Well, technically it IS still an option... just one with a five-day suspension attached.
You ain't cool until you get suspended at least once anyway ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
And an eventual permanent ban I'd assume if repeated, so not really an option.
Comment has been collapsed.
You ain't cool until you get suspended at least once anyway ;)
twice please :3
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm only gonna say, i feel super cool :3
Comment has been collapsed.
ive never made a fake giveaway before, but ive probably been suspended a good 5 times or more lol mostly for forum reasons and always for reasons i think are dumb, i had a mod once that just hated my guts and would suspend me for anything lol
Comment has been collapsed.
wait really? i haven't been suspended (and i aint planning on it) i want to be one of the cool kids :( :(
Comment has been collapsed.
there are easy ways. you can beg your way to suspension, or call it fake :3
both have a high rate of success
Comment has been collapsed.
Or you can spam-troll the forum with a metric shit-ton of GIFs!
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, it has to be like... a LOT. Everywhere.
I remember one guy got a suspension for spamming "wat".
Comment has been collapsed.
If we suspended for posting gifs, MuIIins would be permabanned
Comment has been collapsed.
yes please i want that name for me!
Comment has been collapsed.
She should be permabanned for repeatedly calling support staff "slaves"!
Comment has been collapsed.
lies! i only call them filthy russian modifiers
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn... 5 days... Seems excessive.. :3
I think there should be a rule change here where it differentiates intentionally not sending a gift to actually creating fake giveaways for lulz.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't even want to be cool and this makes me the coolest :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Woooo, I'm the cool kids club, high five! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Ooh, I see. That's in case you refuse to send the key then. If the key was somehow duplicate and didn't work, it wouldn't be the case since it was unintentional.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get antsy when people take too long marking as received esp when I've been stalking their profile and see they've been online.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can still create a ticket of "forcing" received feedback, I used that option once and it went through. There's strong difference between intentionally NOT delivering the game, and intentionally clicking "not received" despite getting the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
If they have the game in their steam library. That should be all the proof you need.
Comment has been collapsed.
But if they trade it it will be more difficult to track/prove.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I guess they could easily argue that they bought the game afterwards too. Tracking the source is difficult, fortunately I haven't had to deal with this yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe I'm a bit late, but I checked that one non-received from last week. The guy won the same game just 2 days before yours and seems to have missed to exit your GA. You should be able to either re-roll or at least get rid of the negative entry through support I'd think.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks :-)
I've put you on my WL just before too ^^ Am currently trying to build a list to make some GAs for good people who deserve some more wins and where I won't get into trouble either. Though with your big library I fear you won't find anything to join from mine xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh I'm sure people wouldn't mind you winning some more (of their) games ;-) I think it's great of you to not just grab everything in sight, but there are only very few who like you really deserve some more wins ^^ So if the unlikely case happens that you don't already own one of my upcoming GAs please join, even if it's not on top of your wishlist, I'd love to hand it over to you :-D
And there is an option in the account settings to enable showing already owned games, so you can see them then including whitelisted ones ^^
Oh and sorry for the trouble you've gotten into again, that's sad :-/
Comment has been collapsed.
ahh, yea that's pretty much the only "rarer" game I have (until it gets eventually bundled that is xD ), for the rest it'll be more common bundle stuff though ^^
I can see what you mean with the high win and low play situation. Some I'd guess go for a big game collection and take more wins. While I'd certainly prefer when those will be played too, I'm not against people doing that either (and admittingly I'm also no saint, so.. xD )
But don't want to persuade you to change though of-course. Would just like to see you visiting my GAs too ;-) I kind of have a feeling otherwise I could end up winning more from yours and you none from mine, wouldn't feel right either ^^
Yes, the list is big without the filter ^^ I think group choice includes WLs but a separate button would be nice indeed.
Oh and good to hear for the situation to turn out fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree that feature would be nice, I like to counter-whitelist people when I notice it, but with a vast library a lot of GAs are hidden and so there may be people I'd like to whitelist but don't know about them O_O
Comment has been collapsed.
Just as an info, there is an option in the account settings to enable showing already owned games, so you can see them then including whitelisted ones. But the list grows quite a bit then ^^
(oh and I've put you on my WL, hope you'll see and can join one of my GAs when I start with them ^^ )
Comment has been collapsed.
The OP is just referring to a situation where someone openly and deliberately refuses to send the key. If something goes wrong (the person doesn't hit receive, the key is duplicate or turns out to be region-locked and you didn't know, etc), that won't get you a timeout, at least not unless it happens so often that Support decides you're doing it deliberately or something.
Comment has been collapsed.
even rule-breakers and leeches have rights here :3
sad but true
Comment has been collapsed.
if someone wins a ga, why should he mark the game as not recived, if he get the game? O.o
thats stupid! he would get blacklisted by ga-creators and if the ga-creators are getting suspended, they will win less. so whats the point in doing this shit?
Comment has been collapsed.
why should he mark the game as not recived, if he get the game?
The phrase "taking the Not Received" relates to the giveaway creator deciding not to deliver the key and accepting that the winner will mark it as such. See this thread for some discussion about the subject.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have solution to your problem.
