Is Steamgifts a charity site?
I still don't understand how it can be considered charity, unless me giving you something is charity.
So yeah, no.
Comment has been collapsed.
You buy games from Humble Bundle to give here.
Humble Bundle gives a part of your money to charity.
So, in some cases, indirectly, it may be called charity. But still, I get your point and I agree - gaming is a luxury and giving someone a luxury isn't charity.
Comment has been collapsed.
Full Definition of CHARITY
a gift for public benevolent purposes
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/charity
Middle English charite, from Anglo-French charité, from Late Latin caritat-, caritas Christian love, from Latin
So unless we are giving away gifts here with malicious intent, then yes, dictionary definition fits SteamGifts as a charity. And if you say it is not charity, is also means apparently that you don't think there is love here. Congratulations, you are all bitter haters now. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
Uriel's Chasm keys were given away in this site, malicious intent confirmed.
Comment has been collapsed.
I still cannot understand what the ever-living fuck was that thing about. And I have it and tried to play it, but still cannot understand it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Try the sequel, maybe it will help you understand. Or kill you.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sequel? o_O
No. No sequel. No. Nonononono. Sequel. No.
Sequel sequel no sequel no.
No. D:
Comment has been collapsed.
Are u kidding me
It has an sequel?
RLLY?!! I wonder what kind of s*** can get through Greenlight...
Comment has been collapsed.
greenlight has been phased out for a year, gabe has said steam should be a self running store
as long as a 'game' works without crashing or other breaking problems & as long as it's not stolen content, then why shouldnt it be on the store?
Comment has been collapsed.
Full Definition of CHARITY
1
: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity
2
a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need
b : an institution engaged in relief of the poor
c : public provision for the relief of the needy
3
a : a gift for public benevolent purposes
b : an institution (as a hospital) founded by such a gift
4
: lenient judgment of others
While there is one case where the definition leads to that conclusion, there are several others that lead towards my conclusion. That in of itself would not exclude yours, however I believe that " generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need" is by far the most used definition, and in many places, colloquially, the only definition. I certainly believe there is love here, as shown by many of my created threads such as this {you're not alone](http://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/4O6qS/youre-not-alone-21-open-giveaways-over-180-contributed) thread, as well as This one, where I simply thank every user that reads it.
Comment has been collapsed.
But that only means that no matter where you look at it, both the yes and no answers to the poll can be considered correct, so, yet again, this question is at square one. This is why I like what was written below this conversation by Beryll.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree. I only presented my opinion of something which is ambiguous to many. I fully realize there isn't a "wrong" answer, and won't take any action on hose that happen to disagree. It's an opinion. Nothing more, and nothing less. I value any input, from any side of a valid argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need
b : an institution engaged in relief of the poor
c : public provision for the relief of the needy
I mean I understand your point but others treat it like its their RIGHT to get free games from people able to give some.
Okay we can consider it charity but givers can still choose who to be charitable to. Even true charities have considerations and specific focus. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay we can consider it charity but givers can still choose who to be charitable to.
That is a much more accurate description, yes.
Comment has been collapsed.
I knew some winners of my giveaways who seriously counted SG as an investment...
They give away some things that they count as a good CV source to get levels to win more games =d
Comment has been collapsed.
here, have a "charity" bump to support your non-charity view on SG o.O
btw, I agree with you entirely :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I deeply agree with you in my personal thoughts, but SteamGifts presents itself as "free steam games and steam keys".
It is hard to explain and convince people otherwise...
Comment has been collapsed.
I am more in lines with the fact that people are able to be generous, without it being charity. It just so happens that
a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need
b : an institution engaged in relief of the poor
c : public provision for the relief of the needy
is, colloquially, the universal definition of charity, and I don't see how gifting fits those descriptions. Those on this site have access to a roof over their heads, electricity, internet, a steam account already valued at at least 100 usd. I give so that others may enjoy them, in whatever fashion. It is simply my opinion, and as such, of no real value, that it doesn't qualify as charity. if others do, that's fine with me. Whether they have a different definition of charity (i know there are several definitions of charity. My point was that only one of them is used almost universally and to the exclusion of the others), different definition of who is needy etc., it doesn't matter to me. I will appreciate being here, as well as everyone else that is here just the same.
