yup. some people win the lottery and get struck by lightning on the way to claim their prize. its not very likely but that doesnt mean the system is flawed if it happens.
Comment has been collapsed.
if anyone wants to do the math:
i won 6 entries out of 131 giveaways (counting only the ones that are closed).
some of the lost giveaways also contained up to 10 copies, so that might make actual calculation pretty hard.
Wins:
Osmos: 331 Entries / 3 copies = 110 entries per copy
Portal: 76 Entries
Portal: 90 Entries
Dark Messiah M&M (MP only): 344 Entries / 10 copies = 34 entries per copy
Half Life 2: 151 Entries (this one was the most lucky)
Deathmatch Classic: 57 Entries
Comment has been collapsed.
just calculated it
4.475349054 x 10^-12
= 0.000000000004475349054
so that's the chance you would win all those 6 games
Comment has been collapsed.
Just a thought: The chance that a certain set of people will win any given collection of giveaways has the probability that a single person would win them all.
eg. Games 1 and 2 have 100 entries each, the probability that Person A will win them both is the same as the probability that Persons B and C will one each.
Comment has been collapsed.
no, the chance of person A winning both is (1/100)x(1/100) => 0.01%
The chance of a person winning the first contest is 1%.
We don't care about who wins the first contest so the chance is 1%x2 = 2% on either person A or person B winning it
We do want the other person to win the next one. The chance on that is 1% (obviously). So 0.01x0.02 => 0.02%
Comment has been collapsed.
EDIT: Seems you changed to the correct method while I made or while I made this post rendering it null, however, I still think your math may be off, I'm looking at it and thinking the second one requires you half the result to average it out because you are using two people instead of one. Though I could just be thinking out of my ass, I don't know, like the old version of this post said: I'm rusty when it comes to probability.
Comment has been collapsed.
And now a new reply again while I edited my post to reflect your updated post, but as I was saying I think you need to divide by 2 somewhere since the second senario uses two people as opposed to one.
Comment has been collapsed.
You basically enter the 1st contest with 2 entries and the 2nd contest with just 1 entry. The person who won the first contest just becomes one of the other entrants on the 2nd. If he wins the 2nd or not doesn't matter, since we only looking at the other person. His chances must be 1 on 100 on the 2nd contest. The chances of both added to togheter must be 2 on 100 on the first contest.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hang on, I just thought of a better way to explain it.
Contest 1 has 100 entries, Contest 2 has 100 entries.
Anyone who enters both has a 1% chance of winning.
Whoever wins the first one still has a 1% chance of winning the second.
If Person A wins the first one, their winning the second one has the same probability of someone else winning it.
Therefore the probability of someone winning both is the same as two different people winning.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think anyone is questioning the odds of someone winning multiple giveaways in a row, but rather the morals of it. Should they be allowed to do that? The beauty of computers, is we can prevent someone from winning more than, say, two games in a week. It doesn't have to be completely random, it can be random with restrictions.
Comment has been collapsed.
Like I say, from what I have read, when people say 6 wins is bullshit, its not because they do not think it is possible, but rather they do not think it is fair.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is a group of people complain about the fact that they don't think random works like it should. That's why I created this thread. This is obviously not about it being 'fair' or not for some to win multiple of games, while others win nothing.
The point system got introduced, which makes it nearly impossible to win like some users did now. So games will be spread more evenly now. It will take some time to work, since people still kept their entries. Giftee's are the only ones that deserve to complain and they were aware of the fact that it was random. So no need to complain about the past.
Comment has been collapsed.
and that's where they are wrong with their twisted sense of fairness. with their entry, they have exactly the same chance to win as every other entrant. that's the epitome of fairness. it CANNOT work any other way and still be called fair. those people who say 6 wins is bullshit are either just jealous or mad, claiming that the site is rigged.
if the giveaway contributors think that they don't want people to win who won 6 games already, they shouldn't contribute.
just hypothetically: i win another giveaway (don't own the game yet), but the contributor says "no, you already won 6 times, I'm gonna give it to someone else". in that case, they do not hold their end of the bargain, and they refuse to give me the reward i won rightfully in a fair contest. that is nothing but stealing. they cant refuse to give their games to people just because they dont like them! thats anything but fair.
also, think of real-life equivalences: if you won in a lottery, are you banned to enter again?
P.S: about winning games one already owns: thats fixed with the invite code generator, so either think about the situation that was BEFORE you could invite your friends to the site, or dont mention it
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah im thinking about giving back to the community, but at the moment, im broke. im gonna get back at that next month
edit: though i gotta remember to try not to giveaway censored games, since i live in germany. if i was to gift titan quest: immortal throne for example, the recipent would be stuck with german voice/text language. not such a good idea
Comment has been collapsed.
