Honestly I don't think group stats page was implemented to seriously manage groups or track any ratio. More like easy to program list of users that contributed to the group.
I don't see it getting any updates as it's "unfair" to add whitelist groups.
Comment has been collapsed.
I tend to add my whitelist to the group GAs when the group allows it, simply because I feel I don't make enough whitelist only GAs and I like to include my Bluies in other GAs in case they're interested.
Can it be exploited? I'm sure it has, which is possibly why a lot of groups don't want WL added but really who is being robbed? Nobody, right?
Comment has been collapsed.
haha, i dont know, it never bothered me before, i guess, till the moment i actually caught myself doing it, and it felt like its just not fair! and i dont like things that are not fair even when im doing it, tu ru...
but, yeah, bottom line is, if a group does allow those combos, with whitelist, shucks, then they are very much aware what that might imply, and they are okay with it.
nop, nobody is indeed getting robbed. but i had to get this outta my system, heh... thanks for the insight, man, all the best!
Comment has been collapsed.
Quality Games Giveaways has a nice rule that you can only include your WL in GAs with 2 or more groups. This doesn't eliminate the problem, but at least it prevents people from getting full credit for GAs that don't attract many group members.
I like your proposed change to the points distribution, but I worry that it can disincentivize people from including WLs in group GAs because they'll take a 50% points penalty even if the % of WL entrants is tiny. A more fair, but more complex solution would be to split the points based on who the entrants are. This can apply to multi-group GAs in general. For example, if 50% of entries are from Group A members, 30% from Group B members and 20% from members of both groups, then 60% of the points you receive should count towards Group A and 40% towards Group B. Whitelist entries would reduce the % of points you get in other groups in exactly the same way.
Of course, the chances of any of this ever being implemented are practically zero and it would be a nightmare to retroactively try to adjust group stats. For better or worse, we're stuck with the system we have right now and it's up to group moderators to try to limit bad behavior.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, in the end i guess it boils down to actual written down group rules. if a rule does not allow that combo or, like QGG, allows it in certain circumstances, that just means that moderators want to have a better control of what kind of GAs are allowed maybe partly to the end goal that GAs dont end up too much outside of group user base.
as for what you said last, alas, that is also so very true, when i think about it, it could be a nightmare to retroactively adjust group stats and there could potentially be a quite a negative backlash from users, khm... so, yeah, imma lay low, and trust the system we have, now that it has been explained to me why the idea of mine was not the greatest, heh
Comment has been collapsed.
6 Comments - Last post 18 seconds ago by OneManArmyStar
29 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by nguyentandat23496
8,440 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by InSpec
82 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by APocketfulofStars
127 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by psyco752
41 Comments - Last post 11 hours ago by pawelt
1,367 Comments - Last post 1 day ago by thatotherone6
649 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by alexfirehouse
84 Comments - Last post 32 minutes ago by Kashart
44 Comments - Last post 46 minutes ago by TinaG
57 Comments - Last post 52 minutes ago by Axelflox
528 Comments - Last post 57 minutes ago by mathisgreat
89 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Psyman
6,762 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Oppenh4imer
this thread arose from my celebratory lvl 10 rant with stat dump available here, if you want to backtrack how my twisted mind works, go right ahead!
after being part of many Group with different rules, it seems to me like the distribution of points for GAs containing both Group(s) and Whitelist is not entirely fair, and can potentially lead to exploits.
just hear me out now. when a GA is shared between e.g. 2 Groups then, yeah, once the GA is marked as Received, the creator gets 50% of GA points increase in each Group, and the winner gets 50% of GA points decrease in Groups he belongs in, which is of course fine.
but, when there is e.g. one Group + Whitelist GA, then the creator gets 100% of GA points increase in the Group and the winner decrease, if he is in the Group, even though there is a big chance that Whitelist was only included to buff up the number of entrants and potentially resulting that the winner is anyhow not even part of the Group.
now, to me, it would only make sense that Whitelist should count as basically a Group for itself when dividing points, and the creator would only get 50% of GA points increase for the Group in the given example same for the decrease for the winner.
cannot lie, i myself have resolved to this "cheat" tactics a number of times, so when i gave away a game i knew would not reach 5 entrants in Group-only GA, id just chuck in Whitelist and problem not only solved, but my stats based on that GA in the Group would result with the same outcome.
this same logic would of course apply regardless of how many different Groups a GA might be shared with, as long as Whitelist is also "counted" in, in my opinion.
the change to point distribution im proposing would not really be a punishment, just a more fair way of spreading the points between all involved parties.
now, if you got this far, its only fair you get some treat, try this one on for size! and look for more in originating thread, wink!
Comment has been collapsed.