Comment has been collapsed.
I see... but I really think most people call "charity" thru language barriers...
In Portugueses (PT-BR) I can think of some words to express it like: beneficience, benevolence, philantropy and not to mention charity itself... all of them, in my language can express what this site does. in PT-BR we have A LOT of meanings for just one word. so all of them that I mentioned fits perfectly well.
maybe most of people say charity due translation limitations. try to understand what they really mean with "charity" not just limitating to one language. some may say charity but some may don't mean charity, get it? when I said that it is hard to explain otherwise, it is because "charity" may fit in a lot of languages around the globe.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's exactly what i'm talking about however. I would agree that many, if not most people are gifting because of
beneficience, benevolence, philanthropy
I would even say that we may actually agree on the real issue i tried to present, but disagree on the phrasing. In at least the northeastern U.S., charity does not mean beneficence, benevolence, or philanthropy. They can be close synonyms, but are not close enough to be used instead of the other in most cases. The difference lying in to whom these actions are towards. I could be benevolent towards my rich neighbor, but i would think that nobody would call that charity. There are different connotations, subtexts, and emotions behinds each of those words that make them distinct and separate to my dialect, as i am sure there are for yours, even though there are cases where they may be used interchangeably.
Comment has been collapsed.
thinking that way, the problem is not really the charity meaning, but the misuse of the word "charity". if you think straight, you know that most brazilians are leechers... mostly simply because they don't have money to buy games. in this context, considering that russia has the same scenario, steamgifts is charity to them... even if you deny.
there's a lot more context that steamgifts is charity(users real poverty, language interpretations, age understanding or any other that we couldn't think of) than it is not. that's why I think they call this charity but they don't really mean it (like most of us understand).
Comment has been collapsed.
Out of curiousity, what do you think about Child's Play?
Yes, I know, it's kind of wrong to compare SG to Child's Play, but still...
Your definition of a charity needs more detail in this case
EDIT: And no, I also do not think that this is a charity website, just in case
Comment has been collapsed.
Items like the video game systems and games will be given to the hospitals and a child...
I do believe that a measure of happiness is a need for a child, and not a mere want. I'm all for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Video games have been proven to be medically beneficial, facilitating mental and physical improvements in ill or injured patients.
Since the hospitals cannot otherwise provide those functions without the consoles and games being present, that is indeed a 'need', as it resolves a shortcoming.
There are so many free games out there for PCs, and it's so easy to get cheap games, that the number of people who can claim a 'need' for games [due to a need to distract themselves from the pain of their world, from their depression, etc] are increasingly few- and noone with hundreds of game [including myself :P] NEEDS more games.
We may like them, they may be positive for us to have, but they're no longer needs, since they're not filling an empty slot, and thus not resolving an absence for a positive gain.
Comment has been collapsed.
While Steam games can be awesome and provide joy and entertainment, they aren't a basic need and don't provide a benefit to the general public, so I wouldn't call gifting charity. People can be generous without necessarily being charitable.
Comment has been collapsed.
Same as you, it really makes me cringe when people call it a charity.
First there is as you said the $100 requirement. Kinda weird for a charity.
Also, calling it charity implies that the recipient is unable to afford games. It would mean having wealthy gifters on one side, and the poor recipients on the others, and that you could not both wing and gift games. That's obviously not the case here, since winners are completely random and could very well be super rich.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, yeah, I remember lively discussion about this topic on here. Needless to say that I was mostly aggravated by what people claimed.