Stop making giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
In what way is your solution better than whitelist-only giveaways? I want to make giveaways. Most of my giveaways were public Level 1 and 2. I then had to switch to public Level 4 because of the amount of rule-breakers I had as winners. When this didn't work, the only solution left is whitelist-only giveaways. This should be safe, as my whitelist members are not rule breakers (I check this when I add them).
Comment has been collapsed.
Goes to show just how bad rule-breakers affect the entire community :/ I've seen way so many people switch from public/lowlvl GAs to do only whilelist/friends/highlvl GAs to avoid rulebreakers, regifters, not-received, etc etc... It's sad for those of us who are low lvl still or can't do lots of high $$ GAs to lvl up, but still respect rules... But I understand how givers feel anyways. I just dislike the sheer amount of blatant rule breakers -.-
Comment has been collapsed.
Keep in mind, there are some users who reward lower level winners for being honest and putting forth an effort. If I see someone win one of my GAs and they say thank you, or have a decent ratio, and put forth at least a little effort to contribute to the community (not just by creating GAs) I'll often add them to my whitelist. Still others will invite you to groups for GAs, so honesty and following the rules can be rewarded in the long run. :)
Having said that, added you to my whitelist. (Haven't done any WL giveaways yet, but I plan on it).
Comment has been collapsed.
Agree with everything you say. Syrenne for example is on my whitelist since August, so I guess great minds etc... :-)
Comment has been collapsed.
I just need to do some WL giveaways now LOL. Have to do them before the Christmas holidays kill my bank account :(
(You're on my WL too)
Comment has been collapsed.
Aw thanks for the add (and also Yirg!) :) Well yes, you're right on that, Tzaar. It still makes me upset tho D: those people who try to abuse of this place where the main idea is to share and give others the chance to try games they might otherwise not be able to. I appreciate all the people creating awesome giveaways. I especially love when the giver adds a little challenge or question for those entering the GA, and it becomes a debate about a cool topic! or you share interests with someone there! or even asks for a gif xD. I like when they do that because it makes it less of a "check game, enter GA if you want it, say thanks, leave" process. It makes it actual sharing, even if you dont win; it makes you always leave with something (be it the game, or a friend, or a nice book/anime/show recommendation, or a new band/game suggestion,etc etc). Well, that's my view at least, others may not like having to write stuff on every GA they enter xD But to me it makes me smile, regardless if i win or not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, just wanted to let you know I've put you on my WL too. First I'd say level 1 is just too low, anybody should be able to gift some.
But then your statement convinced me, because I absolutely want to have users participate in my GA topics. From my public ones the amount of people who even only read the description is at a measy 10% of the entrants, those who reply even lower. So I'm happy to invite people who take part in that more properly ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
That's awesome! Interaction within a GA, regardless of lvl, not only ensures you know who might be or not a bot, but ALSO makes the GA way more interesting. I mean.. sometimes I wanna enter a GA and I'm not sure if I should say thanks or something because the gifter may think its a scripted thanks? or because they didnt even say anything.... I prefer it when, idk, the gifter asks for a gift, or a suggestion on books, or SOMETHING xD
Thanks for the wl add btw! :)
Comment has been collapsed.
The giveaways in that thread haven't even ended yet. May I ask why you've already decided that invite-only isn't a good enough solution and moved on to just whitelist giveaways?
Comment has been collapsed.
I imagine it does, it just seemed to me that the suspension was related to your public giveaways and the invite-only experiment didn't even get a chance to play out. Of course you have every right to put whatever restrictions on your future giveaways that you want, it's just unfortunate for all the rule abiding SG users who haven't found their way onto your whitelist. Kind of feels like a loss for the community.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry to see you got burned by this particular rule. I agree it's kind of unfair and it sometimes makes me apprehensive about creating giveaways for fear of giving away a dupe key by accident or if the winner is a scammer.
It's not always easy to maintain lists of hundreds or thousands of game keys without an unintentional mistake here and there, and it's also always possible that a winner could just activate or give the key to different account and then claim it was a dupe.
It seems like there should be some sort of threshold where if, after 5 giveaways or something like that, the ratio of not received giveaways can't exceed 5% without repercussions. So for every 20 giveaways created, you are allowed one mistake.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do agree with what you write, and I especially like your suggested solution. However this thread is actually about a somewhat different issue. I added a clarification in the end of the original post. Sorry for not being clearer on this.
P.S.
You may want to try those links again ;-)
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah I see, I checked out one of your links above to another thread explaining the issue and I better understand the dilemma now. Very informative, I'll have to be more careful with vetting winners before sending keys I think!
And thanks for the whitelisting, it's been reciprocated. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I once had to wait on humble support for over a week because a key did not work.... it worked out in the end and I was able to get the gift to them.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my case (surely there are others) they guy got away with his crime; don't think he ever was suspended/banned, but even so, he said he didn't care about SG and that he wasn't going back so (filthy words).. Yup, there is the "option" of take a not received, what else can you do? oh I know! cry youself to sleep in a dark humid corner!
The guy soiled himself over a bundle game.. oh man, I'm a huge magnet for this kinds, oh yes..
Comment has been collapsed.
Depends on the bundle game, I guess. After all, if you look at it, Ultra Street Fighter IV is a bundle game now.
Comment has been collapsed.
