Should we implement this feature?
Have been thinking a little bit on this issue too. Am sure support would love to weed out all those reroll requests that end up being denied. No skills at all at website design but is it possible to pop an extra column on the user's won page..support could stick a "thumb's up" sign next to the game in question for any "inactivated game" or "multiple win game" that has actually been addressed already. If I have a winner with one of those issues I usually manually check their won games and their steam account before any ticket is sent off. No idea how much work addressing this issue would be though.
Comment has been collapsed.
The argument I always see against this feature is that it's "calling out". But the no calling out rule is designed to prevent false accusations and witch hunts. If they've been confirmed as breaking the rules by the site staff and punished accordingly, it's not false and there's no reason to try to get them punished again.
And as far as the privacy issue goes, if I submit a ticket, the response to that ticket is just going to tell me that they've already been punished anyway. So you're not protecting them, because the giveaway creator still knows they broke the rule and got punished.
Comment has been collapsed.
-1
we want to prevent witch hunts, even when the person is really a witch
I'm a lookout btw.
n1 - yirg - nothing
n2 - GauRocks - nothing
n3 - DeltaBladeX - nothing
n4 - Ambidot - suspicious
Comment has been collapsed.
If the information is not public (only GA creators can see it when checking their winnners), and if no-one is allowed to post it on the forum (no calling out rule), where's the potential witch hunt?
Comment has been collapsed.
Nowhere. I wasn't disagreeing with the feature - in fact, I'm all for it. I was just disagreeing with GauRocks' opinion about the calling out rule.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can request access to federal/government agency records or information under various Freedom of Information/RTI Acts, why isn't all of that information just available to everyone anyways 🤔 Context & purpose 🤷
Comment has been collapsed.
the no calling out rule is to prevent witch hunts, even if the info is real.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, but the goal of a witch hunt is to get someone punished. If the site literally says "this person has already been punished", there's no point in the witch hunt.
Comment has been collapsed.
leeches aren't punished (because they don't break any rules), but if someone creates a thread to post their names, he will get insta-suspended. ┐(´ー｀)┌
Comment has been collapsed.
the goal of witch hunt is not punishing someone - if your goal would be to punish someone you would simply report them to support instead of creating public forum topic for example. The goal of witch hunt is not punishment but public shaming. You are not fine with someone getting punished only according to rules (aka suspension), you want to punish them yourself as well even if it's against the rules. You want to publicly shame them, you want to disregard them in the eyes of other members of the community, you want to hurt them on your own personal level, you want other to blacklist them, maybe even kick them out of the groups, harass them etc. It goes way beyond the simple punoshment which would be served via suspension.
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't even have to name names. Just search the archive for "abrix" and you'll see a massive list of (Deleted).
That should get people started if they wanted to add to their blacklist.
Is it still a witch hunt if there is documented evidence?
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not saying user should be punished multiple times for same violation. Just a basic information whether user has served punishment on particular offense will reduce unnecessary tickets.
And by no means I see this feature will break no-calling-out rule. Don't we all check potential winner on sgtools. The difference is that there will be extra info which will say action taken or not (just that no need of extra information) for particular violation.
Normally we just create ticket for reroll if we see violation. In this particular scenario the GA creator doesn't have to create ticket if the potential winner has already served their time for violation.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't we all check potential winner on sgtools.
No. Also your feature may confuse new users who don't know English that well.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well there will be always those kind of users. I even saw a discussion yesterday about winners checking received without actually activating it (because of various reasons). What if the key was invalid, what if they forget to activate at all later. There will always be an issue with features. Even the basic ones like filling the box instead of putting a tick sign in exam papers.
But should it be a reason to not include when there are still users who can find the feature useful?
The extra info wont be like required step for game handling to user, which consists of received/not-received checkbox. Its just info nothing more (but usefulness depends on the creator).
Comment has been collapsed.
But should it be a reason to not include when there are still users who can find the feature useful?
People have been asking for more giveaway filters beyond region restriction and level restriction for a long time. It never got implemented, knsys then created their own website for it with many filters. It shows the design preferences/considerations that cg has.
Comment has been collapsed.
"let's have a stamp on that person's face, so we know he violated our rule some time ago"
I have a single multiple win back when I didn't know the basics and didn't know peeps are so sensitive here. I asked giver if it's fine to activate the second key and he said he doesn't care. so I thought it's fine. when I got suspended for 5 days I came back to the forums, trying to explain that if there is no mechanism on the site to prevent particular violations, it's senseless to make up your own rules and force every user to follow it, when it's not even that clear in ToS.
