We make events and try be connected to the community, you where invited once there, and you made a nice giveaway for us :3
P.S.: I didnt get what you want on your topic Raiden :P
Comment has been collapsed.
This should be interesting. Souls doesn't require any giveaways, so I'm afraid I can't help out though.
Comment has been collapsed.
sort of small hijack...
those groups I see you people talking in here (I'm new around) you join on an invite basis, right ?
Comment has been collapsed.
oh! that is bad... Oo
making rules and not be the first to obey by them...
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I was an admin for S-Gifters and S-Gifters Gold. The former originally had a forced giveaway policy which I lobbied against since it was producing low-point giveaways. Then, eventually (around the time I became an admin there), the policy changed to voluntary and, at first, it seemed like it was working but ultimately completely failed. Even the new members who would join the group (including individuals who ran their own groups and should have known better) ignored the rule that all new members had to create an opening giveaway. In the end, the place became infested with leechers and it was deleted by the group owner. As for S-Gifters Gold, that was basically a rewards group for active members of S-Gifters where admins would theoretically create high-quality giveaways for the members (who were not required to make any giveaways and, consequently, didn't for the most part) but when the admins failed to create regular monthly giveaways, the group pretty much died. Both were deleted at the same time.
Right now, I am sole admin of a spin-off group of active members from the old, previously-mentioned S-Gifters: Adamantius' Special Giveaway Group. The group wasn't originally created to be a regular gifting group but, due to the sudden deletion of S-Gifters/S-Gifters Gold, I invited whatever members I could and it eventually became one. Until recently, we had 62 members. The original policy was voluntary giveaways. However, due to increasing leeching and low-quality giveaways, we set up a rule (recommended by one of the members) that whoever wins a giveaway has to make one. However, it didn't work out as good as it looked on paper. (That said, it wasn't a disaster either. However, it just ended up creating a sub-group of winners and giveaway creators that I felt divorced itself from the rest of the group, with the same people creating, entering, and winning.) As a result, last month I changed the policy to "temporary forced giveaways": anyone who has never made a giveaway would have to make one by the end of July or get kicked. 35 members did not make giveaways and were kicked, leaving 27 members (including me). For those that remained, I made a special giveaway of Divinity II: The Dragon Knight Saga (both as a reward and incentive to keep up the good work). All in all, 57 giveaways have been created in our group over a 2-3 month period. (Although the group was "officially" created on 19 March 2012, it didn't become an actual gifting group until much later. Originally, it was just a small group of a handful of people I wanted to make a few giveaways for as a way to make sure no hard feelings existed over an incident that another admin created in S-Gifters Gold. A few months later when S-Gifters/S-Gifters Gold were suddenly deleted, I added as many active members from the former as I could but, not having an archived members list, was only able to add about 50 members from a group of nearly 200.) As for our current and future policy, I think this will be it: a period of voluntary giveaways followed by 1-3 months of forced monthly giveaways to root out leechers. Naturally, this and all rules also applies to myself and any other future admin(s). However, I'm open to all ideas and experiments from our members so this policy could change, too, if we find something better to our group's dynamics.
I hope this information helps you.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well well well, wonder why it failed ;)
I like how you missed the part that I was the one who created Gold S.Gifters(and therefor I was the one with the idea/s), that I was the one making giveaways there, which THE OTHER admins weren't contributing at all, and other stuffs that I worked hard until some people(including you) ended up ruining it.
The way I saw everything falling apart, I warned the owner that the group will fail someday, and thus I created the Notable Odds, which initially where members from the Gold Group(without counting the ones you added that made giveaways from bundles), and we are not that shabby, quite contraire.
"If you want things done, do it yourself!"
Cheers,
Snake
Comment has been collapsed.
Snake, you really have a huge chip on your shoulder. You really must understand that this post wasn't directed to you nor interested in your input whatsoever. It was a message to Raiden who requested info on failed and successful groups so I listed some groups for him, along with some back-story to better illuminate why they failed. Still, you couldn't resist bringing up dead issues in the name of spite and bitterness.
First, the reason I didn't mention your name (or "credit" your ideas, etc.) is because I was trying not to call you out and simultaneously was keeping the names of all admins anonymous so that remarks like the one you just made could be avoided completely.
That said, your "facts" are riddled with errors which I will respond to (despite my better judgment since I know how easily you get worked up). The true reason S-Gifters/S-Gifters Gold failed was explained above in my original post and had more to do with poor members than poor admins (which predates my admin time-frame) though, of course, it was a combination of problems that destroyed the group.
If you want to take credit for S-Gifter Gold (even though you were a simple admin there and NOT the group owner of the group and did not have any special authority there), you can go ahead. I don't care, to tell you the truth since I regard S-Gifters Gold as a major failure (both in idea and practice).