True that!, I didn't mean like crap game but rather from the price point, plus we're talking about duke nukem game so... everybdy knows how thatt went down :P
No biggie! I'd be way way way more upsed or better said in a megalomaniac-murdering-killing-spree kinda mood if instead of a duke nukem bundled it were a fallout 4 or a...idk, the next far cry, even if it's from U-be-crap XD
Comment has been collapsed.
My (time consuming) way around that: deliver keys by Steam chat only, deliver Steam gifts directly to the inventory, run automatic and manual regifting checks on the winners, and above all - screenshot everything. Screenshot the friend request, the chat log, the activation or lack thereof, the last/online both on Steam and Steamgifts in case of suspicious behaviour, everything. I've been consistently using this system for a little less than 80 GAs now and my "proof" folder currently has 327 screenshots in it - most of them display SG, the Steam chat and cross-referenced timestamps at once. Haven't ran into problems ever since and managed to spot a regifter and get him suspended swiftly (which given the comments I've seen about the support being slow I attribute to the massive amount of information contained in the screenshots I included in the ticket). Oh, last but not least, I keep a spreadsheet to track down suspicious behaviour even cross-site, with links to profiles, GAs and all. This also helped in getting the aforementioned regifter suspended I believe - I caught him regifting from another giveaway site onto here.
As I said though and as one can imagine, this is terribly time consuming, so unless one is able to enjoy a little bit of Internet Detective Simulator... well. Better off with trusted lists.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow you are thorough. I go the Steam chat route too for the same reason, but documenting every single step would be too much for me. I'm already unhappy with the amount of work it takes me already, phew.
Did you notice any wrong-doers in your high-lvl GAs? I hoped that around lvl 4+ rule breakers won't be there anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
I notice very few infractions among my higher level GA winners and my groups, hence why I've shifted towards groups and higher levels lately. However, I don't police very rigorously; I recently ran way too many GA's to be convenient to check every single one. (I had suspicions about one for no good reason, as it turned out I was just being paranoid). I think, though, I might check the final day of my current batch just to see who's naughty and nice...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, the amount of bad apples goes down the higher the lvl, I'm just sad to read that even some of those who gift dozens of games themselves don't behave. I hoped for the lvl limit to get rid of those cases, but seems that's not enough.
Just the same like you, I do not want to spend so much time checking everything/body..
On a side-note, guess I still do now, just put you on my WL ;-) no obligations for you or anything, just making a list where the right people get a chance (though I'm also still bummed that many rule-abiding people will be left out that way.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Sadly yes, I found a couple shady characters in 6+ public GAs, although the number decreases drastically.
Personally I'm under the impression that there's a huge gap of between level 4 and 5 when it comes to that, as climbing to level 4 is relatively easy (and most of the lvl 4 shady folks I met reached it and then stopped doing GAs as soon as they reached it) - whereas the road to level 5 is not that feasible for accounts purpotedly set up with ill intent.
Do keep in mind that what I said is solely based on the empirical evidence I gathered though, and the sampling pool hasn't been all that wide. Still, it's a good... gut-feeling-enhancer so to say, methinks.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hope you're right. I'm halfway there to Level 5 with about 20 active giveaways (and I intend to keep high pace), so I may just test it soon enough. Until then I think I'll stick to whitelist-only giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't understand what you're trying to say.
I was under the impression that the gap between level 4 and 5 was significant way before I hit level 5 myself, and way before that I made a lot of 6+ GAs exacly beause I'm well aware that the higher the level the fewer the users hence the less of a chance to run into bad apples (besides, how is that "adventurous"? I'd say "cautious" instead).
That being said, I somehow feel the need to reiterate how my impressions are solely based on the empirical evidence I gathered though, and the sampling pool hasn't been all that wide.
Comment has been collapsed.
No need to apologise though I somehow appreciate it :)
As to me, as much as I'd want to trust people I can't just push myself over a certain threshold, so my GAs now tend to be of higher level - always experimenting with the ranges though. It's not a do ut des thing though - aside from firing off the occasional gift to friend on my list, I even tried to come up with a group aimed at gathering people whom I know and therefore trust and setting the CV on 0 - be it because some people on my friendlist didn't even know of Steamgifts (I'm relatively new myself), and/or because they can't make GAs due to financiary reasons. Thing is, I like to get to know people, so I'm currently stuck with not nearly enough people in said group. I did fire a barrage of CV0 GAs over my whitelist and two well known and trusted lists though, and had no issues with that... I hope that some day I'll have more time and data to make my own group grow into a proper one.
TL;DR: I can't help myself and end up putting firewalls, the results are something I like though. E.g., had some private GAs/invite sent to people on my friend list, many declined because "X could make better use than it", "I wouldn't really have much time so I'll pass", "It's a nice game but Y is a fanatic of the series so I won't enter and he'll have more chances", things like these. I won't say I find them heartwarming because that'd sound cheesy but they make me smile and think "well, this 'firewall' of mine bears good fruits."
Comment has been collapsed.
I found a couple shady characters in 6+ public GAs
Yeah, that's sad :-/ I'm not there yet either and kind of feel off 'demanding' higher lvl when not reached myself, but when there still are bad cases even there, I really don't know how to approach public GAs at all anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
I always do my gifting "in real-time." Whether a gift or a key, I am chatting on Steam with the person and verifying the receipt and redemption of the gift at the time it is given.