This is not a charity and I agree with what you said. Just by definition it isn't as noone needs video games. Sure, you're generous by doing so, but even then it can be for various reasons. Just for the sake of giving or maybe to fullfill the requirement to stay in a group and get better odds, but that's another story.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope. It would be a charity site if it was giving free steam gifts to poor gamers. But actually, it gives THE CHANCE to win games. What I recently said though is that most people prefer to give away in order to increase their CV, instead of doing it to make some poor gamers happy. And one guy told me that, in the moment of my past discussion, from the last 100 giveaways, only 20 were visible to everyone. This means that givers have become too selective. Is selective giving a crime? No, of course not. But I wouldn't feel good with myself if I was doing a selective giving.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, I forgot to say that I agree that games aren't considered a major need. Specifically, as I say in my steam profile rules:
"I hate beggars. I would easily give money or food to a person in need, but begging for a game is just too stupid and rude. Some people don't even have some food to eat and you dare to beg for games? You are as much of a lowlife as scammers and phishers are. You shouldn't even be allowed to have a steam account".
In conclusion, I agree that games are just a luxury.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't forget about second line that comes after charity statement: "I'm poor". All coming from ppl that have food, clothing and shelter, not to mention PC, internet connection and free time to play games.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can't call it charity when you create a giveaway (Level 1), the winner owns 3,300 games on Steam, he created 1 cheap giveaway here and won more than 90 games... True Story ;)
It is rather a place for collectors, most people enter here to get extra titles to their libraries.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, one of the "charity" Games Done Quick supports is considered a great "charity" because it makes a few commercials each year for middle-high class Americans that cancer is bad. If that can be "charity", cg could be anointed a saint for making this site.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not that i care for giveaways - but your thread reminded me of this:
http://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/vR23z/i-dont-want-to-be-greedy
Comment has been collapsed.
Since there is a lottery system in place, you cannot define this site as a charity. Could you imagine if Charities only gave canned food to winners? Or clothing to kids?
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha, that's exactly what I'm saying. :P Charity is about giving without a contest. xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Well actually some places here use a # system to select people and not everyone gets food,so does that make it a lottery or just first come first server take a # kind of thing?
Comment has been collapsed.
Sometimes you can even go back to the store and get another size for the item donated to you!
Comment has been collapsed.
well it kinda is a charity site, because people give away games for free to other people, and they paid (or maybe not) for these games. the people, who win, are lucky, even then, when it's a good and expensive game.
I gifted over 100 keys and own for myself almost 600 games.
wait, i'm on your blacklist? o.o
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe they do not like that you do think it is a charity ....
Is it a charity or is it not...
Cue the twilight zone music..
Comment has been collapsed.
I have not, will I ever, blacklist somebody because of a differing opinion, because it is just that, an opinion. A side note however, I love the twilight zone and own the entire series.
Comment has been collapsed.
i was blacklisted, before i even posted the comment
and i said, it's kind of a charity site, not a charity site
Comment has been collapsed.
Blacklisted :(
I'm sorry for whatever evil I have done to you :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Poor ratio, sorry. Also, I'm trying to be sneaky! D:
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry :(
Oh well... I thought ratios belonged to closed groups. I was wrong.
I guess I need to buy more bundles and stop participating giveaways on a giveaway site :(
After being region locked I lowered my contributions dramatically, I don't like to make region locked giveaways.
Now bundle games basically. Thanks GabeN.
/rant
Comment has been collapsed.
I do not care about region locked giveaways or bundled or any other qualifier. I personally look for users who have ratios greater than 0.8 (so 10 wins per 8 giveaways). Just trying to make those who haven't been as lucky to have more of a chance.
Once you fixed your ratio, message me and I'll remove you. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
So because you declare it not a charity makes it not....
I also see you have commented on other post about this,fine i guess it is fine but i get it you hate that some say it is charity,but no need to keep reminding people that you do.
a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need
This makes this site a charity as much as you wish not to think so it does.
