Uhhh.. I'm confused. Why are the mods crusading against such threads?
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess there is a rule against asking other users to whitelist you. I can understand why the rule would exist. It's basically begging and if allowed, the numerous threads would get annoying. There is also a limit to 1000 users on your whitelist, so it would probably fill up pretty quick.
It seems kind of pointless anyway. There would be a lot of people that would just whitelist you so you add them and they can enter your giveaways, then they would immediately remove you. The users that WL you don't have to create any WL giveaways anyway, so it doesn't make much sense.
Then people will probably start creating rules about how many giveaways you have to create or give a certain value to stay on their WL. This will just create drama. If you want something like that, just create a group.
Comment has been collapsed.
4:12 am ... sometimes it's neat when others can think for me.
- Good points 👍
Comment has been collapsed.
It's basically begging
Not "basically", IT IS begging.
Whitelisting users in the hope that they'll whitelist you back, or bribing users with your one-time whitelist giveaways so that they'll whitelist you, in both cases hoping that they'll create giveaways that you can enter, doesn't leave much space for interpretation.
Comment has been collapsed.
you don´t make any aaa+ wl gas, why should i wl you?
Comment has been collapsed.
Welcome to my WL,
I don't make many giveaways, let alone WL giveaways, but since no one should WL you I thought I'd be the first person to break that, less than an hour later :P
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be a good thing to have that "rule" stated more clearly, those threads can get a bit out of hand sometimes. Good luck with getting noticed by CG.
Comment has been collapsed.
adding a rule (secret or not) won´t change anything. you won´t stop the idiots. they´re gonna rule the world soon o/
Comment has been collapsed.
you can't call them idiots, they will get triggered and lecture you. 😢
Comment has been collapsed.
if you are a triggered idiot pls feel free to call Mully at all times. thank you for your understanding pls add me to your WL. o/
Comment has been collapsed.
you won´t stop the idiots. they´re gonna rule the world soon
What do you mean "soon"? I thought we already were in Idiocracy. I mean... just looking at the news (which is fake from what I understood even though I am not fluent in idiot so I don't always get the whole thing :P)
Comment has been collapsed.
Wouldn't it be easier to write down a rule and then refer people to it when they get punished? Instead of wasting time writing these unwritten rules out each time, having to often also answer the further replies to justify their decision?
Laws don't stop everyone either, but it's been proven to deter unwanted behaviour. Psychology 101.
they´re gonna rule the world soon
One might argue they already are ruling the world.
Comment has been collapsed.
there are serveral rules like this one, and none of them written in the guidelines. there's also the problem of enforcing them with "you should not", which is very vague and sounds like a suggestion rather than something prohibited.
rules would be easier to understand if the guidelines were converted into pages with bullet points. each offense and its suspension time listed (exactly like roles), so everyone can understand what behavior is penalized.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a good point about the use of the word "should". It is used way too often in the guidelines and doesn't clarify the rules. Someone created a giveaway recently and wrote in the description that the giveaway is for a Uplay key. I mentioned that giveaways here can only be for Steam redeemable games and they responded by saying that the guidelines says "should be Steam redeemable" and they thought that meant that it doesn't have to be.
That rule should be changed to "must be Steam redeemable" or "only Steam redeemable". At least those rules are on the books though. They may not be worded perfectly, but having rules enforced that don't exist is just wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
they probably don't add the nowl4wl rule because it's allowed in giveaways. 🤷
Comment has been collapsed.
Asking for whitelists is allowed if done in a giveaway? I didn't know that. I did notice that some of the comments from mods specifically said "don't create threads asking users to whitelist you".
Comment has been collapsed.
last week i reported someone begging for wl in a givewaway. ticket closed, no action taken
edit: action taken, suspension applied ✔️
Comment has been collapsed.
I hate when a ticket gets closed with no response. It would be nice if they could just leave a single sentence comment explaining why they are closing the support ticket.
Comment has been collapsed.
if only cg changed user reports to allow replies...