Give gift > mark "sent" > check Steam profile for added game > follow-up with screen-shot
The advantage I have over you is that it is much easier for me to check out my winners. (Why rule-breakers are so dumb as to enter the giveaways of Support staff is beyond my understanding.)
Comment has been collapsed.
(Why rule-breakers are so dumb as to enter the giveaways of Support staff is beyond my understanding.)
My guess? The downside of using auto-enter scripts. Hehehe. Karma.
Comment has been collapsed.
Been in prison for jaywalking, can confirm the topic title.
Comment has been collapsed.
Once or twice isn't likely to get you into trouble, but according to Support doing it repeatedly would be ground for suspension (for "fake giveaways").
Comment has been collapsed.
No, what you are doing in this thread is "Interpretation game" - you interpret the term "fake giveaways" the way U want, while there is a HUGE and (I believe) a clear difference between "fake giveaways" and refusing to deliver a gift and getting "not recieved"
+I saw a support member stating that there is no consequences for not delivering the game to the winner
Comment has been collapsed.
It was pretty explicit in my suspension note. It would be great if someone from Support would verify what you say, because if it is, I'll be doing public giveaways again.
Comment has been collapsed.
We might let it slide a couple times, but there are consequences if it becomes an habit.
Comment has been collapsed.
- I saw bobofatt using this very phrase here on forums about 2-3 months ago: "There is no consequences for not delivering the game to the winner"
well, besides the fact that a user has less slots for giveaways - I still stand on my argument that this is "Interpretation game" - I PERSONALLY see a clear difference between a "Fake Giveaway" and refusal to deliver a game to the winner.
And the phrase used here http://www.steamgifts.com/roles/guest is "Fake Giveaways"
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just going to copypaste my previous comment : We might let it slide a couple times, but there are consequences if it becomes an habit.
Also like Mullins pointed out, when you post a giveaway you guarantee that you will provide the gift to the winner and use reasonable efforts to do so within 7 days. If you delibarately refrain from delivering the gift, you are violating the Terms of Service.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just going to copypaste my previous comment
wow, simply copypasting previous answers is a clear indication of a good Support(((
well I would repeat
1) why do different support members have different policies towards this issue?
2) can we have a clear definition of a "Fake Giveaway" (that has a 3 day suspension penalty according to the rules)
like Mullins pointed out, when you post a giveaway you guarantee that you will provide the gift
wrong, not only there's no words like "guarantee" in there, there is also no such meaning; the phrase is this:
If you post giveaways to the Website, you will be entirely responsible for providing an unused Steam redeemable gift or unused Steam redeemable key
The phrase "If you post... YOU will be entirely responsible" in this case means that the Site itself does not provide keys or gifts to users (like some people who are new to this site actually think)
That's it! There's nothing saying that you are obliged to deliver the game,only that YOU buy the key or a gift for a giveaway not the Site.
I don't want to look like a d*ck but I believe, that people who contribute (fill this site with content) have a right to know the Sites policy(preferably in clear and unambiguous terms in rules) towards this issue
Comment has been collapsed.
1) why do different support members have different policies towards this issue?
You said that bobo said "There is no consequences for not delivering the game to the winner".
Not "There is no consequence for doing this over and over again." Because there is.
2) can we have a clear definition of a "Fake Giveaway" (that has a 3 day suspension penalty according to the rules)
A giveaway where there was no intent of delivering the game to the winner. Whether it was from the beginning, or because you don't like the winner.
wrong, not only there's no words like "guarantee" in there, there is also no such meaning
You warrant that:
...
within 7 days of the giveaway ending, you will use reasonable efforts to send the Gift to the Winner using the Website services, or the e-mail address the Winner has provided.
Yes, I used guarantee instead of warrant, but there's no or not much difference.
Comment has been collapsed.
there's also the tos mentioning this (which no one reads but it's still there):
If you post giveaways to the Website, you will be entirely responsible for providing an unused Steam redeemable gift or unused Steam redeemable key (gift or key, further known as "Gift") to a user ("Winner"), who is randomly generated by the Website for each gift represented by your giveaway. You warrant that:
...
within 7 days of the giveaway ending, you will use reasonable efforts to send the Gift to the Winner using the Website services, or the e-mail address the Winner has provided; and
...Comment has been collapsed.
Apparently, reading TOS is easier than reading an argument in my post...
Now about your post - I don't see a clear definition and explanation of "Fake Giveaway" in the quote you used + there is nothing there that would suggest "Fake Giveaway" = refusal to deliver a game to the winner
Comment has been collapsed.
both have the same result, the winner doesn't get his gift.
Comment has been collapsed.
If a person gets killed by some1 else and if the person kills himself - the results are also the same, but they are still called differently (murder and suicide respectively).
+refer to my response to TempeteJoachim
Comment has been collapsed.
Good example. Also, you may want to check those links again :-)
Comment has been collapsed.
if you refuse to send how would you prove the giveaway was legit? mind reading?
Comment has been collapsed.
If you added the key when you created the giveaway it would be a good start to prove intent. I always do except for Steam gifts where it's not possible.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are attempting to apply your specific situation to everyone else. Your situation is more complicated and involved than you have presented it, as you well know.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd be happy to go into more detail, but then this thread would be closed for calling out and I'd likely get another suspension.
