Giving Away Stuff = Blacklist??

этот прав

и кто лечить то собрался? гейропа? окраина?
о себе думайте, взгляните на своего президента (комика, актера)....
не завидуйте, просто смиритесь.

zips the lip :P

Their symptoms are usually insecureness disguised as arrogance and an overestimated self-worth. Pretty easily spottable.

🪞

Sometimes you must be smart on sg when you fight against the black sheep hordes :-D

Solution:
Do your GAs in the community train only in the last 6 days :-D

Nice! You can't enter their giveaways anyways because its a cheaper region. And they can't enter yours. I wish I got more Russian blacklists :(

(I can't figure out how to TL;DR this one, given the various number of points addressed, but anyone willing to give a crack at it do by all means feel free to.)

I'm confused- if the mindset of entitlement is wrong, and you're making a point to acknowledge that fact, then why do you seem to still be supporting your own engagement in such [which, to be clear, is the only entitlement I'm recognizing in this situation, and thereby I'm defaulting to an assumption that it's what you're intending to reference]? And whatever at all do the issues with Steam as a platform (or in the particular case you're mentioning, Steam as a storefront) have to do with your description formatting or its associated appearance of entitlement? And, just to be clear, this isn't a roundabout jab from me- I'm legitimately finding your presentation to be rather bewildering, and I'm honestly confused by it, and I do mean everything I just said sincerely (ie, without hostile intent).

While I obviously can't address your comment directly, given my uncertainty towards its intentions, as far as the overall nesting, if there's any confusion over thegodoftitsandwine's comment, let me try expounding and expanding on it:
* It's relatively easy to check against regional restrictions in most cases [eg, by checking SteamDB or SG's related bundle thread].
* Staff generally makes allowances for those circumstances where region restrictions weren't obvious
* You can't insist on rerolls or deletions for any reason in giveaway descriptions as giveaway descriptions can't overrride site rules
* Basic English rules mean that personally targetted (eg "You") formatting or overly declarative (anything that implies "you must") formatting is incredibly rude- even, in many cases, when coming from a superior (barring within a military or parental heirarchy), meaning that the formatting in the quoted statement is intuitively considered rude in its presentation.
* Finally, there's also the simple fact that staff will never reroll on region restricted giveaways, due to the high probability of continued issues, making your entire comment's underlying premise faulty to begin with.

In short, for many many reasons, the phrase quoted by PossiblePsycho is very problematic and very much warranting of critical reactions (which, by personal preference, may lead to blacklists, which is entirely reasonable and exactly what blacklists are there for, and it's always deeply entitled to criticize someone else's blacklist usage to begin with [though one can certainly criticize any externalized behaviors that may come along with such an action] ).

As you yourself just noted(?), it's quite entitled to present such a statement in such a way- comparatively, doing the much more standard "I'm unaware of any region restrictions, but I'd appreciate those who enter be willing to delete if necessary" doesn't offer up any elements that could reasonably be criticized, as it clearly details the circumstances, acknowledges the second party, and presents itself politely.

Entitlement is, at heart, putting yourself above others instead of interacting with them as equals. Perhaps more precisely, it's about expecting something without being willing to provide a comparable offering in exchange. As soon as you start acknowledging the other parties with proper respect, then the fact that you're the one giving something out puts you in the advantageous position, as far as the social interpretations directed towards matters related to your giveaways (at least, from non-entitled site members).

While Steam has a lot of criticizable elements, in this particular case Shakti and others in the community put in a lot of effort to help sort out region restriction related matters for the rest of us. While you can still criticize Steam over the matter in a more general sense, or do so in regards to how it creates more work for Shakti and the others, the specific situation regarding the region-restriction based nteraction between SG and Steam is pretty well-handled at the moment, and thus hard to make a strong argument against (in regards to it impairing or overly complicating usage of SG for GA creators).

Ultimately, the site should always lean towards offering a bias towards GA creators whenever there's equitable effort put into a matter, as the GA creators are theoretically offering more to an interaction to begin with- but that bias can only be presented if the GA creators are actually putting in appropriate efforts themselves. At the point where GA creators are sabotaging themselves or their giveaways by not putting in minimal organizational effort, minimal respectfulness, or minimum provision of relevant details [eg, the method by which win will be delivered], then obviously any negative outcomes following that will be on the GA creator, as they set things up to fail from the start.