"generosity and helpfulness"
If we want to go by just basis of needing it then most charity exist for nothing more then to exist,As you donate money to a charity to fight cancer but that is not a need.Needs are food and water and in some cases shelter.
Wants are wanting to cure cancer,to want a game,to have tv,a car and so on.So the way you put it pretty much means most charity really are not because it is not a need.Like the ones that take donations to supply games for those who are sick and in the hospital that is not a need for them to have games but it still counts as charity because...
"generosity and helpfulness"
Just to clear this is still just how i feel just the same as it is the poster to feel it is not a charity,they are still allowed to see it as not a charity,but i still think it does count and can in a way be counted as being a charity of sorts but this does not mean it makes it one,it just my opinion,the same as there.
Comment has been collapsed.
All the male Asians look like this? xD Shots fired
Comment has been collapsed.
Pfffff, snitch! xD This Asian guy reminded me of something - I remember seeing accidentally a Tokio Hotel video clip in the tv once and, when I saw the band, I was like: "Bleeehhh, look at those ugly girls". But then, I was like: "Oh God, are they boys? WTF"?
Comment has been collapsed.
So because you declare it not a charity makes it not....
No, the only thing i declare is my opinion. I completely agree that other users may or may not have a different opinion than myself. Being solely an opinion, it has no reflection on how the site is used. As for fighting cancer to be a "want", nearly every civilized country considers the pursuant of oneself to live as a basic right, and project those right to be needs. If you see above, I very much agree with the child's play charity.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well i was merely pointing out that child play is a charity but what they do is not a need it just something to help those who are going through a bad time,but they do not need video games it just helps.I was just trying to point out that it more then just being a need to be a charity.
You only need 3 basic things to survive,food,water,shelter....anything else is just icing on the cake.....This need to cure cancer and saying it is a need/right is just silly imo.The same with health care they got the masses thinking you can not live without it,when mankind has survived a very long time without doctors.......there use to be a time when someone was happy to just be a live,now they want to cure this,treat that and live as long as possible all while destroying life in the process lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have taught wilderness survival classes for years and am well versed in what the body needs to survive. The great thing about being so advanced in life however, are that so many other things can be added to insure a minimum quality of life. So while they are not needed by the body to survive, they are, by and large, subjectively, given by society to have a minimum quality of life. Should the world collapse around me, or even should everything in my life collapse, that subjective list changes.
Comment has been collapsed.
EViLiSLuRKiNG, despite what you think about if it is a charity site or not, may I ask you something else? Do you agree about selective giving? Because I see a lot of giveaways for high-leveled users and a lot of people considering that level 0 users carry a plague or something (you know, they consider them as leeches or rule-breakers). xD I totally disagree with selective giving. Of course, they can continue the selective giving, because that's their opinion and we have Democracy, but I'm just saying that I am against it. A real-life EXTREME example: A far-right political party in Greece was giving food for Greeks only and giving blood for Greeks only. It's not against the law, but I'm really wondering if they feel good about that. Because I wouldn't feel good about that. It's an extreme example, of course, but that's how I feel about selective giving: THAT IT SUCKS! :P
I want only EViLiSLuRKiNG to answer, people, because I hope that we have the same opinion. :)
Edit: Hmmm, you've made some giveaways for higher levels, so I suppose you'll disagree with me. Hmph, I hoped that someone will agree with me. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Charity can also be for supporting and improving public welfare, which would include things curing and preventing disease and education.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've always taken your posts with a grain of salt, but saying that curing cancer is a want and not need is absurd....the rate that cancer keeps killing people and evolving, attacking younger patients while rarer types of cancer increase their numbers every single year.
Curing a disease that will have over 1.6 million new cases in the US alone this year and kills over 8 million people every year is not a want, it is most definately a need.
Comment has been collapsed.