Suffice to say that intentionally not delivering keys is something which should be possible and although the giveaway creator should take some hit to discourage this from happening to often, a suspension is an extreme reaction. Again, just my humble opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's too bad. There should be some way out of this predicament without getting suspended for having higher standards for your generosity. Anyway, welcome back and thanks for the GAs.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not if the giveaway creator doesn't agree that a suspension the winner has already served was a way to absolve him/her of all past rule-breaking and ongoing bad conduct. If a user hasn't been perma-banned, he/she is considered by Support as good as any other user in the community regardless of their rap sheet and conduct.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is no "absolution." Support keeps careful track of misconduct and past history, although regular users will only see certain actions taken. We do not have a "one-strike" policy regarding most infractions, however, and implementation of such a thing is left to the individual users (through blacklisting, et cetera).
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't get me wrong I understand that it could have been avoided. I was just lamenting that it was unpleasant that he had to serve a suspension to uphold his principles in this particular case. And now perhaps going forward he and perhaps others like him will be less inclined to be generous to the larger community.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most users choose to contact Support and enlist our help in finding a workable solution. As for his suspension, it had nothing to do with the issue raised in the OP.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh... uh then... never mind. :3
Comment has been collapsed.
I disagree it had "nothing to do with the issue raised in the OP", but it's impossible to explain why without calling out.
Comment has been collapsed.
checks Yirg's profile one more time
I stand by my statement. Your suspension not a result of your refusal to deliver a key. It was the result of something else entirely.
Comment has been collapsed.
I had a situation where I was considering taking a "Not Recieved", after asking for a reroll. Reroll was denied, and Support said I'll take a "Not Received" mark and lose 1 giveaway slot as a result of not sending a win; perfectly fine with me.
I don't like feeling like I've gotten scammed when sending keys to winners.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can get away with it once or twice, but it's not something that Support is willing to allow regularly. They told me it's ground for suspension as "fake giveaways".
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh I know. I don't plan on this particular situation happening again. I'm going to be more careful with how I setup my very rarely created giveaways in the future.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd wondered why you got suspended, thanks for the clarification :(
Well, not even going to address that uglyness in detail- some users of the site are just horribly bad, and I'm not very satisfied with how they're managed by staff. :X
But on a more pleasant note, thank you for the whitelist! =O
<3
Comment has been collapsed.
My suspension was actually for an act Support considers as calling out (I still don't, but they have the final word on the matter). It's just that my suspension note included an explanation about the subject of this thread, so I felt obligated to share.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah :X
Well.. I certainly haven't seen eye to eye with many of the support staff as well, so I can sympathize.
I' was actually banned for, I believe, 5 days once because of our difference in perspective..
Well, welcome back! Glad your desire to contribute hasn't waned with the circumstances :)
Comment has been collapsed.
"I was actually banned for, I believe, 5 days once because of our difference in perspective.."
Welcome to the club. The best way to avoid falling in a pit is to stay far away from it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've asked you politely in the past to leave me alone, please stop harassing me.
I appreciate you may not realize how intensely rude your previous actions were, nor how these continued quips emphasize the previous problems. I appreciate you don't get how inherently unfunny your quips are to begin with, and I'll even ignore the fact you don't show courtesy toward our own senses of humor as I try my best to show you such.
But I can only run the 'difference of perspective' interpretation so far.
As I asked before, please stop interacting with me unless necessary.
Thank you..
Comment has been collapsed.
I was showing solidarity with you as I have experienced the exact same thing in the past, but it seems you took it as an insult. Apologies.
Comment has been collapsed.
Given our history, and how your comment can easily be interpreted as a mocking barb.. You can understand my considerations.
Nevertheless, in that case, I apologize.
And certainly respect the demeanor of your reply.
Comment has been collapsed.
Indeed.
BTW, I'd appreciate it if you rephrase what you wrote so that Support can't consider it as calling out (leading to a call out). I wouldn't be surprised if some are itching to close this thread and just need and excuse.
Comment has been collapsed.
Couldn't someone just keep milking keys from one win that way?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure if I understand the concern, but you don't get CV for a giveaway the winner marked as Not Received, so not much incentive for the giveaway creator to do it. Creating additional giveaways for the same key and getting more and more Not Received marks (for continually not delivering) is technically possible, but I doubt any giveaway creator want such a tainted profile, as it would get them on many blacklists. I don't think it needs to be explicitly forbidden by Support.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry the someone I meant was the winner of a giveaway and them saying, nope that key didn't work, nope that one didn't work either...so on.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, I see now. Yes, it can happen. I know of at least one member of this community who delivered another key to such a user although she knew perfectly well that the original key was good. I was certain that if it ever happened to me I would take the Not Received, but with Support seeing it as ground for suspension it becomes a risky act. I guess that's another reason to switch (reluctantly) to whitelist-only giveaways. Speaking of which, you may want to check those links again ;-)
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks! That's cool of you darn no points lol :D Yep, I've run into my first snafu and it's quickly turning me off of making no level public GAs which is a shame but a little time and documentation and it'll be easily taken care of hopefully.