That would be the polite thing to do, but judging by the way BlueLegion runs his mouth, its not in his character.
Comment has been collapsed.
Screw this line of thinking, THAT is not fair. Some people are entering because they can't afford to buy games... I understand not putting contests up. I don't think people should be guilted or coerced into contributing, let them arrive at that through their own generosity.
Comment has been collapsed.
You know, you are awfully mouthy for someone who has won six games. I would tread a little more carefully if I was you.
And of course you are going to support a system that has treated you so well. That's only natural. But don't go around saying it is fair, because it certainly is not. Random is NOT fair. Look at a casino, is that fair? Some people walk in and loose ten thousand dollars. Some people walk in and win ten thousand dollars. Sure they had the same chances, but the end result is sure as hell not fair. If a casino was fair, everyone would win the exact same amount of money.
But this website is not a casino. We are not gambling here. So in order to be fair to all participants, and to the gifters, the giveaways should not be based on chance alone.
Comment has been collapsed.
who are you to judge my character? I would like to know your basis for that insult.
but to your sense of fairness: "If a casino was fair, everyone would win the exact same amount of money."
this is not what a casino is for! you dont go into a casino to gain money, you go into the casino to gamble with your money. of course a casino isnt fair because the only one who wins in the long run are the casino owners. but this site is for giving away games among each other. and the only way it can be fair is by making it purely chance based. one entry is and shall always be one equal chance to win.
this isnt a system that "supports me", i was just having a lucky streak. i wouldn't be surprised if i didn't win anything the next few months. but blaming it on the system? thats just low. thats pure jealousy and somewhat borderline paranoia (if it was meant serious, you can't always know if it was or not)
and i do not need to "tread carefully" since 1. i did nothing against the rules or moral code (again, this was BEFORE the invite code generator). 2. i am not going to hide and hope that people will stop hating me. that just won't do anything. let them be jealous of my luck, but they shouldnt take it out on the site and it's moderators. 3. i'm being rational and polite in the forums, unlike some other people here. (i'm not referring to you but to those who lead the flamewar) 4. people already made up their mind if they're gonna be haters or if they wanna stay rational. ergo, nothing should be stopping me from speaking my mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
Who am I judge your character? I am a free thinking human being who will pass judgment on whoever I fancy.
In regards to the casino example, Of course people go to the casino to gamble, and of course it is not fair. That was my entire point. This site is random like a casino, and that is what makes it unfair.
"the only way it can be fair is by making it purely chance based"
No, you are totally wrong. Chance based is fair on a SINGLE giveaway basis. But in the long run it is not fair whatsoever, as is evidenced by your winning streak. Random is not fair at all.
"this isnt a system that 'supports me' ... blaming it on the system? thats just low."
Please read my comment again: "And of course you are going to support a system that has treated you so well." Where did I say the system supports you? I didn't, I said you support it.
And unless you want to be shunned by this entire community, yes, I do suggest you tread carefully, or you are going to end up with a lot of people pissed off at you. And contrary to your popular belief, it wont be from jealousy, it will be because of your shitty attitude.
Comment has been collapsed.
alright so i worded it differently, but it doesnt really change my point.
"this entire community" doesnt shun me, i have the support of more people here than there is people who flame about me. even cult is on my side.
if you have a problem with my attitude, i dont care, since i dont like your attitude either. but dont go on acting like it's everyone's opinion. youre welcome to judge me, but youre not welcome to make up character traits for me and act as if they would apply to me. you dont know me or my character, and youre welcome to mind your own buisness. if you wanna claim that my character is a certain way, you need to prove it, otherwise its just a baseless, mindless insult.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't need to prove it - you are doing a perfectly good job of that all on your own.
Comment has been collapsed.
As I stated below, which I'm assuming nobody read, you can't compare a casino to this website. That's like comparing a corporation to an orange. BlueLegion, I support your random luck and I'm glad that you have put your luck to the fortune of others also. Please continue speaking your mind since it is the internet. I already stated my thoughts below, so I won't repeat them, however, fair is a word I am not sure actually exists. If it WERE to exist, it would absolutely, 100% NOT involve mathematics since math is unbiased and pure in not caring a single bit about anything said or performed. Which means that lady who just got cancer can still burn her house down mathematically. You want fair, go make your own site where you give games away based on merit. You want a free mathematical chance to win something, stay here.
Comment has been collapsed.
"You want fair, go make your own site where you give games away based on merit. You want a free mathematical chance to win something, stay here."
Last time I checked, this website is invite only because we are supposed to be testing the site and making suggestions on how to improve it. I make suggestions and you tell me to go make my own website?
