stop making puzzles? :3
also ban everyone complaining in melly's threads.
Comment has been collapsed.
A group from an image board leaked some of Melly's private GA links, and now they're acting like they had the right to do that, and like Melly was the bad person who removed those GAs. Here one of the group members defends their actions. Scroll through the thread and you can see several other members from that group
Comment has been collapsed.
it's actually very lively, you will blacklist a lot of users there. :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea I think it was ~5 if I remember correctly. Not really happy about that because I made a big blacklist amnesty lately and since I don't (really) create puzzles they didn't hurt me personly but they basicly left me no other choice.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my experience, there is no point arguing with that type of people. They're always right D:
Comment has been collapsed.
What I don't understand is why they've not been banned yet. There are several people who have more or less admitted to leaking GA links and using leaked GA links.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's got to be on a similar level to the duckman. Depressing.
Comment has been collapsed.
it started with the halloween event. after that you will see them in every single mellymelly thread commenting stupid things, so it's obviously stalking and harassing her.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not going to read this... I'm not going to read this...
breaks and opens the thread
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, there is a ways to add some protection to puzzles, but none of this can make it 100% leak-proof. If someone want to leak answers - they can always do it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Literally nothing - if you make the GA public/group/WL, you can't share it in a topic, because non-solvers will see it on the appropiate list. But if you make it invite only, there's nothing you can do against people sharing the link. Maybe place a codeword that needs to be entered in the puzzle, and delete it from the thread when the GA ends? This way only people with good memory (who read the topic) and those who solved the puzzle can access that codeword - if the winner can't tell the codeword, that means he didn't solve the puzzle, and you can ask for a reroll. Maybe? :|
Comment has been collapsed.
I like this codeword idea! I think I may test it soon :-)
Thank you!
Comment has been collapsed.
No worries, I don't think it's a puzzle you'd be interested in. Just another beverage quiz...
Comment has been collapsed.
Wont accomplish anything. People who share the giveaway url are those that solved the puzzle in the first place, aren't they? So if they share the url why wouldn't they also share, that is leak the codeword?
Or maybe I misunderstood how the codeword thing is supposed to work.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was thinking about a manual challenge - basically like a single easy-to-solve but frequently-changing bonus-question. One that if you solved the puzzle you could answer easily, but if you didn't you'd be stumped and would be need to wait a day until you get another chance (for a different easy question). I guess I should suggest it to itstoohard.com.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would love to start by having ITH do full rankings of solvers, not just a top10. That at least makes it a little easier to check solvers. I'd also love an option to only have logged in players able to do the puzzle, no anonymous solvers. Then you can cross-check and report/blacklist unidentifiable users.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a great idea. Even better would be to have your SG account associated with your ITH account.
Comment has been collapsed.
Another related question - is there a pattern to identify likely-leakers on steamrep.com?
Comment has been collapsed.
They don't deal with issues like these. (Nor should they.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm thinking about heuristics - e.g. if someone is from region X and has at least Y amount of friends who were VAC banned then he/she can be considered potential-leaker. Something like that...
Comment has been collapsed.
I cannot see any statistical correlation between people who get VAC banned in CS:GO or TF2 for aimbotting or similar in-game offences and people who leak the solution for a puzzle on a site loosely associated with Steam. Not to mention that I'd be REALLY surprised if even a single percent of VAC-banned people in the past years are even active forum users. (Heck, I'd be surprised if tenth of those people spoke English on a level to understand even the basic puzzles.)
Comment has been collapsed.
They don't need to speak English to register and type answers in istoohard.com.
I'm not saying this is the right set of heuristics, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is some correlation between people who cheat in one field and in another, or in having many friends who cheat.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can always find some correlation between Steam users based on two random criteria. What I seriously doubt that you could find a correlation that can be used with more than 5% accuracy projected on a larger group. Like how you cannot say that if someone cheated on a school test, they will steal your wallet. There are people who cheated on a school test and would steal your wallet, but there are more people who cheated on a school test and would not steal your wallet, but assuming they would will create all sorts of incorrect statistics.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree it's not going to be very accurate, but it doesn't seem like there are better options out there. If it's something that users can check themselves before attempting to solve the puzzle they should at least be less aggravated to know that they don't meet the requirements.