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, I didn't even realize that. I read that on user reports, but was kind of confused. I thought it just meant that the user couldn't add any comments for some reason, I didn't think it meant that a support member couldn't post a reply. I definitely think they should be able to reply, but at least I know why there is no reply now :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Some places use "shall" instead of "should," thinking that "shall" is much the clearer of the two terms and is probably not really open for interpretation as a suggestion.
(I imagine someone, somewhere could misinterpret it, but it is much harder to so do.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I've written a lot of technical specifications and standards, and in this forum, "shall" is a mandatory requirement and "should" is a recommendation. This is documented in the ISO International Standards foreword supplementary information. I believe "must" is often used in legislation as a legal imperative but it's not something used in these documents. Extract from ISO Standard foreword text below:
The following definitions apply in understanding how to implement an ISO International Standard and other normative ISO deliverables (TS, PAS, IWA).
- "shall" indicates a requirement
- "should" indicates a recommendation
- "may" is used to indicate that something is permitted
- "can" is used to indicate that something is possible, for example, that an organization or individual is able to do something
In the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, Seventh edition, 2016, 3.3.3, a requirement is defined as an "expression in the content of a document conveying objectively verifiable criteria to be fulfilled and from which no deviation is permitted if compliance with the document is to be claimed."
In the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, Seventh edition, 2016, 3.3.4, a recommendation is defined as an "expression in the content of a document conveying a suggested possible choice or course of action deemed to be particularly suitable without necessarily mentioning or excluding others."
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't like standardisation? Do you think life was better when the length of a mile depended on where you were and who you were talking to?
Comment has been collapsed.
:D
yes, kinda.
really really boring stuff, you just can't say the opposite. you've just lost 1500 i-points, also.
Comment has been collapsed.
Standards are just there to eliminate ambiguity and to document common requirements. They are driven by real world requirements and I can say that I did not find standards development boring. If you had dealt with the consequences of not having standards, you would appreciate the need for them. I guess safety standards are boring but I don't think any more so than repeating the same requirements in every relevant document, and neither is preferable to repeatedly investigating deaths with the same preventable cause.
I don't know what an i-point is but I'm not going to change my opinion to earn them.
Comment has been collapsed.
see? already a tad better.
sorry cicchi, it looks like i've just defined your work as hella boring.
i'm only talking about "all" the ISO's, like.. the actual object. had to study (a few of) those ages ago, and it was something done by the EU cause of a "quality assurance" (iirc, that was the definition) workforce need.
i'd say, it might depends on how you have to deal with an ISO, from where comes the need of your dealing with them (never touched those about safety and at the end, also never worked where my iso's knowledge was needed -my choice-).
sorry for lame, lame english :D
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not my work anymore. I have no work. However, I consider standards development to be some of the most important work that I have done. Instead of fixing problems one at a time and ignoring the bigger picture, you can prevent the same problem being repeated at hundreds of different places for generations to come. From an engineering perspective, I appreciate the efficiency of this systematic approach.
I only mentioned safety because most people find it easy to relate to. If you told me your field I could make relevant examples because the same applies to all non-safety requirements. The meaning of any term is debatable unless it is defined somewhere, so standards are almost as fundamental as language. If you ever need to compare prices for something, you need documentation to define what exactly that something is or people will not have the same interpretation (often intentionally when trying to win a contract). You can define every single element in each specification but it is impractical and if something needs to be defined repeatedly, it is more efficient to have a standard document that you can refer to. The transparency of well-documented standing requirements also allows everyone to understand in advance what is required on an ongoing basis, so there will be less non-conforming bids and less accusations of impropriety when assessing submissions.
I don't really understand what your negative exposure to ISO Standards was. If you were asked to memorise them, that was a foolish task. Standards are supposed to be reference documents and they are also regarded as living documents - Australian Standards are scheduled to be revised every five years to ensure they remain current. If it was to understand the structure and their application, I think that is valid because they represent a robust system of information management.