In reality, S-Gifters Gold was actually the most negative development of the admins. Why? Because, like the "winner-creates-a-giveaway" policy in my group, it divorced the group into two factions: insiders and outsiders. Just as bad, its basic idea completely failed in execution. (In fact, it was mocked in the SteamGifts forums and groups were created just to parody it by Yatterman, if I recall correctly.) The idea may have been for people to want to get in to such an "exclusive" group so bad that they created better giveaways, but that was not the reality.
Furthermore, many of the most active contributors of S-Gifters were completely ignored by the admins when inviting members into Gold, except for me. Whereas the other admins waited to be contacted for an invite request, I took a pro-active approach by painstakingly researching our members and invited about 40 new members (out of approx. 200) into the group so that the new blood would hopefully give it some much-needed life.
Then, of course, that's when you had your panic attack and started screaming about me removing the new members: even though it finally turned out that 75% of the invites were properly invited according to the "official rules". (Had I actually been informed of the "official rules" by another admin or they had been posted/announced somewhere, that number would have been 100% but that is besides the point.) It's funny (and very typical) that you claim that these valued members were making "giveaways from bundles". (Yeah, keep believing that if it keeps you in a relaxed state of mind.) Anyway, the 25% that I had to remove, I invited into a small group to make 3 high-quality giveaways for them (which originally was intended for Gold members until this incident) so that they wouldn't feel snubbed due to the removal. (That group eventually evolved into my current group after the deletion of S-Gifters/S-Gifters Gold.)
Shortly thereafter you discontinued being an admin but remained in the groups as a member. At that time, I was the only admin still genuinely active in S-Gifters and I tried to keep the group alive by focusing on S-Gifters (rather than the failed Gold group) by creating high-quality giveaways for active members as incentives for people to make more giveaways: which actually started having positive effects (despite your public prophecies of doom, I might add). If it wasn't for the group owner's decision to delete the group, a purge and implementation of my reforms would have saved it, in my opinion. Just before the group was deleted, many members posted remarks disagreeing with the coming deletion and stating that the group owner should simply give it to someone who wants to run it (i.e. me).
As for making giveaways, I believe that by your own admission you stated that you "wasted $30 making giveaways in Gold" when I asked you why you were obsessed with constantly bashing S-Gifters. After you decided to stop being an admin, you became very sour and bitter and always complained about S-Gifters, how your new group was superior, etc. (It goes without saying that you completely stopped contributing at that point but did not stop entering giveaways.) I always found that strange because someone with a superior group doesn't need to troll other gifting groups or constantly advertise themselves (like you even did above, in your last post, too).
Finally (and as I mentioned briefly), had my reforms been put into place, S-Gifters would not have failed. A lot of members really wanted that group to succeed but unfortunately only one admin (i.e. me). However, the group owner was no longer interested in S-Gifters and told me he preferred to just delete the group and possibly restart fresh. After the group was deleted, he also recommended that he and I plus a third individual (a former S-Gifters member with a very high contributor rating) form a new, elite group (for people with $150 minimum contributor values) but as I was too busy with my own group (and he too busy with admin duties elsewhere), nothing came of that.
All of that said, in the end, everything really worked out well for everyone involved. All four of us (i.e. the last generation of admins) ended up in groups we liked after (or around the time of) the demise of S-Gifters. The group owner ended being an admin in a group known for its events and chat, you created your own group, the other admin joined a group he liked as a regular member (though, it should be mentioned that two of the admins of said group were technically leechers from S-Gifters since they joined and never made entry giveaways, let alone any voluntary ones, but that's an unrelated matter that I'm not getting into), and a gifting group evolved out of my own "special giveaway" rewards group. (Also, considering how problematic the very term "S-Gifters" was to so many people, S-Gifters' demise helped to finally end that "issue" once and for all. So, one could argue that it worked out in SteamGifts' best interests, too.)
Despite these facts, you are the only former S-Gifters admin that complains all the time about the past. Get over it, the group is dead. I have nothing more to say on the matter because I'm not going to waste more of my time debating S-Gifters with you again or help you hijack this thread and turn it into some sort of nostalgia for bitterness or as a way to self-promote yourself/group. If you want to continue bashing S-Gifters, feel free to do so but please do so without me as I have no interest in this topic anymore, now or ever.
Too Long; Didn't Read (for those who don't appreciate my verbosity): S-Gifters was once a fine group, it failed due to numerous reasons involving both members and admins despite my sole efforts to reform and save it, and it was finally deleted by the group owner. Instead of bashing a dead group, everyone should just move on and focus on the groups they are presently in.