Comment has been collapsed.
Better? I don't think so. You are right in that VAC is the only thing that is a sure way to tell if someone tried to play against the simple rules.(And for a video game… that won't even give them money for winning… people are strange.) I just wanted to put an emphasis on that even though it may be the best bet, it is a very weak an unreliable one.
Comment has been collapsed.
For lack of a better option, I think that's what I'll use. Tough for those who tried to cheat in the past. In this case, they'll only be able to enter the Caffeine giveaway (linked after solving the quiz), but won't get an invite for the group with the additional giveaways.
If I make it clear that users who I'm not familiar with & who were VAC banned in the past will be limited to the number of giveaways they can enter, it would at least save them the bother of trying to solve the quiz.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hope we won't end up with some password-generating app, like Steam guard =)
It's too hard to separate leakers from humans - it could be anyone in disguise =<
Comment has been collapsed.
Only one, extra question on chat before handing out the prize. But that would lead to suspension...
Patterns do exist, but you have to look at puzzle threads and prize GAs
Comment has been collapsed.
It won't lead to a suspension if the answer is only the deciding factor as to whether to invite someone to a group and not whether to deliver a key. The problem is that it's a lot of work.
For the Beer and Homebrewing quiz I manually added 38 users to a group with the additional giveaways, and I did it after checking that each one added a related comment on the "gate" giveaway (which was accessible after solving the quiz), and of course after validating that they pass SGTools test. If I had to chat with every one of them it would have been too much effort.
I'm planning to do something very similar with my upcoming Coffee and Homeroasting quiz, but this time I think I'll also require participants to be free from VAC bans. I'll lax this requirement if they're already on my whitelist or are members of one of the groups that I trust.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, forgot about group option. Still the chat is the only way to do it more or less reliably (depends on question and time to answer) - cheater needs someone who can answer available.
As to VAC, I have little trust to this tool - afaik it uses heuristics as one of the ways to detect cheats. I would not be surprised at all if it flagged me if I ever played vac secured game thanks to software running on my pc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I'm beginning to think VAC may not be a good indication. I just checked the profiles of some questionable users from Melly thread, and couldn't find any indication on steamrep.com of them being involved in wrong doing.
One pattern that I did find (on their profiles here) is that most of their giveaways are region locked, so I can relate to that in the requirements for the group. That's an easy requirement to add.
Comment has been collapsed.
That pattern is to be expected, they are from that region. Take a look at winners to see interesting pattern (not useful for detecting puzzle leakers in general tho)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure steamrep.com is a good way to track if Steam users are good people, because it's mostly concerned with whether they cheat in games that are VAC secured and their trading rep. Being duplicitous isn't a metric, unfortunately, unless they lied in a trade.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is not within my ability, but I have an idea. We can make a website, where one giveaway on SGs is assigned to many randomly-generated page, each page is bound to one IP address. Each time an user solves a puzzle, a page is create with his IP address to let him join the GA using PHP, so even if he shares that link, other users cannot access the GA.
The only problem is that this method cannot prevent users from sharing the answers for the puzzles.
Comment has been collapsed.
No idea how it works, but sounds awesome :O
Comment has been collapsed.
there's a problem, many people have a random ip address everytime they connect, for example if I turn off and restart my router I'll get a different ip, so that would cut out people like me that would solve the puzzle in the right way :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretty much. Generating any sort of one-use token is useless if the answers are static. The only kind of puzzles that could be non-static are cipher puzzles where you could randomize a phrase or something for each user, but then someone could share the cipher method. You could hand out a subset of a larger pool to slightly inconvenience, but it would be an awful lot of work for something that's generally supposed to be fun for the creator.