Comment has been collapsed.
work anymore
can you please pretend to never have read that ">iso horrible stuff"? i've checked this thread, stumbled a bit, gone nuts and then saw "ISO", saw your avatar and shot that one comment.
i only have vague vibes of that terminology, and it's quite technical. those aged bits should be translated into english... and would mean staying awake for an entire night just to answer you like i would. like... too much.
so (and this is not a trap or smth, promise!), you have attention to details, and you like "standards". you also seem to like this site. my question is -this after 1 hour and a half of showerthinking- : why don't you write and apply to be part of Support, here?
i really know zero on how these things works, here at SG... and i won't apply cause i "would have hard hard times" to keep the "support" tag.
(have sum mercy, man :D)
Comment has been collapsed.
Calma! We're still cool. :-D
You don't have to explain your aversion to ISO. It's just that I was genuinely surprised and curious because my experience of standardisation is so positive. I can understand how it can seem cumbersome and bureaucratic on the face of it, but only when you don't consider the level of bureaucracy required to get the same result on a consistent basis without standards (it's like using a template - there is effort involved in developing it and it would be inefficient if the task was only ever done once, but the effort is justified by the work saved on all subsequent applications). Anyway, as I said, I am not demanding a response, I had thought you wanted to rant and was opening the door for you.
My trap comment (elsewhere) was partly a joke and partly a commentary on the SG community (and your comment, which made me laugh). I've noticed that you enjoy discourse and you post forum topics asking provocative questions to prompt it, which I think is good. However, a significant proportion of the community here will passive-aggressively "punish" anyone that expresses an opinion they disagree with (without ever entering into discussion) by adding them to their Blacklist. This leaves many people bewildered at the fact they have offended people to the point of Blacklisting, not realising that Blacklisting is some people's main hobby and they do it at the drop of a hat. There are also a handful of people that will aggressively argue and bully people as a group, somewhat belying their ostensibly tolerant liberal agenda.
I think site support is assigned as a reward/punishment for reaching Level 10, which I am confident that I will never reach. It doesn't matter because I don't really want to be responsible for settling disputes or dealing with people that behave badly. One of the reasons I like standards is that if you do the work properly once, you don't have to deal on an ongoing basis with all the petty consequences of not doing it. I could help write rules if they want, but I doubt they do. Something I have come to understand is that people are becoming more and more dismissive of expertise unless it involves immediate danger (e.g. high voltage electricity), technical jargon designed to confuse (e.g. Information Technology or subsea oil and gas infrastructure), or immediate financial impact (e.g. legally mandated specialists such as lawyers and accountants). My skills are fine and rare but not valued.
Comment has been collapsed.
Calma!
scusa cicchi, davvero :D
"checked this thread, stumbled a bit, gone nuts" was not for you, ISOs don't have all that power on me... it was cause of a comment about SG mods... and re-reading me it really sounded like it was for you, the "gone nuts"...
i've been trying to recall what's left up here on the brain about my experience with beautiful ISO and, yes, it's hard to put it in english, man... i do remember, though, it was a 9 months -course or smth- thing about Quality. notice the Q. also methods -with
exotic names- to "make" workers do the "right thing" in the "right way", achieving the "Zero defects", always getting the ultimate level of Quality... after 3 months or so, half of us was kinda shocked cause what seemed to be "a marvellous theory" was just a boring, kinda useless giant thing with only real target being The profit (financial). i remember a day, a speaker told us about "Green Marketing" or smth, cause, for him, "marketing could also save the Planet"... :D
so, i've decided that wasn't my route, and ISOs still remains like a "totem" of that experience.
you don't get the "Support" tag when you reach level 10. very very luckily i'd add. i think you should ask Support filing a ticket for info, but it was just a suggestion cause of your "rigorous" writing, and as a Mod said they're working on Guidelines, you could be a nice fit :P
(really not for "settling disputes")
rare but not valued
that's really "international", as a thing, cicchi. ... :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I almost called you paesano but wasn't sure if you'd consider it offensive (can never tell with you fancy northerners ;-P ). It's meant to be the opposite amongst my Italian friends in Australia.
