At least you contributed something to the Site, not like damn people with 0 comments, 0 gifted entering the giveaway and then it turns out that the winner is the second account of some arsehole that tries to resell the game...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah but for people, that is getting to be a little much. I mean the whole premise of this site is generosity. While even if the average user doesn't say thank you, i doubt that most of them have second accounts. This site isn't about giving a bit and getting a bit back. It's just about being generous and giving some games away to people who don't have them. I somewhat agree with the comment ratio, only if they made a way to not count spam.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with the comment ratio part because I can actually do that :P
Comment has been collapsed.
This may just result in people spamming the forums or giveaways with gibberish.
Oh...
;)
Comment has been collapsed.
IT'S NOT GIBBERISH, IT'S JUST TOO DEEP!
lol
True that. I've seen thread spamming on totally useless subjects and spam posting hi on threads by lots of people trying to get their comments up.
Still, at least a 1:1 entered/commented should exist. But this will turn into an "Y U (NOT) THANK" thread again. We've had enough of those :)
Comment has been collapsed.
This idea is better. I don't want to giveaway games to leechers who sell the giveaways or trolls said my giveaway "is obviously fake" thoughtless.
Set a minimal value will let people who have contribution and good judgement more likely to win the gifts.
Comment has been collapsed.
wouldn't such a thing just promote the evil leechers to give the same game between their accounts as private giveaway to increase their value given away? - i.e. does it really make any sense at all?
Comment has been collapsed.
well, just add a few accounts, ... - it's been an arbitary example, but the point sorta was: it won't help against those who make second accounts, ...
those guys who try to abuse the system will just find a way around the limitations that totally defeats it's purpose and the people you'll really be locking out are those who actually played fair and even wanted to play those games for which they enter.
well, that's at least my humble opinion ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure but I think there must be a minimum quantity of entries that this private giveaway will be displayed...
And if somebody rly want to leech - i think there will be always a way. But this option could limit the quantity of leechers a bit. Not every leecher will create private giveaways and groups and "send" not existent gifts around. Hight efford for a small chance to win something.
Comment has been collapsed.
wasn't the point to get those down a bit who actually violate the rules? also I think it's asking a bit to violate the rules even - e.g. if you need to have some stuff given away even more people will start to put their left-over bundle games up which is forbidden by the rules, but obviously nobody cares (judging from the selection of games that is given out it's most of the times left-over bundle games and daily deals)
Comment has been collapsed.
well, not quite what I'm saying, but you should also keep in mind how your change will affect other users.
basically I see this ending up as "make gifts or gtfo" as there'll be many limits to prevent leechers entering and new users basically see barerly any giveaways at all and hence no reason to contribute, either, as it'd look pretty dead while the leechers continue leeching - yay \o/
now that's surerly pretty pessimistic, but I think you got the point.
I think if you want such exclusiveness go for a group - it'll work out better.
if you want it to be open, well - accept there'll be people who may not deserve it in your opinion.
and you can also go other ways like puzzle givaways, etc. to reward those who actually do something at least :P
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm speaking about an OPTION. The gifter could decide if he want to turn this kind of filter on or not. I think this is a very good improvement. Again - OPTIONAL.
The amount of users here is increasing. One day every public giveaway will have more then 10.000 entries...maybe that not bad....i don't want to say that. But I think this will increase the amount of multiple accounts too ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
oh, and just for the record: if you want an alternative: I think making requirements on the users steam account would be more suited.
examples may be: not vac banned, not trade banned, at least x$ in value, ... (note that achieving value in steam games library is harder than achieving value in giveaways)
that way you could probably more easily cross out duplicate accounts and those who generally tend to misbehave ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
well, surerly 50 games would be a lot.
just saying that you could have that as similiar option to your proposition for example and that I think it'd be more effective in crossing out those who just want to improve their odds wiht more accounts.
also something that I'd personally appreciate would be an automated way to check whether the user actually activated the game as this seemed to become a problem lately (judging from the forum here) (maybe this could counter the resellers a bit, dunno)
Comment has been collapsed.
It's easy to check the second one. After the winner click Gift received, next time the SG account sync can check that whether he already has that game.
If not, just stop at the sync page until he activate the game already.
But I'm not sure if the winner received the game then select gift not received. Is there any way to prevent these things happen?
Comment has been collapsed.
These are better options. No Vac banned, No trade banned should be absolutely included.