Comment has been collapsed.
knew perfectly well that the original key was good
How do you know that? You'll only see that when redeeming and when even Amazon gave out faulty keys sometime it can happen anywhere, though certainly very rarely.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I recall, the user eventually was suspended for trying the same trick on others, but I agree, there's no way to be absolutely certain. If you maintain your key list well and if the winner has other questionable attributes (e.g. bad trade feedback), I think you can be certain enough to decide to not deliver the key, but I don't think in that case she even considered it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess trading would be a much cheaper option to get another key, but it's definitely not failsafe and your time may be worth more than the time it takes to find, agree and perform the trade. I stopped doing trades because as much as it's cost effective, it's way less fun than giveaways (or at least giveaways that don't require requesting a new winner).
Comment has been collapsed.
That's an extreme case, I sure hope there are not that many such scammers around..
Still can be difficult to tell, I've seen people with 500+ trade feedback and one stray minus, often it's some weird issue or even a scammer doing that..
An idea to get GAs "securely" to a wider audience than just whitelist could be forum/invite-only with a custom rule-set like no regifts/unactivated wins. Once support approved I think that's a reusable method, just means no public GAs anymore.
Which on the other-hand I kind of think to stop doing myself too due to abysmal description reading results, with like just 10% even with some min-lvl attached..
Comment has been collapsed.
Custom rules in giveaways are no longer granted by Support.
For something like this to work, you would have to create your own method to limit access to the giveaway URL itself. If someone you did not approve of entering then won, it would have to be from a leaked URL and you could then request Support action. I imagine you would have to keep accurate records who received links to such giveaways.
Methods to choose who to distribute those URLs to can vary. You could have users read a script, accept terms, answer quizzes, promise you their first-born children. A Request for Comment was made by user Knsys on design of a tool which would do something similar based on publicly available limiting criteria. (See: http://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/jFlpd/sgtools-future-new-tool-opinions-suggestions-ideas ). The important thing to remember is that if you give someone permission to enter your giveaway (whether by group/whitelist, private URL,or publicly), the only rules that apply to that giveaway once the winner is chosen are those of Steam Gifts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Custom rules in giveaways are no longer granted by Support.
oh, bummer. Guess I missed that memo. That makes things more complicated.
For now I'll gonna try the WL approach, where I can say, welcome aboard ;-)
Comment has been collapsed.
there is a way to be 100% sure - you create GA for gift link (be it Humble gift or Indie Gala Gift) just before sending the gift you check if it's still valid and it is - yet winner says "sorry man, it was already used", you check and in fact it is used - and yes, this has happened in the past... -.-
Comment has been collapsed.
would be very discouraging and a lot of work - epspecially for peeps who give away a lot.. not even tens but hundreds of videos to capture just to protect your few cents worth of key ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it does sound like a lot of work. Maybe if there was a way to constantly record your desktop (like CCTV) and only look for the footage if something like this happened, assuming only the last few hours are stored.
Comment has been collapsed.
How do you check that it's valid? I wish Steam could implement a system to check whether a key works (and what game it is for) before confirming its activation.
Comment has been collapsed.
how do you check if gift link is valid? well - you click the link - and you swill see that it's valid (you can enter email) or already claimed ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Usually, people that do this are also dumb enough to get caught.
Comment has been collapsed.
So sad to hear that.
Well, if I were you I'd just open whitelist thread, encourage users to post there, and evaluate everybody if he qualifies, by your own factors. Whitelist has a limit of what, 1k entries? That should be enough.
Yep, I do understand that it's not the best way, but I can't think of anything else.
Comment has been collapsed.
I read the FAQ and rules many times when i start on this site.
well.. the admin and support for this site are all really good..
You have 7 days to deliver the key.. so if you check the winner and his/her profile is bad or have problem.. submit a ticket ask for reroll..
They will check it and tell if if that person has already paid suspension for those offense yet or not.. they have a record...
if it reach 3 times they will be banned permenatly...
And if the person is Rude/Racist/Begging or threating you.. you can also ask for a reroll.. if the support finds it's true.. it's another different type of suspension.. But Supports gets to decide that if you get the reroll or not...
I hope it helps...
Ya.. and previous comment is valid you are not cool enough unless you get your self suspended at least once...
so you would study the rules carefully and respect it
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is that even if the winner has a combination of many unactivated wins, multiple wins of the same game, bad trade feedback, bad ratio & they never thank giveaway creators, they're still good as gold for Support as long as they've already been suspended for their infractions in the past. I don't see it this way.
Comment has been collapsed.
but after 3 suspension of the same type that person will be banned.. send a ticket to support and asking each unactivated win and multiple wins.. and ask if that person has fully paid for all the suspension will yield 2 result...
- there are 1 or more that he/she didn't pay for suspension = suspension so you get your reroll..
- they are paid for.. then you have no choice but to give you game for now.. but think about this.. that much offense.. unless he/she change and choose the path of light.. he will get more suspension and ban from this site soon enough.
Comment has been collapsed.
bad ratio & they never thank giveaway creators
I can certainly see them denying a reroll for those. those are silly personal and subjective reasons. if you want those rules make a private giveaway 9_9
any unactivated wins, multiple wins of the same game
this I get. but I thought they should let you reroll for that one?