Ultimately I think a good analogy is trying to manage the entryway of a secure area. You have a numeric pin and you see the problem that people can share their code, so you give out magnetic swipe cards. Turns out magnetic swipe cards are easily copied, so you move onto impractical-to-clone smart tokens embedded in a badge. People start lending their badges, so you move onto something that can't be given away: biometrics. All this time and money spent on implementation and people can still just hold the door open as someone else goes in. There are some things that you can only ensure by witnessing in person.
Comment has been collapsed.
So true. Where I am living now, people just scan their fingerprints to let other people in :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Why complicate things so much. Use the SteamID login. This still doesn't solve problem with leaked answers, but at least you have list of profiles
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd rather not log in anything unnecessary though. And if people enter the GAs, you already have a list of profiles in the GAs page, at least the last time I checked (about a year ago), it's still there.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's the whole point of extra layer - to have a tool that gives a chance for detecting cheaters. With ID you can collect times of each correct answer, number of wrong answers, when user saw questions for the first time and so on. With multiple puzzles cheaters pattern would show up.
Info on etries page is useless. First, not all enter or comment. Second, often entry and comment happens much later then puzzle was solved. IP number carries no information at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good question. I'm not entirely sure if there's a good way, but for example the Touhou Giveaways event used a database to see who had the links to what giveaways and who cheated, though we only found the leaker by their own confession, not by actually tracking (we had an idea, but not bulletproof).
Comment has been collapsed.
Not exactly true, I found the leaker by checking who picked exactly the same giveaways as cheater joined. If cheater joined only 2-3 giveaways, it would be impossible to track the leaker because of many people picking the same 2-3 gibs. But I had like ~12-14 exact giveaway IDs, so I could check that, and it resulted with only 1 result, so the leaker was obvious.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, yes, but the database tracked who chose what giveaways to enter, so you didn't have to manually distribute the links and track who entered what. The bigger issue here is that in order to track this, you need a good number of giveaways running to eliminate false positives and guarantee that the leaker gets caught.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know someone asked knsys for the sgtools giveaway tool to have an option to detect whether an entry passed through the tool or not. It's probably harder than it sounds but iirc they'll try to look into doing it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's already implemented and working.
The owner can get a list of people who joined the GA without the invitation of sgtools (so, got a leaked url)
Comment has been collapsed.
If you use the new "Entry criteria" feature of SGtools you already get a list of valid entries after the GA has ended.
The only thing that confused me a little is that the tool currently uses local time so when my restricted GA ended there was no list of valid entries but when I looked again 2 days later it was there.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can check the entries at any time, it doesn't need it to be finished.
Simply the option was not implemented when you first checked it :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Cool, thanks for the heads-up.
I guess this would rather belong in this thread but is there a way to clear the Giveaway dashboard? Currently it doesn't matter to me because I just reached 10.000 GA entered a few day ago and I think I'll stick with that number at least for a little while but I can imagine the dashboard getting a little crowded if you enter a lot of restricted GAs.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll make a pagination system when I get some free time, thanks for the suggestion
Comment has been collapsed.
make them so hard that only a few ppl will be able to solve them - then they'll be less likely to leak after they wasted so much time only to singnificantly lower their chances to win :D:
Comment has been collapsed.
or at least the leakers are easier to spot ;p I had leaks in puzzle with 5 solvers - 1 solver shared an answer with a friend - I was only able to catch them because it was damn hard puzzle, like 1 person solving per 1.5 days at average and suddenly 2 users enter GA seconds from each other - they basically called themselves out ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
leakers are so stupid they don't even think about winning odds... they prefer to spoil a puzzle and have less chance of winning but look cool with their friends.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, they might think "if I leak answer to friend, if he wins he'll steam share it and I'll play it anyway"...
Comment has been collapsed.
but then he will leak to 1 good friend - it's shitty but still less damage than posting to public forum / image board for tens of ppl to enter, ppl he may not even know.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, okay. If we talking hypothetically...
-
Implement itstoohard functionality on sg site.