And provide options for gifters who want some limitation for their giveaways:
steam account more than x games(50 would be fine), games value more than x$ etc.
But I would also prefer to add some options like: SG giveaways' total value more than x$ etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
iirc u cant have special rules for public giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a reasonable idea but honestly exclusiveness/restrictions such as that within a site is usually pretty crappy. To me, it goes against some of the spirit of the site. I see some gifters don't look past the picture of giving a game away to one random lucky person, whether they helped contribute to this site or not by giving away also. I understand how it can be depressing when you get complete leechers winning games who haven't even bothered to post anything and just enter giveaways. With that said, if you really want to giveaway a game to people who've done so as well, just make one of those giveaway groups that have been done a million times already.
Comment has been collapsed.
But the point of this site is to give people free games, not to keep people from getting games in a restricted community because they can't afford to give games away themselves. And before you say I have given away zero games, note that I made my SteamGifts account less than 12 hours ago.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've made 37 and I think they're right. You want to avoid leechers? Make a private group and invite people you want to enter your giveaways. Just because someone's made zero giveaways doesn't mean their view is invalid.
Comment has been collapsed.
This "option" might make the site go from legal to highly illegal in some countries of the world.
Comment has been collapsed.
In Rage Mode nothing can`t be done correctly, you should chill out a bit...
And Yes, Arguing in PM please :S You have Steam Chat for this kind of situations :I
Comment has been collapsed.
The only thing i wanted to show is that the most of the guys who are not fine with this idea are the "0 giveaway" guys.
Again - it would be an option. Not more - not less.
And the opinion of them is not worthless - but maybe it would be more helpful to hear what the opinion of GIFTERS is. Not the opinion of guys who never saw the "Create a giveaway" page.
Comment has been collapsed.
Although it would be an option, it would be real hard for new people to get into this site without giving something away. That isn't a bad thing necessarily, but not everyone is in the same financial situation, and generally if they want to come to use this site it is because they aren't filthy rich. A lot of people become more active or start to give back after they win their first giveaway. With an option like this gifts I'd just be afraid that people with 0 gifts would be left out too much. I personally want newcomers to feel welcomed and encouraged to use the site, not feel like they have to go buy a bunch of gifts to even use the site properly.
Comment has been collapsed.
I nowhere said I'm not fine with it. You're just stroking your ego.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not a bad idea, but yeah, like some people have already said, it needs to be based on overall value. I personally think the site doesn't need this because there are many private groups that giveaway games to people they're more familiar with. Public giveaways will always be public giveaways, even if you're giving it to someone who deserves it :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, being someone who cannot contribute anything atm, whether my opinion has any merit or not, I dunno but....
I am "pretty" sure Loko has said in the past that he wasn't willing to filter out anyone due to their ability to gift or not. He wanted no discrimination against anyone at all, IIRC from what he said. This would be exclusivity on public giveaways. If that's your goal, then just make a private giveaway group for those YOU see fit to add. Then you have fulfilled what you wish, and not gone against what the idea of the site was.
And If I misremembered what Loko said, well, wouldn't be the first time. So it goes.
Comment has been collapsed.
This idea is worth 0 for my person. I have an awesome group and everything is fine.
I created this topic because I rly think that this OPTION would be a great idea.
Maybe I was a bit rude:
I know that not every person who never made a giveaway is a bad person. Some are broke, some are simply not interested to give away something to strangers.
...but I think that this optional filter has no bad impact on this site. Quite the opposite!
Comment has been collapsed.
And yet it goes against the whole idea I am pretty sure he said made up a public giveaway. I understand your reasoning, as many MANY people contribute nothing at all, in any form. I try to be a forum presence and a chat presence, but does that make up for being a broke panda? I'm not sure about that, but I have my own issues. By putting selective filters onto a public giveaway, it's no longer public. It's selective, and therefore by nature, discriminatory.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are right - its discrimination in his purity to create an option to select out some ppl who made a bit more then others and recuce the amount of entries in this particular giveaway.
Let's burn all private groups and ppl who make private giveaways. They are all Nazis.
Comment has been collapsed.
And here comes Godwin's Law rocketing up the middle out of nowhere, taking first place in the race!
Comment has been collapsed.
You're missing the point. If you want any special rules, those are supposed to be private giveaways. Or puzzle giveaways. As jade has pointed out, there are to be no rules for public giveaways. It goes against the nature of what the site was intended for. Again, I know WHY you want to do this, but as I said before, that's why there's private groups.