Ah, I think you were studying ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems. I can understand your frustration with that because there are many people that don't understand them properly but make money as management consultants telling people how to use them. I have been trained to audit quality management systems under that standard and can tell you that quality management is not supposed to be as bureaucratic as they often teach it. The idea is just that you have a system in place, often documented but not necessarily, so that people know how to do their job. You also need to have a system such that if someone finds a way to improve the system, it is adopted throughout so that everyone does the job the new, better way. Of course, fewer problems mean fewer repairs which means more profit but it should also mean that workers have clearer understanding of their job and they are given the power to improve the system. The attitude of the management and the way they implement it can make the biggest difference. I have worked at oil production companies where they continually pressure workers to keep the plant operational. This is the opposite of many of the models normally taught, such as Toyota's adoption of continuous improvement (kaizen) and encouraging their staff to shut down the production line if they discovered a problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
H O R R O R i s s i m o
9001 and 2 and 3 (maybe a fourth?). that's the name, that hurts. you should use spoiler tag, fo' that!
man. it's even worse cause it also was kaizen.
ages and ages ago.
a worker has to fill a bucket with water to clean his workplace. that day his look was a mix between "fun" and "terror".
a mister kaizen was counting the steps that worker needed to make to go fill that bucket, from workplace to water tap:
"don't worry, it will get better" he said.
(i don't get offended easily, don't worry :P tho, "paesano" is always "positive", maybe is mostly used by old people, like "paisà"... chuckled at that fancy northerners... there's some truth, there :D but i'm really more a southern type, i usually feel better dealing with southern parts of the world, in general :P)
thanks a ton, second cicchi-tour: done!
Comment has been collapsed.
:-D
Oh, that time and motion study by managers in white coats with clipboards and stopwatches is a bit of a throwback to the bad old days of the industrial revolution. I can understand that offending your sensibilities. Although it appears to be measuring an individual worker's performance, that's not what it is for. It can be useful for developing sensible factory layouts.
Comment has been collapsed.
there's also the problem of enforcing them with "you should not", which is very vague and sounds like a suggestion rather than something prohibited.
It's also amplified by the fact that there are no rules, instead there are "guidelines". It's a site with a moderating system, not a pirate cove in Tortuga. If they truly wanted an anarchical system, then mods wouldn't exist on this site.
So yeah, they definitely need to bolster the language to have a rule system, not just guidelines. Though, guidelines obviously can help with moral stuff. So, for example, insults are more of a moral thing since they don't have a set definition and the term can be twisted one way or the other. But regifting and making whitelist recruitment threads are pretty binary things.
Comment has been collapsed.
The argument could be made that is contravenes this section
"When posting links or content, that content should not force users, encourage users through reward, or primarily exist as a traffic source for users to perform an action for promotional, commercial, or monetary benefit."
They are encouraging users to whitelist them for the potential of winning more games which is an monetary benefit.
Some are also trying to trade whitelists, which is against this section of the guidelines
"Trades should not be posted or organized on the site."
Then there is always the case of you can't have a rule for everything. I hope they only got warnings, unless they were warned already multiple times. Its not a very serious thing they are doing, but to be honest would you like the entire discussion being flooded by everyone asking for them to be on your whitelist?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm pretty sure there is no suspension for these (at least the first offense). I think the thread is just closed and a comment is posted letting the user know not to ask for whitelists.
Edit: I was wrong, I just saw proof that asking for whitelists will result in a suspension. I believe it is considered begging which will bring a 4 day suspension.
Comment has been collapsed.
WL begging in a thread brings a 2 days suspension
I don't know If it is different handled in GA's.
Comment has been collapsed.
I seen people with lesser suspension time, as 4 days, for it.
Maybe they have "interpretation" solutions or it depends on the one that look into it that they haven't fixed 4 days for each case
Comment has been collapsed.
To be fair, like 50% of the threads exist in that way.
"Article: xxxxxxxx. What do you think?"
"Video x. What do you think?"
