Should SG implement automatic re-gifting detection?
It doesn't have to check the key (and what you do when they didn't add a key, but email it, or is a gift involved). It should simply be a system that , at the end of giveaway checks if the giveaway creator won that specific game and did not activate it.
Or even better, when we sync our accounts, there should be a system that checks if we activated all our wins, and if there are not-activated wins, it should create an auto-ticket for that user.
Comment has been collapsed.
Even if the idea sounds great at first, there's only one problem with it: some stuff doesn't show as activated even if it is (first things that comes to my mind is collections and DLCs) and a system like that would get support over flooded with false not-activated wins.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's why I said that the system should create a ticket instead of doing auto-bans...
The second part of your post is invalid for two reasons:
PS: On one hand, we get a great system. On the other hand, our SG detectives will remain jobless.
Comment has been collapsed.
i think the extra load on the server won't be worth it, since people can still send keys via email/add in steam or resend gifts. not saying it's a bad idea, it will be just working on a feature that will cover less than half of the infractions.
in the end it's always up to users to report this behavior and let support suspend/ban offenders.
Comment has been collapsed.
See my other comment. Doesn't matter how they trade it in that senario. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't need to actually save the keys saved, just a flag on that particular game for that particular user.
Should count for anything, not just keys that way, but also gifts on steam. The moment you flag it as received, should set a flag on your account.
The problem becomes, more data being stored on SG's side.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, at that point, the system is doesn't work.
Especially because the only option I can come up with is when you sync after winning, it should double check you activated things before flagging you.
But then we start getting into further issues of people 'forgetting to sync' etc etc etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
I sync everytime I buy a bundle/win... which ends up being at least two to three times a week. :/
Makes it easier for me not to break rules, cause I lose track of which games I just got.
Comment has been collapsed.
There have been several suggestions to check the case of activating /regifting..some really good ones.....this sorry, might be the one this will work worst ....
All we need is a activation check, winner mark games as received....-> forcing a sync -> game has to be activated on his account -> if a automatic system fails the check, the ga-creator has to approve that the mark as received is correct.
This covers regfiting and trading here and elsewhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is a good suggestion, but it won't cover all cases. We need complex measures to stop it.
N+1 We need to clone cg a couple of times to implement all those measures...
Comment has been collapsed.
too easy to bypass...
you can trick it if you send keys via chat/email...
Comment has been collapsed.
The idea is simple - keep the keys included in giveaways in a database, then whenever a key is added to a giveaway check if it was already used for another giveaway by a different creator. If it was, automatically suspend the regifter for a few days to send a message that this really isn't acceptable.
Well, just warn users. People that do that, knowing they break rules, would just send keys by emails or steam chat and they would easily bypass your detection system...
Comment has been collapsed.
Old thread but was thinking of making one myself just now. There is no reason why they can't check X number of last giveaways won (even those not marked received) when a user creates a giveaway. It won't cover all cases but using the key data that is already there can reduce it quite a bit. No need for extra data collection. Then send all those guilty to the dungeon for sacrifice.
Comment has been collapsed.
ok, but he may not give exact same key which he enter, maybe he put it by mistake
U cant punish for what is not yet done
Comment has been collapsed.
this might be a very low percantage... could be solved via support... + infraction counter to see if someone lies frequently about this...
Comment has been collapsed.
I know that this thread is quite old... but idea is great :)
Some people mentioned that regifters would use e-mail to send keys - but that would only apply to regifters who are not lazy and read rules/forum. So maybe 1% of them all would dodge it.
Comment has been collapsed.
8 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by venturercatt
28 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by JonathanDoe
744 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by RATT78
47 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by Gozu
16,406 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by Atro
8 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by lostsoul67
10 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by pb1
2,117 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by vlbastos
454 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by venturercatt
95 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by eeev
90 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by tarikgoethe
95 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by Calibr3
33 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by Kurozzz
34 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by venturercatt
The idea is simple - keep the keys included in giveaways in a database, then whenever a key is added to a giveaway check if it was already used for another giveaway by a different creator. If it was, automatically suspend the regifter for a few days to send a message that this really isn't acceptable.
To those concerned about what happens if the database is compromised, I don't think the potential impact is very big. The keys are anyway supposed to be used by the winner within 7 days so I don't think there's much risk in keeping them as clear text in the database. If this is a concern then some salt & hash should be sufficient to make this a non-issue (and I'm not talking about food seasoning and recreational drugs).
Comment has been collapsed.