Hi,

I just wondered how you guys think about this.

Surely I consider people who give away stuff as well to be way more eligible to receive stuff as well.

Then, there's leechers.

So how about a 50P limit for everyone Level 0?

Opinions?

4 years ago

Comment has been collapsed.

What do you think?

View Results
Only if one gives he shall receive
No, that would be wrong

Personally, I think kittens is the answer to this question

View attached image.
4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Needs more fluff!

View attached image.
4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hehe, a cute chonker :)

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yes, the universal solution, great point!

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 3 years ago.

4 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yea it's just sad when you see people who have won tons of games and never played a single one of them :(

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 4 years ago.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Its always baffled me why people care about "leeching". Its a mathematical impossibility for everyone to be a positive ratio, that being said it would be nice if more wins were played...THAT being said there are groups for collectors and traders, so they are obviously never being played.

We have level filters and blacklists, thats pretty much good enough. Hell make invite only giveaways or a personal group if you feel that strongly.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leecher

translate it to english

"es la denominación que se le ha dado en foros de Internet a ciertos usuarios que se caracterizan por hacer uso de los recursos aportados por los demás sin agradecer ni hacer ningún aporte a la red en cuestión"

now you know what means to be a lecheer, because you are wrong thinking that all people with "negative" ratio are lecheers.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Surely I consider people who give away stuff as well to be way more eligible to receive stuff as well.

Well, I don't. I consider them about as worthy. Someone who has won 1000 games IMO shouldn't win more, regardless of whether they're giving or not, and someone who hasn't won a thing should win regardless of whether they give or not.

One major problem with SG, IMO, is that because there's a CV system which is intended to encourage people to give, people get to think that people who give more deserve to win more. I can think of a few criteria of who deserves to win more (people who haven't won much, people who have less money, people who play their wins, ...), but people who give isn't one of them. If you give out of kindness, your reward is built into the giving. If you give to get more, the the CV system is working. But that doesn't make you more deserving.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

actually you just need to make a GA with minimum lv
if you think lv 1 is a leech, make lv 2 and so on

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Level 0 users are already highly limited by the available giveaways (many are level 1 or above) and the sheer amount of entries on level 0 giveaways (the non-shovelware ones usually range between 2000 and 4000 entries). No need for further restrictions IMHO.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You want to get more when you buy more?
Well, here's an easy solution for you:
Don't put what you buy on SG, put in your own library instead. Wow, instant 100% bought one = got one in your library ratio!

So far pretty much every complain like this one sounds like leeching itself, you simply want to skew rules so YOU could game them instead of handing out stuff randomly.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't think limiting the amount of points gained is the best solution as determining who is a leecher can be tricky. However I do feel creators should have more option available when making a giveaway on the site itself, such as, taking into account the ratio of won/sent gifts, real cv of won/sent gifts, etc. As seeing someone like this was your winner, would bum out some of the gifters (obviously I won't reveal the name of the user): https://imgur.com/a/qAERr6a

4 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You can already set up custom rules with SGtools
You can choose what the ratio has to be, what the given or won values has to be.. And many more rules. even set it up that only people who own some specific game can only enter your GA (if you are giving away sequel for instance)

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But you can only set it for invite only giveaways, not for public ones. It's especially bad when you would like to make a long-running giveaway, because while it's always visible as a public one, on the forums the topic will get pushed back by newer ones.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Agreed, In such a case it would be cool to have some restrictions for public giveaways as well

But matter of fact remains - it IS possible to limit with more detail which users can access your giveaways, even if only invite only

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yes I know. As Adam already mentioned, I meant for public giveaways, not just invite only, which you then have to post in the discussion with the hope that people will see that.

4 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1

At the public GA are the options against the "bad apples" not enough and users, as me, are forced to avoid public GA's and handle it with groups, the Whitelist and private GA's.
Normaly that should not be the solution but i know very very very much of the guys you posted a example picture and i prefer to give my GA's to someone that make other ones happy too.

4 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sign in through Steam to add a comment.