Comment has been collapsed.
No, I'm saying you are stating this website should be completely changed from top to bottom, based on the method in which games are given. I'm fairly certain that will never happen. You want to make a suggestion, talk about something to add or alter, don't state that the entire website needs to be changed algorithmically based on an odd notion of fairness.
Comment has been collapsed.
What on earth are you going on about? I am basically advocating a very basic limitation to how likely it is for someone to win multiple games, and you claim I want to flip the whole website on its head?
Look buddy, I was told the website admin needed feedback, and so I am giving feedback. Step off.
Comment has been collapsed.
More hate for the player, and not the game. The vocal minority is really starting to get ridiculous. I've won nothing. I couldn't care less BlueLegion has won 6 times.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, this has nothing to do with "the game". When I said BlueLegion's attitude sucks, I said that because I think his attitude sucks. It has nothing to do with whether he has won a game or not.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are free to speak your opinion. Try to stop speaking for the entirety of the site, however. Once you find your army of people "shunning BlueLegion and being pissed off," you are more than welcome to shun me as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not speaking for the entire site. I was talking about a future possibility, not the present, which is why I said "unless you want to be shunned". This is eluding the the future possibility of BlueLegion being shunned, and not a reflection of the current attitude of the sites users.
Now, if you are finished twisting my words around, I am done with this conversation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd hope so, as I don't think you understand what you are saying.
"I do suggest you tread carefully, or you are going to end up with a lot of people pissed off at you."
Why? Unless you know something about all of the users, the majority of this site couldn't care less.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you would be wrong. In fact, I have defended his winnings in other threads. The problem I have with BlueLegion is that he calls it "stealing" if someone does not want to give him his 7th free game this week. The guy has no sensitivity towards the gifters wishes, and an extreme sense of self-entitlement. Yes he won, and yes they should give him the game, but he needs to be respectful and understand that he may be upsetting people in the process.
Comment has been collapsed.
regardless of the winner being me or not: yes i would compare it to stealing if person A doesnt want to give person B a game that B rightfully won in a raffle, just because A doesnt like B.
the giveaways are free to enter for everyone, regardless of the contributor thinking that the winner doesnt deserve the game or not. he is obliged to do it. on giveaways of this kind "fair" means "equal chance", not "being sensitive towards the contributors opinion or wishes". if the contributor doesnt want his game to be won by a certain person or group of persons, then he can go somewhere else with it. its not his CHOICE who can win or not, just like it is not his choice who DOES win.
^has nothing to do with attitude, just hard cold facts
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with BlueLegion here, though I may be sympathetic to a gifter who sets up a contest and states in the description "please don't enter if you own the game or have already won a contest here." Though, I would prefer any of those "don't enter if you've already won a game" clauses to just be in private contests.
In any case, refusing to gift a valid winner would result in negative feedback which I believe results in a ban.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, so far I have lost every entry I have been in, however, I will certainly not whine about that. On the topic of fair or not, you cannot compare a casino to this website. A casino is not random. Most of the games there are a highly complex algorithm that slightly stacks odds towards the house and not the player. These giveaways are completely random individually and are always given to someone.
So, to more important points, on the topic of fairness, the player who has won six times now owns those six games and no longer needs to enter any contests for those games. Sooner or later, that individual will be in the same boat I am where he's only got a few games here and there that he really wants and will not win a single one of them.
On the topic of probability, according to chance, because each game is individually given out randomly, what they have won already has absolutely no bearing upon any other game, so the chance of winning six games is the exact same chance of winning one game, effectively. 1 out of x number of entrants. Repeat. If you want to talk about STATISTICS, then you can do the mathematical calculations you have done above and realize that someone winning often is relatively unlikely. The comparison, if someone needs one, would be flipping a coin. Flip a coin once, it lands heads. The second flip is still a 50% chance. Just because it was heads before has zero bearing on it being heads again. It could be heads 500,000 times in a row. The next flip is still 50% chance. Statistically, this is rather unlikely. Mathematically, there is no argument whatsoever.
Comment has been collapsed.
hehe :P taking it way far :) ofcourse the past doesn't have any effect on the future. So right now somebody that won 6 games will have the same chance as all of the entrants on the next contest.
Ofcourse this thread was only to counter the people saying the random generator seems to 'favor' some people over others or some algorithm was false :) the calculations are only there to show that this is not based on guesses, but is indeed a scenario that is likely to happen.
Comment has been collapsed.
