enjoy living in your imaginary world where charity is injustice that needs to be stopped and giveaway websites are going to suffer an economical collapse because people might want to give away games without demanding recompense in some form, best provided by any game at all, since money is the only value humans are subservient to.
Comment has been collapsed.
you're good calling out things vaguely, everyone understands the term justice different and i'm not seeking justice, i want to stop bad accounts ruining the site, why do i have to connect it with ethics, because you say so? I don't care about your ethics.
And then you make claims without arguments again, so i don't know what bull you're talking about and am not be able to counter it, but i long ago recognized you're lacking the mental capacity to understand correlations.
you're a funny crap talking piece of crap, please point me to where i stated charity is injustice, when you came up with charity first and i never made it a point, are you under the influnece of substances again?
didn't you saw you made the wrong connection, even if i gave examples, so an idiot can understand it, a right i forgot you're in the fubar state
nice made up world that your implying me to live in, do you think this bull was so smart, that you had to repeat it?
Comment has been collapsed.
This comment was deleted 2 years ago.
Comment has been collapsed.
please stop spamming every other giveaway with walls of text
Comment has been collapsed.
most gifters are very thankful for my advice, so no, i won't stop, because a level restriction would be uncomfortable for you
Comment has been collapsed.
Much appreciated!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you ! <3
Comment has been collapsed.
🐺 May the werewolves protect you. 🐺
Amazing Music Video and its analysis
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks!
Comment has been collapsed.
This comment was deleted 1 year ago.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the giveaway! Stay healthy
Comment has been collapsed.
thank you
Comment has been collapsed.
Joined
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank You xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the giveaways~
Comment has been collapsed.
thanks !
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the opportunity!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks! :)
Comment has been collapsed.
thanks and good luck! <3
Comment has been collapsed.
thank U
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the Giveaway!! Spuds be upon Ye!!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the giveaway! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you for the opportunity~
Comment has been collapsed.
Thx
Comment has been collapsed.