(edit to clarify i meant I'm fairly certain they let you reroll for that one /edit)
bad trade feedback
t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶o̶u̶t̶s̶i̶d̶e̶ ̶s̶t̶e̶a̶m̶g̶i̶f̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶,̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶'̶d̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶g̶o̶ ̶s̶n̶o̶o̶p̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶i̶r̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶f̶i̶l̶e̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶s̶o̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶m̶s̶ ̶a̶l̶s̶o̶ ̶n̶o̶.̶
edit- forgot thats actually on the profile now with the "new" site.
(still though seems like a personal rule and so confined to private/group giveaways vs public)
sounds like mostly you asking for rerolls for invalid reasons rather than the mods being unreasonable
Comment has been collapsed.
any unactivated wins, multiple wins of the same game
this I get. but I thought they should let you reroll for that one?
you do if it is within the last 30 days
Comment has been collapsed.
If a suspension has not already been served for the offenses, support will suspend the reported user and reroll because a suspended user cannot win.
If there are non-activated wins within the past 30 days, a reroll can be requested, regardless of whether suspension has already been served.
Comment has been collapsed.
I only ask for rerolls for unactivated wins or multiple wins of the same game. The list of bad attributes I gave was for a hypothetical user (no calling out) who fits a combination of suspendable and unsuspendable bad behavior attributes. Would you feel ok to send a key to such a user because they've already been suspended? I don't. But according to Support, I have to.
Comment has been collapsed.
SG trade feedback is used by now almost universally as something that cannot be manipulated or exploited, or not as easily as anywhere else. For game-only trades, it is sort of a go-to system now, not just here, but for a few trade-related sites.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, that is not how it works. Every time Support checks a user's profile, they look for patterns of abuse.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure how that works. In the hypothetical user I described, only few attributes are ground for suspension, and if suspension was already served then the user is as "good" as any other user and does not suffer any additional consequences.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually I think if it was possible for me to implement a system where you could create invite-only giveaway, with custom requirements such as level, sent/won ratio, unactivated wins, double-wins etc. and my system would automatically check all those factors, showing people the link if they pass. Something similar to my touhou event, without giveaways selection but only initial level check.
Let me know if you might be interested, perhaps I could code something nice.
Comment has been collapsed.
You mean like.... an external site that only makes the links viewable if your steamgifts accounts meets certain criteria?
Comment has been collapsed.
Didn't you take part in my touhou event? This is how it worked, just based on your SG level (only)
Comment has been collapsed.
as for ratio I see a problem with it - it was already suggested in SG Tools project and got dropped because no solution was found for the problem mentioned:
if you set ratio requirement for GA entry, user may just quickly unmark a lot of their wins so he meets GA criteria, grab the private GA link, then quickly go and mark his wins as received again before anyone can notice, so he is not suspended for missuse of feedback ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Wouldn't this be straightforward to solve (for SG) by not allow users to uncheck Received for more than several giveaways (at once or at a certain period of time)?
Comment has been collapsed.
well - that would require cg to change the way the site works and no longer be done just with coding made by users themselves. Also it would just require more work from person trying to get around it - over extended time just unmark wins from ppl who are no longer active on the site - ok, I won this 60$ AAA game from you year ago, but you last logged in 7 months ago - doesn't look like you will come back anytime soon to notice that I unmarked my win and to report me ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems that CG did, in fact, change this. For some reason, I can no longer un-check the "Received" box on my giveaway(s). I'm still trying to figure out why this is.
Comment has been collapsed.
umm, I always wonder, why isn't that locked after awhile? I can't really see why months or year old GAs should be un-checkable.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are several solutions. I could store the data and validate it later so your user could do that only once in his lifetime. Additionally GA creator could select other factors such as min/max won/sent games etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
A minor issue I see with a single lifetime data collection is if something changes that justifies a legitimate change, for example, if a game gets pulled from your account 3 weeks after the GA because it was originally bought with a fraudulent credit card and then traded to the GA creator. As long as a method to manually approve changes exists in those rare circumstances, it should work.
A Request for Comment was made by user Knsys on design of a tool which would do something similar based on publicly available limiting criteria. (See: http://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/jFlpd/sgtools-future-new-tool-opinions-suggestions-ideas ).
Comment has been collapsed.
Any user could request a force sync if he had a valid reason. If we found out that reason was invalid and user lied to us, we'd just ban his steamID for the tool, so he could never access any giveaway again.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm getting to that point myself, Yirg. Like you, I tend to check the winners of my GAs ... and I probably shouldn't LOL. I haven't gotten to your "stage" yet, but I've been slowly raising the levels of my GAs to insure at least some measure of "peace." I would imagine WL-only and forum-only GAs are the next stage sigh
An additional pain (for me at least) is tracking people down to make sure they activate the game and mark it as received. I would imagine that's much less an issue with WL folks ...
Comment has been collapsed.
It might be undesirable for certain people too; I have a perfect sent rate, and even though I am pretty attached to it, there are a few people who I would rather not send keys to. On the other hand, I can see why support doesn't like people just taking the not received, since it deprives the randomness of the system of its impartiality. That said, sometimes I think a reroll is justified, and if people abuse the key you send it's a pretty big deal.
Comment has been collapsed.