Comment has been collapsed.
It does to me, or you wouldn't be in Souls. If someone can't be active as a gifter, being active in the community is a damn good runner-up. The best people here, gifters or not, are those who are active in the community.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, coffee filtering is discrimination. I'm glad someone else finally realises tha- WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU GIBBERING ABOUT. No, it really isn't. And no, you're really not.
You're missing the most basic point of all, which has been said to you: "Extraneous/special rules for giveaways require moderator approval. Public giveaways cannot have any special rules. Would you like to know more?"
Comment has been collapsed.
DUDE! STARSHIP TROOPERS IS THE FUCKIN BOMB! And I didn't even click the link. PANDA APPROVES!
Comment has been collapsed.
You are discriminating me now... do you understand what discriminating is? I don't think so.
Well, i want an additional feature and you are linking me the current rules...
I rly think that I should stop answering to you. Its completely useless.
Have a nice day.
Comment has been collapsed.
you are right too - let's do nothing. Thanks for your constructive argument...
...and the second point is (lets quote somebody above): Moul
"I think that if a giveaway has only one entry, the value of the game, when the giveaway ends, is not added to the submitter's value. Correct me if I am wrong."
And now you will ask "what will you do if i make 100 private skyrim giveaways with 100 fake accounts?"
Right? ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll create 5 fake accounts. Where is the border - 1 entry or 3 or 100? It's not so difficult to create account.
And some private or group giveaways sometimes has only few entries.
I argue only because i see very exploit for it (I'm not the system architect, i'm just tester). And if you want to create such system, to isolate leechers, you should think about weak point. Cause leechers always will try to break border. (like puppygames free games case).
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not professional software tester. But sometimes do it for fun.
Of course you can't do totally bug-free system, but creating few fake accounts - it's obviously easy way. Another one - creating cheap giveaways if you check only quantity (for example yesterday's daily deal was only about 60 cents in russian store), but if we check quantity and total price - it's not problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
You should understand that there will be left not so many SMART ( YES! SMART ) leechers, because 90% of them are just little raging kiddos,that can`t even write correctly Their own names...
Comment has been collapsed.
The Twittish Community of Pro Leechers! I like it!!! There should be created the group for Leechers, so they`ll always be up to date with leechy tricks!!
Comment has been collapsed.
If there is the ability of at least reading/posting comments of the giveaways but just not being able to enter, I don't mind. Those are the best parts of giveaways :3
Also, just for extra information, if someone has made giveaways that only had 1 entry, those giveaways do not appear on his/her profile neither on the Received/Not received counter not in the Gifts Value either. So some people might have more than what is just visible.
Comment has been collapsed.
(Since you've adressed everybody I'll answer, even though I haven't made a giveaway yet and it will take some time till I can do)
I don't think this is a good idea. There are already enough groups for elite gifters and you can always make a forum giveaway with some restrictions (e.g. I won't enter your giveaway if you don't want me as a not-yet-gifter in it)
If somebody really wants a game and is happy to win, he maybe couldn't afford it in the first place. So he might not be able to do giveaways. The only restriction I can think of, that really makes sense, is a restriction that a giveaway is only visible to people that have this game in the top 10 of their wishlist. Then you know that somebody will receive it, who really wants it.
Comment has been collapsed.
The wishlist check could be a requirement from the person making the giveaway. I've actually seen this as a requirement in the past and it can easily be checked since games on your wishlist have the date they got added to wishlist on them. Top 10 is not really a good idea since lots of people don't take the time to rank their wishlist :P
However, the problem with that and public giveaways would be that lots of people do not take the time to read the description so something like that would require rerolls till a valid winner is found. That would be too much work for loko and I don't think we should add more to his load.
Comment has been collapsed.
My wish list is unrelated to the games I want to win. In fact, I bought several games who weren't on my wish list just because they were given often enough here and looked appealing to me (Fortix 2, Hydrophobia Prophecy). Frankly the only reason I have a wishlist is that the last Steam sales wanted me to have one.
So from my point of view restricting to the wishlist would make this site worthless.
To put it another way, would you have wanted zero people to win Faerie Solitaire?
Comment has been collapsed.
This was just meant as a counterproposal to RoHs restriction in the description. Both were meant optionally. The Faerie Solitaire giveaway wouldn't have used this option, since it was a promotion giveaway.