Pros:- No separate link to the giveaway, so it can not be leaked.
- We always know who solved the puzzle, no anonymous solvers.
- Users meet restrictions before solving - time saved.
Cons: - not going to happen
- people can still leak answers to puzzle.
-
Enhance itstoohard (or make a new similar site) to use steam auth.
Pros:- We always know who solved the puzzle, no anonymous solvers.
- If giveaway link leaked - we can check, who entered the giveaways without solving puzzle.
- Users meet restrictions before solving - time saved
Cons: - people can still leak answers to puzzle.
-
Add time measurement of answers. If someone solve all questions from the first try with minimal delay between questions - that's probably a cheater with leaked questions. Can be done with both 1 and 2 paragraphs above.
Pros:- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked answers.
Cons: - Easily avoided if cheater know about it.
- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked answers.
-
Log user's referrer in the puzzle, so we can find if user came not from original thread.
Pros:- Extra anti-cheater protection. The ones who came not from original thread are suspicious.
Cons: - Easily avoided if cheater know about it.
- people can still leak answers to puzzle.
- Extra anti-cheater protection. The ones who came not from original thread are suspicious.
-
Log user's referrer in the steamgifts giveaway, so we can find if user came not from puzzle
Pros:- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked giveaway links.
Cons: - not going to happen
- Easily avoided if cheater know about it.
- people can still leak answers to puzzle.
- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked giveaway links.
-
Make functionality to add one-of-a-list question. This would make puzzle a little different for different users.
Pros:- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked answers.
Cons: - Much more efforts to make a puzzle - you need to add extra questions, the more - the better - the harder to do.
- Rest of answers still can be leaked, making puzzle much easier to cheater.
- Extra anti-cheater protection. Partially protects from leaked answers.
-
Make some public database of leakers, so anyone making puzzle can blacklist them.
Pros:- less leakers - less leaking
Cons: - It's somehow against steamgifts rules (calling out)
- It's exploitable - someone can report innocent users
- Need some way to know, who is the leaker - often hard to find.
- Needs moderation because of the above - this means we need volunteers.
- Still does not give full protection.
- less leakers - less leaking
This is what I can think of so far. As you can see - there is no silver bullet, we can't protect puzzle from leaking for 100%, as I already said above.
Comment has been collapsed.
extra con to all your suggestions - it only works for a very specific type of puzzle - ITH Quiz. If any part of the puzzle or whole puzzle would not be ITH Quiz all your propositions no longer work. So for example - it wouldn't fit most of my puzzles, or issues that probably let Yirg to post this comment now - namely /gabe/ leaking GA URLs not associated with ITH puzzles (my trian, previously Melly's treasure hunt) and now group-solving revilheart's puzzle which is not ITH quiz either.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, this is a problem too, you are right, as always.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I didn't say it earlier, thanks for posting this great list of ideas! I agree any enhancements on SG side are not going to happen, but hopefully itstoohard.com implements some changes.
In the meanwhile I'll use the setup I used for the homebrewing quiz (invite-only "gate" giveaway open to all solvers + invite-based group giveaways for solvers who add a comment). This way I can at least look for troublesome signs before inviting people to the group, and if I see that the answers were leaked, I can decide to only invite people I know instead of cancel the whole thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think there's a way to protect the puzzles at all. BlueAward and I talked about this 2.5 years ago. I think I even talked with Zelgh about it, but every solution has the same common downside - human factor. Someone will always tell the answers, give out links, talk to friends... ask around for answers... not appreciate other peoples work and effort... and money...
One solution would be a dedicated puzzling website where you login with a steamID, get X random questions, and a unique passcode that will enable you to get in the private giveaway group for a single event.
But that's simply too much work.
Comment has been collapsed.