I apologize if I came off as if I was attacking you. I was mostly commenting on things that were said after you. Statistically speaking, I would be worried that it was not random if we did NOT have someone who has won several times. Based on 3000 members, I am going to perform a gross underestimate of numbers in favor of someone NOT winning several times to prove how likely it is. If you assume half of the 3000 people have entered 100 giveaways that each had 150 entrants. To properly assume the statistic since order does not matter, you can take 100*150 and pick 6. That's 15000 and you are picking 6. That means there is a .04% chance to win six times. Now, you times that by the 1500 members we are basing this on (this means we are immediately assuming that the other 1500 members have not entered any of these or have automatically lost), and you get a 60% chance total that one of the 1500 people who have done this will have won 6 times. That means it is MORE likely for someone to win 6 times given the numbers than it is for someone NOT to win 6 times. This, again, is using grossly underestimated statistics. I attempted to get a more appropriate number early based on random sampling of users and got closer to 75%. What others seem to be saying, though, is that random isn't fair. Mostly my point is that math isn't fair because it doesn't care who or what you are. Math is pure math, so fair has nothing to do with any of this.
Comment has been collapsed.
hehe, not attacked at all :D I guess you could call it 'fair', because it was stated that the winners were randomly generated. It never favors anybody for having less games or having already won something in the past. You can't argue with the system, because every person entering was aware with how it worked. But I guess wether or not something is 'fair' is another topic and different at each person :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn it Coookie I said I was gonna do this! But yes, the calculation and conclusions are correct, as far as I can tell in my morning-addled state. Folks whining about BlueLegion, anomalies like him are to be expected. It's been analyzed and the chance of his case occurring has been shown not only to not be astronomically unlikely, but in fact likely enough to be expected.
As for fairness. This system is as fair as it can get. To borrow some terms from game theory: Everyone knows the rules of the game, and everyone knows that everyone else knows the rules of the game, and every player is equally likely to win any particular sub-game of the game. Short of hacking the site, it's impossible to bias the system. CG doesn't even use pseudo-random algorithms if I'm not mistaken.
Yes, some people will win more than everyone else. But did they actually negatively affect your own chances of winning? No. So then what are you complaining about? That you haven't gotten anything when you haven't given something up for it?
As for the comparison to casinos, it's founded on a faulty analogy. Casinos have two groups of players, the House and the Gamblers. Odds at games in a casino are always designed to stack in the Houses' favor, otherwise it couldn't possibly be a profitable business. S.Gifts however is a simple raffle, composed only of Gamblers. The odds aren't stacked in anyone's favor.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is people like me that win the game and the dude dont send the game to me , even i send to him a friend request he dont accept it, and steam say he is online... sad face
Comment has been collapsed.
Statistically that would be the case, but not so much by Gambler's Fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
Comment has been collapsed.
58 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by SketCZ
85 Comments - Last post 42 minutes ago by WaxWorm
16,299 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by Carenard
1,811 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by ngoclong19
72 Comments - Last post 14 hours ago by Reidor
545 Comments - Last post 16 hours ago by UltraMaster
41 Comments - Last post 16 hours ago by ViToos
22 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by ViTALiTY
57 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by LittleBibo1
54 Comments - Last post 45 minutes ago by Akuburanir
119 Comments - Last post 57 minutes ago by Norbee001
14 Comments - Last post 59 minutes ago by PonBaron
73 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Thedarksid3r
9 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by PonBaron
So many complaints about the system being flawed that I decided to make a little topic about chances of winning :)
Let's make a little scenario :)
Our testsubject X joins 100 giveaways.
At all giveaways 200 people entered our testsubject included.
Each giveaway only has 1 gift.
Chances on X winning nothing is (199/200)^100 --- that's 0.995x0.995x0.995 repeated another 97 times
So ~60,6% chance on not winning anything.
Chances on X winning 1 game is (199/200)^99x(1/200)^1x(100 C 1)
So ~30,4% chance on winning 1 game.
Chances on X winning 2 games is (199/200)^98x(1/200)^2x(100 C 2)
So ~7,6% chance on winning 2 games.
So if we want to know how big the chance is that X wins 3 or more games we just do, 100-60,6-30,4-7,6. That brings us to 1,4%. So 1 single person will have a chance of 1,4%. Considering there's a huge amount of members there's nothing strange at all on 1 person getting lucky and winning that many contests.
If we change the numbers a little. Having 100 contests, but only 50 people enter each contest. Each giveaway still having only 1 prize. Person X will have a chance of 1,5% on winning 6 or more contests!
There you go, nothing strange about the results of the giveaways. Perfectly normal for 1 out of the 3000 members being lucky and winning several contests.
Because the numbers are different for each contests on this site, aswell as the amount of copies that are given away. Doing a calculation on the exact data would take a really long time. I hope that with the details explained above, people will start to believe that the site isn't flawed. It's just how it works if you make it completely random.
Comment has been collapsed.