Those threads have promotional benefit. It would kill off a good portion of the already weak forums.
Not to even mention literally all the deals, where SG directly benefits from many sites and where those sites get sales from these threads.
Or any group recruitment. Groups make giveaways and often enough require the members to make giveaways as well. Or groups that are larger, that get free keys for promotional purposes.
This rule just needs to be broken down a bit and made more specific, I'd say.
Comment has been collapsed.
dont forget https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/jBnsq/some-non-bundle-ga-total-60 in your wl for wl list^^
its not the sense of wl and i even have seen a mod complaining that it would be not allowed here. but on the other hand i cant see a written rule against it...
but even if it would be not allowed: just create a steamgroup instead ;)
you can also ask as a rule for n (unbundled) giveaways each timeperiod
Comment has been collapsed.
That is the one I was talking about when i said a new WL for WL thread was just created. I didn't want to link it because it was still open and figured it might be considered calling out. The other threads I added because a mod commented on each one stating the rule that doesn't exist.
Comment has been collapsed.
the golden rule that there are no rules for mods on steamgifts strikes again.
Comment has been collapsed.
i hope no one responds to this wanting a whitelist invite even tho my giveaways are unfortunately bundled for the most part and not triple a
Comment has been collapsed.
some Mod closing/opening thread on their wish, based on how they hate/like you while they not doing for the same to others.
But what can you expect when there are mods with few giveaways but 1k+ wins?
Comment has been collapsed.
But what can you expect when there are mods with few giveaways but 1k+ wins?
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I can't really figure out what the link is between good moderating and, let's just say "unoptimized gifting activity"?
Though it might just come from me because I'm pretty much a leech on this site as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
you are pretty far from leeching and I do not have a problem if anyone doing it (after all most of my giveaways lvl 0 or lvl 1) unless it is a mod, I can't take it seriously if a leecher is a mod.
Comment has been collapsed.
Makes no sense to judge a mod's performance based on how many giveaways he does though.
I can understand that you seem to be very concerned with 'leeching' so I won't try to argue against that, but consider the fact that mods are generally putting in free hours of work for the community, which is worth immensively more than even the most expensive quality giveaways (and hundreds of times more than average shovelware), when comparing to minimum hourly wages for instance. So it doesn't seem reasonable to try to fault them for that. (I could still find other things to fault regarding the mods but this was just to address your angle.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not concerned about leeching, my giveaways only lvl0-1, it would be higher if I would be concerned. But some mods taking actions against some while not doing anything against others for the very same while they also have a pretty leeching stat. That was all about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree about the latter part that mod rulings are very variable sometimes, also speaking from own experience with them.
But from my view I feel the opposite, that mods are lenient towards name-calling against 'leechers' and the like (often directly overlooking witch hunts and criticism), while occasionally being extremely harsh with minor rule violations, likely because they suspect malicious intent (again, may or may not have something to do with 'leeching' stats). And some also seem very prone to issue warnings, as well as getting a lot of general community support for being volunteers so voicing any criticism of them is also very dangerous.
So all in all it's probably balanced, in some way.
Comment has been collapsed.
As far as I am concerned numbers are irrelevant with regards to the mod position. If they moderate according to the guidelines set by cg, then they are a good moderator.
Comment has been collapsed.
True, numbers mean nothing, but I believe the guidelines aren't very clear neither for mods, neither for users so sometimes they can act how they want and punish someone for something what ok for others.
Comment has been collapsed.
marvellous! you're so much wrong to be kinda right. that's something.
Comment has been collapsed.
"being right" is a non-existing state. But that is true for "being wrong" too:-) Because the world isn't dark and white and everything is subjective:-)
Comment has been collapsed.
and everything is subjective:-)
That is not entirely true, someone can be factually wrong - for example Hungary is not in South-America no matter how hard someone wishes that to be true. In same aspects the world is very much black or white :)
And like that, you're wrong about connecting number of giveaways and quality of work / character. SG seen friendly people get permabanned for multiaccounting and CV cheating, and level 10 "generous" user for repeated inappropite behaviour and being unable to deal with reality.