I actually thought once about puzzle idea - dedicated website with sort of maze with basic navigation - each player starting at random maze location so noone can just post route to get to puzzle - and there are GAs protected by randomized puzzles/quizes scattered among whole maze. I'd also be able to check which user got each GA link. But then again - even with such restrictions it still wouldn't be protected against such group as /gabe/ - even if ppl get random puzzles - they may ask others in their board for answers. And with enough ppl dedicated (and in this case we're not talking about 1 person leaking GA to friend, but organized form of many ppl anonymously leaking and cheating) soon enough even with random puzzles all puzzles I got prepared would be leaked soon enough.
And like you said - it's too much work for something that still isn't chet and leak proof.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've been trying to find out a bit more about the group, but well, google translate is not exactly the best ;) How big is /gabe/ and is it the norm to spread leaked GAs in the group, or is it just a small sub-set of the group that does this?
Also, did some snooping around, and apparently one of the people who were so keen on defending the groups behaviour had a GA removed due to it being leaked. Double standards, anyone?
edit Did a bit more reading on that image board, and it very much does seem like posting leaked links is the norm. What a scumbag community.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don;t have a lot of info, but also did my part of digging so can tell at least what I know now :> Their steam group itself is 60+ people, just about half of them more active on SG BUT - it is publicly accessible image board - some people who entered my still running GA in my train (I screwed up timing) were not in their Steam group yet obviously they are active on their board. I think reason is that group strips them from annonimity while on board you may remain anonymous. For example - I informed one person who was not in the group that is she aware that entering via GA leaks is against rules. My train entry ratio was 0.75 she had ratio of 0.29. Quick chat, quite angry rant, I blocked her. Image of our chat shows on /gabe/. So there are more people than these 60 who are either lurkers just using up stuff they post or prefer to remain anonymous.
I cannot tell you how common is it for them to leak stuff - I know they destroyed Melly's event in the past, but began reading through they board only yesterday after they leaked my train. But I can tell you examples of what was there during just a single day. First there was crying over me setting ratio requirement on my train using SGTools followed by leak of direct GA link. Then there was organizing of sabotaging Melly's Christmas event thread. Then there was listinng who should be Blacklisted for talking about them. Then there was talking about sending fake reports to Steam about these people. Then there was puzzle leaking and group solving of revilheart's puzzle. Oh and in the meantime suggesting how they should post links to leaks from now on (using spaces and special symbols inside the link or SG code) so they couldn't be easilly googleable and lead to them. All this during one single day (actually half of the day - from 10AM to 22-23PM). So like I said - cannot spoke about all their history, but based on that small amount of content I've seen it doesn't seem like rulebreaking is something strange or uncommon to them. Ofc it's not all they do - big chunk of funny images, offtops, links to private RU/CIS GAs etc - thing you'd often say in any other SteamGroup. But also enough of rulebreaking and it didn't look to be something strange - noone saying dude, wtf are you doing, it's against the rules etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Please give me a chance to explain the essence of this group. Group of AIB is NOT a stimgifts group (that in your blacklists). AIB can visit ANY anonymous person and board's popularity has dramatically increased for last month (after MellyMelly event). Visitors CAN'T control what is written on the board and I can not exclude that in the group made a provocations (leaked GA's). These links can write any, ANY visitor! Responsible and intelligent SG's users from our Steam group will never enter into leaked GA's. Please understand, we can't fight this, but we DO NOT PARTICIPATE in this! (for example, I personally didn't enter in Melly leaked GA's or GA from Revilheart and i know that in Steam chatroom participants of our steam group criticized leaked links!) You get good people to answer for the actions of the bad people. Me, personally, and my friends - we don't want "World War Of Blacklisting" because it harms the spirit of SG community.
But I think the wrong Melly's decision blacklist of people from other regions... Of course, it is her choice and her decision, but I think website dedicated to the gifts should be good and polite to all people in our world.
And Merry Christmas to all! (I am writing this on a case of ban :)) )
Comment has been collapsed.
But you did admit to breaking the rules in other ways through the group, so you're not completely innocent here, namely cheating in puzzle GAs (it was for the cheating that I blacklisted you).