Don't get me wrong: I don't need any restriction in a public giveaway. I had the feeling that RoH as a gifter may have felt "used" by some winners. While he consequently wants to make giveaways restricted to other gifters, I just wanted to express, that it is instead better to restrict it to somebody who may be much more happy with the game.
BTW about the wishlist: Steamgifts uses the first 25 items on your wishlist already. Though it is not necessary to have one, it helps to create a list of the most wanted items.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well you brought a good idea
only you didn't specified that it will be limit on public giveaways or an option for public giveaways
If it would be an option then there will be less people who enter random giveaways just to enter but..
If someone wants to ressel skyrim he will make 10 account and make in top of his wish list skyrim
And then it would be pointless.
And if restrict public giveaways then it would as said ET3D and ofcourse read this again^
Comment has been collapsed.
I think public giveaways should stay without any restrictions and filters. An interesting idea is possibility to create giveaway for more than one private groups. With this option you would be able to get more people chance to win your giveaway and partially/completely eliminate leechers.
*I guess my opinion is not valid to many of you since I haven't made a single giveaway yet. But I already bought some games in sales and after all my exams I will, fear not :)
Comment has been collapsed.
There is no invalid opinion. Just some are not as contributing as others (some are not at all). Lots of us have limited budget and thus can't do more than what we do. The fact that you commented this and not something along the lines of "qq more, don't gift if you are like that" is proof enough.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with Rinarin, you have made a nice valid point and not resorted to vitriol or ridicule to any of the posters. This counts for something, methinks!
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't want to encourage restricting public giveaways further. It's not like there's a huge number of them even without this restriction, and group giveaways probably outnumber them considerably. I don't really mind adding such conditions on some giveaways (and there's already an option to get such restriction okayed by a mod), I just don't want to make that a standard.
Comment has been collapsed.
It`s like take the last piece of pie from the poor man,same way you want to "Steal" the Gifts from the leechy part of community :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Well obviously because you see it in bright light (as many with good ideas)
But you don't count on human greed and human charity
Leechers will always find a way to get pass restrictions.
And those who really can't afford games will just go away.
So what will left?
A bunch of kids who leech and guys who resell games that will be around 70-85%
And donators who would make "Public giveaways" With giveaways option: not less that 50
Then the whole idea will collapse and no money for site owner.
The end.
P.s i see it like this, and many who answer on you idea have the same thought.
But youre idea is praiseworthy, but it's not an option.
P.s.s To say the truth, all the games on my steam account thanks to steam winterpile+Pkeod+Tikhonex+JiveMoose and HIB that at that time giving out even for 1 cent (but i didn't bought my friend gifted to me) and some good guys.
That's how i get so many games, am I a leecher? Maybe, but i can't afford to give gifts, and i think this is enough... Line with the private life begins here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Somebody don't know where the "create a giveaway" button is. Or what an option is. Or what smurf accounts are....or what it means that a lot of pol are "stealing" gifts from ppl who want to make some random ppl happy.
...or what it means to say THX If you recieve something.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that the idea of giveaways is for you to be generous and to want to share games you like (or won't enjoy), whit people who have not heard of them, or can not afford them, and not to give gifts, because you want to win more games for yourself.
Edit: There are giveaway groups that require a certain amount of gift given away to enter. I don't see how what you suggest is different.
Comment has been collapsed.
407 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by reigifts
15 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by reigifts
6 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by xxxka
7 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by WaxWorm
2,068 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Megamind9
76 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Tuxerito
1,413 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by XJ777
10 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Abaction
111 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Peiperissimus
599 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by Wildstorm
81 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by Microfish
27 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by reallurker
51 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Swordoffury
764 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by GameOverGiveAways
Hello everybody,
this would be a nice idea to motivate some people to make more giveaways and to filter the extreme leechers(and maybe second accounts) out of the pool.
Example:
I want to create a Risen giveaway. I want to make it public. But I don't want that everybody with maybe 0 giveaways is able to enter. So I set the "Who can enter" requirement to "Everyone" who made "5 giveaways".
First improvement: I'm not angry if somebody wins - because he is 100% no leecher (or not one of the rly bad ones - smurf account i.e.)
Second improvement: The guys who has less then 5 giveaways maybe make some more to enter the upcomming giveaways with this requirement.
What do you think?
Comment has been collapsed.