Levels are made out of money. Having money doesn't make anyone better, and the lack of it doesn't make someone a bad person.
Comment has been collapsed.
We do work to tweak up the guidelines, sadly can't give any info when it will go live. As I do not know how long it will take support team to move through all the discussed points.
But yes, asking to be whitelisted falls under no-begging rule. Both in discussion thread and GA comments.
I do agree it could be listed as a separate point in the guidelines, not act as "unwritten rule that is derived from other rules". But as we're still working on the update, I can't share any details. As points and wording can change.
Comment has been collapsed.
In that case, it would be useful to identify it as an example of begging in the guidelines.
Current: Do not beg users or developers for keys or gifts, whether in comments, or chat.
Proposed: Do not ask users or developers for keys, gifts or whitelist inclusion.
Comment has been collapsed.
I "begged" for gifs in my last thread and less than 1/3 of the entries did some :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I guess that depends on whether cat pics are considered gifts.
I think people will argue about the definition of "begging", which is why I changed "beg" from the wording in the current guidelines to "ask" in my proposed wording above.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would like it to be strongly considered that the rule becomes general so people won't continously lowkey ask/trade for WL in every giveaway they make. Some users really do that constantly and it just feels cringeworthy that they are clearly borderline begging for any extra WL they can get. (It should be obvious that anyone who actually wants to WL don't have to be told to do so.) I think most users would be clever enough to distance themselves from people who type that but it's still annoying to see.
I'm not 100% sure what the general rules on advertisement on giveaways are, though, so I'm not sure if it'd become a problem to distinguish between that and legitimate ads.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the response. It's nice to know that it is being worked on even if it takes a long time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed. If it is going to be interpreted as begging or some other sort of undesirable manipulation by at least some moderators, which I personally think is fair, it should be clearly identified in the site rules/guidelines as not allowed. This makes the position clear, which is important both for users and for moderators.
Comment has been collapsed.
Those noobs are doing it all wrong anyways. Begging for WLs gets you BLs and suspended while begging for BLs gets you tons of WLs and not suspended.
Comment has been collapsed.
And being correct gets you blacklisted. Or is it whitelisted? Can't remember.
Dang, now I'll have to put you on both lists just to be sure...
You just created a copious amount of extra (and unnecessary) work for me. That will get you blacklisted. Or is it......
Comment has been collapsed.
I believe they end with more blacklisted than whitelisted so there is no need to add secret rules xD. They apply by themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
Welcome to Steamgifts, where the rules are all made up and points don't really matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
What's the point of having a rule that is not stated anywhere, but enforced? How are users supposed to know about it?
There is nothing in the guidelines that says anything about not asking other users to whitelist you, yet there have been numerous threads closed because of it. If the rule is going to be enforced, can't a simple single sentence be added to the guidelines?
A new WL for WL thread was just created and here are some examples from a quick google search of some closed threads because of this:
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/j5s3R/whitelist-recruitment#PWO7xnr
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/F2Tya/ga-mortal-kombat-11-ru#pLf2mDW
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/8QkpX/giveaway-whitelist-recruiting-lvl-2/search?page=2#aJ9PFyK
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/laNf8/whitelist-recruitment#FFckTuY
Edit: Maybe a support member can clarify this if they see it. I have been told that asking for whitelists is allowed if it is done in a giveaway description, is this true? What about specifically asking for WL for WL in giveaway descriptions. I don't like WL for WL and wouldn't do it, but I am just curious about the rule.
Edit 2: A mod responded and said that asking for whitelists is begging "both in discussion thread and GA comments". Since this hasn't officially been added to the guidelines, I would consider it their opinion for now because not all mods agree on everything, but I would recommend not asking to be whitelisted anywhere.
Also, don't confuse this with creating a thread to find users to add to your own whitelist. As of right now, that is still allowed. You just can't ask other users to whitelist you.
Comment has been collapsed.