And I've seen quite a few associated with the group that have been behaving very very badly. I've not blacklisted anyone who I've not seen behave badly, blanket blacklisting don't do much good, but reading through the image board and seeing peoples posts around here, it's easy to get the impression that at least a sizable portion of the group is, shall we say, less than pleasant individuals.
Comment has been collapsed.
First, we have not solved this puzzle (no entries from our members).This is proof that in the chat had NO cheatertips!
Second, on the board were not CLUES or TIPS, just chatter about this puzzle, suggetions and discussion. This is CHAT room! However, you believe the person (don't remember his nickname, sorry) who wrote that we leaked answers and do not believe me. I think this is not an objective point of view.
Comment has been collapsed.
you didn't solve the puzzle - because you didn't manage to - but you intended to. Intended crime, even if not successful is still a crime. Plus there was no comments whatsoever at image-board from any of you against what was happening - you can say whatever you want about what was going on on your private chat, but if everyone were against on chat why was noone against on board?
Sorry but for me personally it looks like simple damage control (and a weak one) - ofc anyone may write whatever he wants on an image board. But none of you were concerned with it. None of you opposed it. Only because you get publicly exposed because of pissing off two big contributors (me and Melly) who spoke against you you started to try to cover the truth.
In post above ( http://www.steamgifts.com/go/comment/gbm48E5 ) - sorry, don't want to write two seperate comments regarding same main issue - you claim that your group users are fair and square - but you simply has no control who posts on board. Then explain me this (all linked comments comes from members of your group, the one that you claim is honest part not associated with anonymous rulebreakers):
- XYECOC admitting to your organized harassment, but claiming it's good, because Melly "deserved it" source.
- He caliming it was not a leak because "puzzles cannot be leaked" source
- He again saying "I deserve" my train being leaked because I put a protection on entering it. source
- You yourself admitting to group-solving puzzle. source
So please tell me again - how is the things you and another member of your "official and fair" part of the group any different from what anonymous part of your board post on it?
Comment has been collapsed.
At first, about puzzle I answered below. But your words "Intended crime, even if not successful is still a crime" reminded me "Minority Report" by Philip Dick)
"Plus there was no comments whatsoever at image-board from any of you against what was happening - you can say whatever you want about what was going on on your private chat, but if everyone were against on chat why was noone against on board?"
Most users do not sit all day chatting at AIB, some users do not attend board at all. We can not influence what anonymous users write on the board. Our protests were drowned in the depths of an anonymous chat, and we are the only evidence that we have NOT ENTERED into leakead GA's.
"who spoke against you you started to try to cover the truth"
We (good users) can not be held responsible for poor users. I think that now, as I write this, AIB does provocations as harrasment pictures because they also reading this thread. Anonymity gives permissiveness.
"XYECOC admitting to your organized harassment, but claiming it's good, because Melly "deserved it" source"
That's liar, I came in previous thread by my personal deсision just for explanation of MellyMelly's BL rules. BTW, his nickname XYECOC in Russian mean DICKSUCKER))) What do you think, why is it so called in russian community?))) That's all you need to know about this man.
Comment has been collapsed.
At first, about puzzle I answered below.
You did not really answer it, you skirted around the question, but gave no direct answer to it.
Comment has been collapsed.
onpe - it's quote from any law-system in the world. If you attempt murder but person lives - you still get punished. If you attempt robbery, but guy behind the cash scare you off with gun - you still get punished. If you attempt tax-fraud but get caught by IRS - you get punished. And so on and on. We're not talking thought-crime here (yeah, imagine you're the only one reading Dick here, plus protip - Dick stole the idea from Orwell), we're talking attempted crime which is very different. You didn't just think about breaking the rules - you attempted breaking the rules but failed. It's not thought crime where we're not sure if you would do it or not - we know for a fact that you did break the rules but sucked on that.
Going on....