(Conversely, putting it on the winner or entrants at that point is rather perverse, even very lightly bordering on being victim-blaming- that is to say, they're not victims persay, but similar to the victims in victim-blaming scenarios they're still very much dealing with the outcome of someone else's faulty actions, regardless of how well-handled their own actions were, and it's similarly unreasonable to criticize them for something they had no initial control over.)

And, to be clear, blacklists aren't even inherently a negative outcome to begin with- if you've no previous relationship with the individual, and they're choosing to not invite you to their parties while choosing not to go to yours, then it's an utterly bewildering and phenomenally entitled (or deeply insecure) thing to start insisting that you have a right to their parties, or that you're suffering any emotional loss for the exclusion.

SG is seriously the only place you'd see that kind of response- imagine if you tried to go up to a random table at a school [hopefully one that you're actually attending], and the people there politely said "we don't feel comfortable interacting with random strangers, and our clique doesn't really seem to be a match for you" and you just kept going up to their table and insisting they accept you, and then started griping in public about how rude they were being for excluding you. Again, how they present themselves outside of the exclusion is certainly relevant- you could reasonably complain if they were rude in how they went about excluding you- but the exclusion itself is very much their right, so long as they don't also try to include themselves in your affairs (which the two-way blacklist system naturally prevents, currently making that a non-issue for SG).

Again, I'm not entirely sure about what you were trying to say, and there's nothing wrong about making a thread asking questions about a topic, even if it's one that the community on the whole is tired of dealing with, like blacklists. But given your comment below suggesting that you're perceiving your entrants as being inherently arrogant (which is less questionable due to its own merits, and more by its seemingly untenable relation to the core topic), and the fact that you do seem to be overly concerned with received blacklists (despite your claims to the contrary), it does seem as though there may be grounds for you to take a step back, take a deep breath, and stop giving mind to matters that, at a glance, seem to fall in somewhere between being frivolous and petty.

You can adjust your description to be more reasonable, and then just accept that anyone still blacklisting you is someone doing you a favor by excluding someone with a contrary mindset from further interactions with you, or you can deliberately retain your description (or even make it more instigating) and encourage blacklists just for the sake of encouraging them, and accept that they're the result of your own actions. Or you can just avoid descriptions altogether, and just take a relaxed, laissez faire attitude towards your dealings with SG, accepting whatever may come.

I'm not really seeing a fourth set of options on approaching things, there, meaning that I'm not seeing any option that makes complaining about blacklists in threads a reasonable course of action (all the more so given that it's such a great way to encourage additional blacklists, making such threads inherently contradictory, in that it's always a bizarre thing for any user who ostensibly disdains being blacklisted to bring up). Again, threads that ask questions are fine, but introducing even mild hostility into them seems rather misplaced, given the lack of any actual negative interactions that the user could reasonably complain about.

Well, in the end it's really on cg for having blacklist stats available to users in the first place, given how predictable this outcome is, based on how the average human is.. Not that I'm not personally always in favor of unrestrained information flow, but in this particular case the losses do seem to massively outweigh the gains, given that those who care about information for information's sake likely only very rarely care about blacklist stats to begin with, meaning that it's really just catered towards furthering drama to begin with.

Rules is rules, I'm not arguing for or against them just stating them, if you have issues with them take it up with the staff. As it stands (and as I stated) it is your responsibility to place appropriate restrictions on your giveaways. If you can't figure out the specifics for a given game you can always choose to restrict it to your own country/region to rule out any issues.

😱

wow, you dug out some quite old post, i'm now close to 200

I don't do retaliation blacklisting.

Same here life is to short for such nonsense.

I don't do retaliation blacklisting.

I don't do this too in the extreme majority of cases.
Only if i expect that the user is someone that would take me down whenever he have a advantage from it AND when it gave enough "trouble" that i try to minimize my contact with this person. I want then to be sure that it don't switch from BL to something else.
Oh and only if that user is level 5 or higher.

Haha! I'll admit that I've blacklisted someone who blacklisted me. He's an ass anyway. LOL! Although, I genereally don't BL for just being an ass.

And the honest truth is that I rarely blacklist anyone. I usually remember exactly why they're there because it's a small list, and they've had to have been extremely obnoxious to earn it.