True. A cancer cure is needed. And the sad thing is that nobody cares or knows how to avoid cancer. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Cancer is something that seems unavoidable. We are all carrying cells in our body that are cancerous already, but they're able to be suppressed by our bodies antioxidants and immune system which can fight off most of these cells. The growths that our body cannot kill off are the ones that require other treatments to kill them off, if there is a treatment for the cancer you have.
In this amazing modern age we are in we still have cancers that are untreatable, inoperable and killing loved ones every single hour of every single day.
You can go through life without smoking, using a single drug or ever drinking a single drop of alcohol and still have your body ravaged by this vicious disease. If it was as simple as just avoiding things, it would not be the killer that it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
I already know about these, man. Still, do you know that some antioxidants may cause cancer when they are in large quantities (because they act as prooxidants)? Did you know that mycotoxins, which usually appear in a lot of biological foods (that people love saying that they're healthy) and in dry foods, are considered a main cause of cancer? These are just 2 mere examples in order to see that even when you think you are eating healthy, you actually don't! But most people don't know about these things. Or they just don't care to stop smoking or drinking, etc. There's actually almost always a reason that cancer may grow. Sometimes though, it's very weird to understand how.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, the brash reaction over the last few years from people regarding good and all of this marketing of things that are supposed to help reduce aging, make you feel better, help develop muscle, add extra protein, etc are all a dangerous game. People are in such a rush to try the new diet craze or the next big new "smart food" without ever thinking about how your body will react to it. Combine that with the GMOs in the world, Factory Farming and the rush to make as much money as easy and fast as possible, the world is getting scary.
I wonder how long until we see something along the lines of Idiocracy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hehe, that was a great movie. :P I'm a food technologist and, from my experience, every food is unhealthy. xD You will freak out if you go to a food factory and see what they're doing in there. o.O We're all sadly screwed. :( Still, don't believe whatever you see in youtube about food factories, because some videos are just propaganda - not all of them, but some of them. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Some are propaganda, some are far too real. I'm a trained chef and I wouldn't say every food is unhealthy, but there's a lot more to it than most people realize. Food is a lot like people - everything and everyone have their good and bad traits. Life is a game of balancing those traits out. That's why generic diets don't work, that's why you can't just eat healthy to lose weight or get in shape. There's a lot more to it than people want to admit.
The biggest problem with food factories is they are all over Capitol Hill and keep pushing legislations that will make it harder to get them shut down for violating policy. Combine that with all of the former Monsanto board members and employees who now hold office in the FDA and other government agencies, the US is on a very scary downward slope.
Being from the Midwest though me, my family and a few of my friends all have the same philosophy though - if you can grow it yourself, go for it and always try to get heritage seeds.
Comment has been collapsed.
But as I said, even organic food is unhealthy. Insects and microorganisms thrive in organic food, which makes them unhealthy. And don't think that you can cook them and the bad things will disappear. xD Toxins are heat-resistant. But when the food isn't organic and pesticides were used, it's also obviously unhealthy. That's why I say that every food is unhealthy. Although people understand that pesticides are bad, they tend to forget how dangerous some microorganisms are. And don't think I'm supporting pesticides. :P I'm saying that both sides are bad. So, eventually, what the f@ck can we eat? xD And you're talking about USA now. I'm not from USA. I'm Greek. And I've spoken with the owners of some factories and some answered me honestly that it's not profitable to follow the rules. I also remember when an owner of a slaughterhouse told me that animal breeders (I don't know if I chose the right English word) preferred to kill the animals in their ranch, even though he kept telling them that this is unhealthy and not profitable for any of them - still, the animal breeders didn't give a f@ck. :P About GMOs, Greeks tend to avoid them. I don't see GMOs products in Greece. Still, some organisms, like the pigs, are all GMOs, but let's not discuss about this too. xD Thing is, governments profit if the people eat unhealthy food. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I envy most of the countries in Europe for their food laws compared to the ones we have in the US. They're designed much more for the people and not for the companies who write checks to lobbyists who get the lawmakers on their side.
Animal Breeders are in a world all their own, the things they do for a profit will make most people sick.