Most users do not sit all day chatting at AIB, some users do not attend board at all. We can not influence what anonymous users write on the board. Our protests were drowned in the depths of an anonymous chat, and we are the only evidence that we have NOT ENTERED into leakead GA's.Sure, but strangely enough for MULTIPLE rulebreakings that could be witnessed just yesterday over 12 hours - not a single opposing comment? I could agree with you if there would be one case and noone responsed - but multiple morally-wrong actions over 12h and noone responds, yet still you claim that simply "noone from majority of fair users wasn't around? Bull-fucking-shit.
Also - as in Melly's case it was hours b4 GAs got deleted - you could simply notice that you got caught and remove your entries so you don't be held responsible.
We (good users) can not be held responsible for poor users. I think that now, as I write this, AIB does provocations as harrasment pictures because they also reading this thread. Anonymity gives permissiveness.You "good users" (to be exact at least you and XYECOC) spoke yourself in defense of your rulebreaking. For fck sake - you even told me I deserved my GAs to be leaked because I set up the rules on them.
Oh - and if all I need to know that his name is Dicksucker - why do you keep such a person in "fair and honest" part of your community? His comments were everything but not fair and rule-obedient - he directly claimed that breaking the rules was ok.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you solved it or not is besides the point here, you worked together on a puzzle. That's against the rules, unless the gift creator specifically allows for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
So show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" should collect fines from each family who guesses the answers before TV))
I do not guess and not entered in the GA. You judge me for an uncommitted crime)
Comment has been collapsed.
If those were the rules for "Who wants to be a millionaire" then yes, yes they should. But those are not the rules, so they should not (and do not). Same here, if group solving was allowed, then you would not have broken any rules, but as it's not, you broke a rule. It's really as simple as that. So please stop with these strawman arguments, they really don't hold up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just one question: a man who accuses us has any evidence (screenshots, proofs) of ANYTHING except his words and statements about the knowledge of the Russian language? This is bifurcation point.
I like watching the movie again "12 angry men")
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm basing this on YOUR statement, which was in English.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fnord, you're not locked in the toilet every time when you solve a SG's puzzle?)))
I don't know who began discussions about puzzle and called user's suggetions and discussions. However, I witness that there was no clues or links or something leaking.
I value my reputation on this site and ready to answer any of my words.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do not remember that you had access to our steam groups)
"absolutely turn a blind eye"
This -> We can not influence what anonymous users write on the board. Our protests were drowned in the depths of an anonymous chat, and we are the only evidence that we have NOT ENTERED into leakead GA's.
Comment has been collapsed.
If there were no clues, or members of the group helping each other in any way, then what does this line mean?
We're just guessed together, is it restricted?
Would that not mean that you worked on the puzzle together in some way?
Comment has been collapsed.
for the fucks sake - you say that google translate misinterpretated things like links directly to puzzle, things like "we have to do this and this with these numbers", things like FUCKING DIRECT LINK TO MY OWN TRAIN and we base our accusations on fucking misinterpretations?
YOU HAVE NO FUCKING SHAME!
Comment has been collapsed.
I do not have more time and energy to argue with you. You do not want to see the arguments on the other side. You found an image of the enemy. God will be our judge.
Have a nice evening!
Comment has been collapsed.
sure - you were not able to explain any of the arguments pointed so you just turn 'jesus-like" and turn the other cheek hoping that the community will feel the pity for your arranged and calculated act.
Comment has been collapsed.
Okey: I'm guilty, you are saint.
I repeat: God will be our judge, I'll pray for His mercy to the persecutors.
Discussion is over.
Comment has been collapsed.
sorry to dissapoint you - atheist here - so I won't be willing for some non-or-maybe-existent-god to judge you :(
Comment has been collapsed.
So please don't participate in Chirstmas events&GA's)) because you think religion is absurd
Comment has been collapsed.
first of all - why? religion =/= tradition, that's one thing, another is that moders xmas celebration has almost nothing to do with any religion (please show me where in your holly book there is anything about putting lights on a tree and boxes wrapped in colorful paper under it). And lastly - xmas nowadays is celebrated around the world no matter the relligion - do you think let's say Japanese people celebrate it to honor birth of some random dude from other part of the world 2k years ago?