The "beauty" of SG is that for most times, it protects the winners of the gift, not the creators of the GA itself. This is also my problem in creating a public giveaway. If for some reason the key did not work, will the winner forgive me? Or, if the winner decides to have two copies of the game for himself, can I detect it? People in US may have more option, as they can directly deliver the game through Steam, but I can't do that as my Steam is region-locked.
If the winner is scamming, there is nothing SG could do about it. The winner has to fork over the game, no matter what the creator thinks about the winner. The option to blacklists also shows this, as the creator could only blacklist a user for future giveaways, and can't blacklist him for currently running giveaway. That way, if a user is rude to the creator, if the user wins the creator have to give the game to the winner, not caring about rudeness that has been displayed by the winner.
SG runs on a zero-sum game, where there are people who always be losers. Yes, these people are willing to be losers. But I think some protection is necessary for these losers.
That's why 90% of my GAs are given to guys I know, or close groups that I have been on, and I have no intention to change that for the time being.
Either way, I also suggest that if you have huge number of people in your white list, it is easier to use Steam Groups to control all of them.
Comment has been collapsed.
The "beauty" of SG is that for most times, it protects the winners of the gift, not the creators of the GA itself.
That's basic protecting the customer rule. Not only they are the vast majority, but if the creators were the favoured ones, everyone would just spam 1000-copy Fallout 4 fake giveaways and shrug when the winners get nothing. It's always worse backing out of a promise, even if the promise was to give a random person a video game.
Comment has been collapsed.
On this very thread Thekuribo suggested something which could solve this. Quote:
It seems like there should be some sort of threshold where if, after 5 giveaways or something like that, the ratio of not received giveaways can't exceed 5% without repercussions. So for every 20 giveaways created, you are allowed one mistake.
Don't you think that it would be safe enough to allow users with hundreds of successful giveaways an occasional rejection of a winner (i.e. not more frequent than once every 20 or so giveaways)?
Comment has been collapsed.
Imagine this loophole: you buy 19 of a 2-dollar game on a 96% sale and give them away, then register 5 accounts through VPN, and make a fake invitational giveaway for five copies of a 100-dollar game. A bot finds it with brute-force (it happens, somebody posted something similar) and wins it. Instead of cheating the CV, they take the hit freely and get only fake 400 CV instead.
Sadly, when money can be involved, the more windows you install to your rules, the more loopholes will be drilled and exploited.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess it's possible, but seems too elaborate (VPN, brute-force attack etc) to be something to worry about.
Comment has been collapsed.
This, elaborate? You should see the tax-evasion tricks an everyday person does around here. Registering five free accounts through VPN is nothing compared to when you have three-four fictional companies billing each other.
Comment has been collapsed.
the thing is you won't be able to register a free account - you need 100$ worth of non-bundle games per account to create SG account. Even buying games on 80$ sale it's 20$ spent per account so you'd need to invest 100$ to make 5 of these. Seems a lot for something that will get all of them permabanned the moment anyone checks them if they win sth from him and report all for Feedback Fraud ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Never said it was a good ruse. ^^' I just want to point out that the more complicated your rules are phrased or the more kind of conditions and exceptions you try to add, the more loopholes will be found and exploited.
Unless you go all way in and implement German laws. The gods help you and anyone dealing with you if you do that.
Comment has been collapsed.
You've been on my white list for a while now. What does one have to do to get on yours? I even started upping my giveaway level partially in your honor :)
Comment has been collapsed.
If Support says you have to deliver the key to the winner, it doesn't matter what he/she said or did. You do it, or you get suspended for creating "fake giveaways".
I guess whitelist-only giveaways are the only way to go...
http://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/1icC3/portal-of-evil-stolen-runes-collectors-editionhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/lxkR7/spy-chameleon-rgb-agenthttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/kLDxY/star-wars-dark-forceshttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/t5E87/letter-quest-grimms-journeyhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/YtkH1/it-came-from-space-and-ate-our-brainshttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/rGBrX/mount-blade-with-fire-swordhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/BVLxW/prime-world-defendershttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/6QjmV/stackinghttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/tHfzV/tetrobot-and-coSo the above whitelist giveaways (in
strikethroughlinks) have ended, but I'm having pretty good experience with Level 4 invite-only giveawys, so let's see if Level 3 invite-only works well too:http://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/vsqC4/burn-zombie-burnhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/jxEbl/montagues-mounthttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/rXSmd/steel-storm-burning-retributionhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/X3C1P/crowntakershttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/iHZ8C/star-wolves-3-civil-warhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/M48uH/necrovision-necrovision-lost-companyhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/iZy7y/super-splattershttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/Ai9z7/contagionhttp://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/GUJaO/president-for-a-day-floodingsEdit: To clarify, the phrase "taking the Not Received" relates to intentionally not delivering a key to the winner because of their conduct. It was brought up in the forum in the past as an option, I just want to let people know once and for all that it's not.
Edit #2: To those who aren't on my whitelist, it's not late too join. Check out this whitelist recruit thread to see if you meet the criteria :-)
Edit #3: Unfortunately I don't have any good news to share about this issue, but I would like to ensure people are aware of it and have 9 more giveaways to share here. This time they're not limited to my whitelist :-)
Comment has been collapsed.