Comment has been collapsed.
Adamantius, while I read ur huge ass wall of text, make your homework before posting, I was indeed the owner of Gold S.Gifters, I left the group? You can ask Axakovec about it, I asked him to re-invite me after I leave so that I would keep an eye on how things would end in the Gold Group, you would notice: "Snake was here" for a reason. I dont know how why in the heck you would write something that you are not sure about it, maybe just to make me look bad or to remove my creditability? -_-
Admins would REWARD them with special giveaways, no member was forced to make giveaways there, only some did it voluntary. I would still make 2 giveaways, one for the public, another for the gold one, Yatterman just created a parody because S.Gifters name was snatched without permission from Raiden by some Holand guy, who later left for not making giveaways and just leeching, and thus created a hate towards the group, many people outside would bash any admin, find anything bad to post on forums, and the parody was one of them.
So in your opinion it was a bad idea to reward members with special giveaways? Cool story
Adamantius, you are a saint right? I wonder why all the members came to contact me because someone (you), added a whole bunch of members who where not supposed to be there, it was not MY panic attack, it was everyone's panic attack. But yeah, I am the shitlord here, you are the saint one who freaking must write a wall of text so that I would be "afraid" of you.
"(rather than the failed Gold group)" I wonder why the gold group failed, interesting.... Before I was making giveaways there, that is, rewarding players, then I left... Hmmmmmmmmm OH! Right because no one except me was rewarding the members, including you Adamantius ;)
Oh and yes, I continued joining giveaways, I really enjoyed those bundles for sure ;)
And I have the right to write and talk about my group, there isn't such rule or etiquette that forbids me to do so, and I have the right to express my opinion.
/"rage" ends Dont take to serious my shitlord - saint stuffs
In the end my anger is not really towards you Adamantius, its towards you know who, we work hard, we try to do something great, and it just gets spoiled by the head above us, in the end I may had complaining a lot(that's my type of character, I don't stay quiet) but I had my hopes that you could work around the S.Gifters and do something with it, but in the end I just saw the rapid delete of the group and I suppose it was the same case of someone working hard and the owner do whatever he thought about without firstly discussing with his admins.
Peace,
Snake
P.S.: I already apologized Raiden to write his post so its Ok
Comment has been collapsed.
Snake, I don't come to SteamGifts to make enemies or to have virtual fights. I come here to make giveaways and enter giveaways and have a pleasant time -- which is why I hate these S-Gifters conversations (and try to avoid them) because this is how they always end. Anyway, since you were rather "eloquent" this time around, I'll respond with some brief things and, hopefully, this discussion will end on a pleasant note:
1) I never attempted to make you look bad (certainly not as a "shitlord") nor to make myself a "saint".
2) I was genuinely under the belief that S-Gifters Gold was a creation of the group owner's. As far as I remember, the group owner was the same for both S-Gifters and S-Gifters Gold. However, if the idea was yours (or even if you really were the group owner of Gold), that's fine and I have no problem accepting it. I'm not trying to kill your credibility.
3) The Gold group may have been a good idea on paper, yes, but not necessarily in reality. I, in no way, deny that you created giveaways in Gold and, thus, contributed positively there. However, that's not the issue. The issue was that unless we had a minimum of 6 admins, the idea simply could not work successfully. It was unfeasible. If we had 6-12 admins in Gold, each admin could have made a 40-point giveaway once or twice a year with the result that there would be an excellent giveaway each month. However, there were only 3-4 of us at the height of the group. Unless one of us happened to be very wealthy, there is no way we could have made monthly giveaways for Gold and giveaways for the regular S-Gifters.
Personally, I concentrated the bulk of my giveaways and energy in regular S-Gifters. I was going to make at least one in Gold but the aforementioned incident left me with a bad taste toward that group, with the result that the giveaways I had planned for there were allocated to the members I removed. (These giveaways were: Tomb Raider: Underworld, Numen: Contest of Heroes, and Metro 2033.) Also, keep in mind that I was the last admin to be added in S-Gifters/S-Gifters Gold and thus had the shortest stay there. In addition, after Gold was pretty much dead and abandoned I did something akin to your idea by creating a special admin giveaway for Deus Ex: Human Revolution for active members (i.e. anyone who had made at least three giveaways), which you yourself entered. (I only bring this up since you tried to make it sound like everyone was making giveaways from bundles after you left as admin.)
The way I was made admin was also very casual. I was speaking with the group owner on an unrelated matter and he simply offered to make me admin, telling me my duty was mostly just announcing giveaways. Despite that, I did much more -- at least in regular S-Gifters, where I tried very hard (and at my own expense) to resurrect a dying group. Had the group not been deleted, I would have focused on S-Gifters by purging all the leechers, creating the new rules I'd proposed to the members, and eventually tried to make S-Gifters Gold work as well by bringing in a lot more admins to handle the monthly rewards. I didn't get that chance.