Another thing - you lack constructive arguments to what people say on main topic, so you ignore it and instead go picking on words and unrelated things ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
also why don't you answer to direct examples of your fcking rulebreaking posted here: http://www.steamgifts.com/go/comment/pJlBvNT
Comment has been collapsed.
there's a big difference - a person answering questions on his own in "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" may win a prize, but family answering together cannot. If you cheat the puzzles like you tend to do and see nothing wrong with it - all of you can win the prize.
Comment has been collapsed.
Big. Split into smaller groups, both formal and informal, all with common characterisitics of a blackhole - (nearly) nothing comes out. About moral spine you have already learned enough
Comment has been collapsed.
I also said somewhere, and I stand by it, that SG has become way too big/popular for its own good.
Comment has been collapsed.
and with this I fully agree! the vast majority of current problems - the big influx of leechers, rulebreakers, bots etc - comes from the simple fact - community got few times bigger, while the same number of ppl manage it and use the same rules and schematics they used to manage small community.
Comment has been collapsed.
I try to mitigate the problem by
1) Making really difficult puzzles. When your puzzle only has like 10 solvers, none of them are going to be leaking it.
2) Making really difficult group puzzles. You can share ITH answers and hints already. Also is really difficult, so few entries.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is, as someone who can't solve even medium-difficulty puzzles, I empathize we those like me, so I want my puzzles to be relatively easy. I had 38 solvers for the Homebrewing quiz, which is pretty much what I'd like to have. Too few solvers, and some giveaways don't get 5 entries; too many and it means too much work validating users and inviting them to the group. Somewhere between 30 to 60 is just right for my point of view.
Comment has been collapsed.
most of my puzzles never got 5 solvers ;p In SGv1 you needed 2 entries to get CV so I used to stop giving hints the moment I got 2nd solver ;p
Make puzzles for fun, for challenge, not for CV! ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I just read your response. I don't think I've had a problem yet. Then again, I've only been looking at the winners, not all of the entrants.
Comment has been collapsed.
well - having 2-6 solvers in your puzzle makes it quite easy to check each one carefully and find cheaters :D:
Comment has been collapsed.
I've served past suspensions for multiple wins which were honest accidents (the second time I was punished for a technicality). Would you consider letting me join regardless? Either way, thanks for the giveaway! :)
EDIT: Regarding your question - I know that you can ask support to delete your giveaway using 'leaked link' as a reason, but I'm not sure how to find out that it was leaked in the first place - also this punishes all the people who entered legitimately.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know you, so don't see why I should give you a different treatment than anyone else who doesn't pass the SGTools validation. In fact, even if I did know you, my advise would be to get it sorted out. Unactivated wins are very simple to fix - just buy the game or trade for it. Multiple wins are not much more complex to solve. See here.
Think about it - you've won more than 500 games. This means hundreds of potential reroll tickets being created again and again, wasting the time of giveaway creators and Support. Wouldn't it make more sense that you get this sorted out once and for all?
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for providing the link to solving issues with multiple wins! I guess I should obtain a copy of the game and return it to the creators of the giveaways in question, correct? I'll try to get it sorted out, though I hope they're still reasonably active on SG.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, that's the idea. If the giveaway creators are not active and you prove to Support that you did everything in your power to contact them, then maybe they'll delete you as the winner for one of the GAs. Good luck!
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, i don't know any solution.
I have an idea for an easy puzzle, but even if it is easy to solve, i know there will be a leak.
So yeah, i don't feel like doing the puzzle :)
But Winthorp has a solution for his thread that can help you.
But that requires some effort.
Maybe can you talk with him :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Puzzle leaks seem to be a more frequent issue than I thought, which robs much of the fun from making puzzles. Is there a way to mitigate it other than limiting the puzzle to whitelist- and trusted-groups?
And a related question - is there a pattern to identify likely-leakers on steamrep.com?
L0+ GA
Comment has been collapsed.