Also, our government at least, will profit no matter what people eat - they make sure of that. Plus, they drive the public education on what is healthy to eat, why it should be ate, etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jamie Oliver made a petition about creating food education lessons for schools. It's mostly about fighting obesity, but it's still a great idea. I don't know if he'll succeed, but I surely hope so. But if he succeeds, the little kiddos will finally learn how to eat healthy, despite the brainwashing made from tv, internet, etc. ;P
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah he has been on that crusade for years. One of the good things done by the Obama administration was the changing of school lunches in the United States.
We are a country that used to count Ketchup as a vegetable in schools.
Comment has been collapsed.
:B You are kidding? Or are you serious? :B In most Greek schools, there are no lunches. If a kid wants to eat something, he/she goes and buy something from the school canteen (once again, I hope I chose the right English word). I think that, in Greece, there are lunches only in kindergarten and in specific private schools, but I ain't sure.
Edit: Oh, in universities too, as long as you have a card proving that your family isn't rich. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, ketchup was counted as one of your servings of vegetables for years. Now, our school lunch program has gone from having meals mass produced in a central location and then trucked out to schools, to having their own kitchens and staff there preparing the food on site for them.
Kids can bring a cold lunch or sack lunch from home if they wish, but there is always a "hot lunch" option. When you get into High School it variest by location, some places have fast food/local restaurants in them, some just have different prepared products like Pop Tarts, Muffins, Little Debbie Snacks, Fresh Fruit, Sandwiches as well as the hot lunch line still. The private high schools work like the Universities do, having a meal card that you put money onto.
However, with the No Child Left behind program, now every person under the age of 18 in a public school in the United States is provided a free meal. With the Universities and colleges here you can purchase a meal plan. a meal book or put money onto a card as you need it depending on what the school does. Unless you're a culinary student then you just eat everything you make and take all the leftovers from class home. Best part about being the last lab on Saturday night? Anything that would spoil by Monday's classes went home with us so it did not go to waste lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
Argh, lucky you. xD We cooked a bit in food technology classes too. :P We were making (and eating afterwards) mostly pastries and sweets, but also ice cream, jam, pop corn (hehe, dunno why we were making pop corn), fish, etc., and we were also eating many small snacks in organoleptic control. :P Oh, memories incoming. :') Anyway, it's good that USA schools provide free food and it's sad that most Greek schools don't. :( Anyway, let's hope that Greece will change some things, after 100000000 years, when our debts will have been paid. xD
Comment has been collapsed.
I personally hate it when people describe SG as "Charity". Even if the people that tend to call it that bought games for the sole purpose of giving away, and didn't care about the CV (surprise, most don't do this and give away leftovers or obscenely cheap games), they are still giving away something that is purely a want, an amusement, esp. considering the entry requirement to joining the site is $100 USD of non-bundle games. I give away for the amusement of others, sure, but to call it charity really gets on my nerves. You want to do charity, go buy some food and give it to your local food pantry, go work at a soup kitchen for a bit, or heck, even read to some sick children if you want to be cliche, because giving away games isn't it.
To be clear, I have nothing against giving away cheap games, bundle leftovers, or anything of that nature. I do have an issue with people calling it charity however. I've seen too many threads recently where users complain about being "excluded" from things and getting angry because that this is a charity site. Since when is having new games a need?
Here, have a cheap gift lilly and sasha - curse of the immortals
Edit: to clarify, i think that someone can be generous, but not have it be charity. Particularly going off the fact that this definition
is used to the near exclusion of the other presented definitions, at least colloquially.
EDIT: I also realize that we are from many nations here, and as such, many grew up speaking something other than English. This leads to the interesting conundrum of translations with different connotations. Words that mean the same thing, but have different feelings, subtext, or emotions attached to them. Charity seems to be one such of these words, and i fully agree with some people that said yes, because their view of the word is dissenting from my own.
Comment has been collapsed.