4) As proud of S-Gifters Gold as you may be, you need to recognize it had some serious problems from the start. For instance, there was a Turkish guy who was allowed to enter early on despite only making a $6 giveaway when the minimum was $20! (Ironically, this was one of the few people who criticized the new influx of members.) Also, there was a Russian guy who was allowed to enter despite only making a Humble Indie Bundle giveaway (which could have literally cost him as little as 1 cent) in S-Gifters. In other words, there was definitely some cronyism going on in that group. I don't know who invited these people in but this was long before I was admitted into the Gold group as a member, let alone as an admin. All the people I invited into Gold had at least $20 worth of giveaways, many of them far exceeding that, and not due to bundles. Also, there were members who had created $60+ in giveaways but, since they had not made them within 3 days (like the "official rules" demanded), would not be eligible for Gold whereas someone who had created two $10 giveaways within 3 days would be eligible! This is why I created my rewards group: because I really felt these people got screwed and I didn't want them to feel jilted and snubbed.
5) I'm glad to hear that your anger is not directed at me since, as I said, I am not looking for enemies or battles. However, back in the day, you definitely clashed with me so I have responded in a confrontational manner to you at times. I really hope this is over now. If you really had an issue with the group owner (or as "you-know-who" as you called him), you should have directed your anger (or at least your grievances) at him and not me. Anyway, in the end, you were correct about my attempts to reform S-Gifters when you said "unless you are owner, you have no real authority to change anything". I mistakenly assumed that the group owner would transfer S-Gifters instead of suddenly deleting it. After all, he had not created the group himself and so it wasn't his "child", so to speak. The guy who created it was the scammer/leecher that was forced out of the group shortly after he advertised it in the forums. That said, personally I don't have any hostility against the group owner. It would have been nice to reform S-Gifters but, ultimately, he had inherited the group and it was his to do whatever he wanted. I only wish I had enough time to make a list of the members so that they could have been invited into my own group before the deletion took place.
Anyway, the demise of S-Gifters allowed all of us former admins to have the freedom to create and run our own groups the way we saw fit, without any constraints like we had to deal with before.
All of this said, I have no personal issue with you or your group and wish you luck with it.
P.S. Although I tried to be brief, I know I was still a bit verbose in my response but this is simply how I write and it can't be helped. I participate in a lot of forums where long posts and discussions are viewed positively. I know, here in SteamGifts, anything longer than a one or two sentence response is considered "tl;dr" (too long; didn't read).
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, this entire thread was a puzzle that requires a special cypher to decode. There was never any S-Gifters. Snake and I just created this fake conversation about a fake subject in order to mask the real intention of the secret giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes but what sets of data are you going to be comparing eg. quantity of users joined in first week or average daily time spent online by users of groups etc. You cant really do a comparison if you don't know exactly what it is in each group that you are looking for to compare, and your findings will be meaningless if you don't tell us exactly what you did compare.
Comment has been collapsed.
Quantity of users is one element I look at but there's a lot more to it like when the group was made whether there was a huge sale going on, were the giveaways mainly bundles, was there a fault in group creator's behavior towards members inside and outside the group, were any of the group creators banned etc.
I was hoping I'd be able to get all this done by the weekend but that seems a bit unrealistic :/
Comment has been collapsed.
The place I do giveaways for the cool people of S.Gifts! :P
Comment has been collapsed.
I hate those groups that forces members to make giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
16,583 Comments - Last post 20 minutes ago by Kenruyoh
9 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Delisper
1,072 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by zecleaner
67 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by nahemot
10 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by Inkyyy
204 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by Hawkingmeister
47 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by jzone55
9 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by xurc
45 Comments - Last post 18 minutes ago by usshadowop
97 Comments - Last post 45 minutes ago by caesar239
821 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Yamaraus
9,907 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Kingsajz
82 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by lext
96 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by samwise84
Mostly on successful groups that require giveaways within a month that have been active for a while and comparing them to either failing and failed groups. Old deleted groups help too as I only need the group url. I'm up to 5 so far in failed groups, 4 of which has either been deleted or abandoned and 2 successful groups still more or less active. Overall I'm hoping to reach a total of 10.
I'll post what I find other than failed pyramid schemes roughly around Friday or Saturday so if anyone isn't busy or ashamed of their own failure to have a successful group then please let me know.
(If I can't moderate then I'll find some other way to kill time besides games.)
Comment has been collapsed.