I proposed to remove multiple entries and hide the key until I confirm I want it. they thrown shit at me and I got 100+ bl in a second. all they told was "you should follow the rules", "it's too hard to implement"," it's not needed". but as you know recently cg just implemented the former feature. and hell, it's ridiculous how same community was happy about a feature they bled everyone who proposed it year before.
so do you want a stamp on my face for your community's toxicity?
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually this topic is never about putting a stamp on any person's face.
If a user got their punishment for previous violation, no need to create unnecessary tickets that's all.
Comment has been collapsed.
this suggestion if implemented may drop the mere 20 re-roll tickets avg we have down to 10 instead, but it will raise the other ticket category daily with "please remove my infraction notice from public eye, i have now redeemed it" tickets coming in instead.
Comment has been collapsed.
If they sync their account it should automatically go away, no ticket needed.
Comment has been collapsed.
not the way they're wanting it implemented it can't. they basically want it a support based tag on the users tagging them with their latest infraction. they even want it to remain if mistakes are fixed which pretty much tells people there is no reason to ever bother fixing your past mistakes since it would be permanently left on your account showing the mistake.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well what they want and the way it should be done are two different things.
If they've purchased the game syncing the account should automatically detect the game and remove the infraction.
That way the violation is removed entirely (only support staff can see it), no new tickets are filled out that don't need to be filled out, and most users are satisfied.
Comment has been collapsed.
if it had all those safeguards and showed the bare minimum details required to know on only the already visible thru 3rd party site stuff... i wouldn't be quite so opposed to it. it would take quite a few safeguards in place to make it work just right though.
edit: i don't really think it's necessary though anymore with the staff size increase we got recently. support would probably end up pretty bored if there isn't any more re-rolling at all. lol
Comment has been collapsed.
See, you understand the way I wish it worked.
I don't like having to jump over to sgtools for stuff that should already be available on SteamGifts.
The main point is just to cut down on the amount of duplicate tickets Support has to go through.
Comment has been collapsed.
i think those are just stuck as they are for the most part. lol. most of those are probably "can't be helped" and since they can't be replied to they just sit there forever.
Comment has been collapsed.
They went down by 5k since jatan and Tempete got added as mods, so I'm not sure how the stats counter works.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah true still though, they probably are just slowly going thru and closing the majority of them and taking whatever action could be taken on the others.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's an easy fix for this, and it also makes it a lot harder to witch hunt.
Just put the suspension notice on the giveaway itself. Something like "User X was suspended for non-activation of this giveaway" or "User X was suspended for winning this game twice" That way, if the non-activation or double win is taken care of, nobody has any reason to even be looking at that giveaway unless they're going through all of someone's wins manually.
Comment has been collapsed.
Issue with region restricted/private/group giveaways. The giveaway creator may not be able to view the giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I'm going to give you something you can't take off"
If he violated the rules, and fixed the violation by buying said game, then all is well and good.
If he violated and didn't fix the violation, then he deserves to be blacklisted by everyone who wants to.
Comment has been collapsed.
why bother reading, right?
- it was about multiple wins, not unactivated wins.
- i got bls for something that was implemented by cg a year later. and they loved it just as much as they hated it a year ago. just because it came from a "violator" who wanted to help to prevent those in future.
Comment has been collapsed.
I read it, I've been blacklisted for doing the same thing as you.
No matter what community it is, anywhere there are people, there will always be special asshats.
I simply linked the video because yes, if someone breaks the rules I'd like a mark on them.
inb4 people compare me to Hitler.
And it doesn't matter what their rule breakage was for, all infractions should be listed.
Comment has been collapsed.
As long as, if the user later rectifies the issue (e.g. buys the game themselves), the history of punishment for that particular game vanishes from their profile for all but staff, then I have no problem with this suggestion. People shouldn't be eternally punished for issues that they have rectified.
Comment has been collapsed.
True, people shouldn't be punished multiple times for same violation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know they aren't. I am saying about GA creators asking for re-roll by user's history (knowingly or unknowingly), even though which won't be granted.
Comment has been collapsed.
it's not multiple punishment - it's the same single one punishment according to the same rules. If you break the rules you get one time suspensions AND you will not be able to win anything during your suspension time even if you were the only entrant AND you have to be aware that any wins you have for month following rulebreaking may be rerolled and any reroll request in this time period will be automatically granted. It is not multiple punishments for the same thing, it's one punishment consisting of multiple things. Think about it this way. Someone steals a car adn court sentence him to 1 year in prison AND 5000$ fine AND 100 hours of community works. Does it mean he got punished mukltiple times for a single crime? No, he got punished once but he got complex punishment consisting of multiple things. It's the same thing here. Punishing for the same crime multiple times would be only if 3 years later the same person gets sentened for prison again for the same crime ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Multiple punishment in a sense that, if xyz user wins one of my GA, and I found about violation, I create ticket, Support takes action.
After few weeks(suspension ends) that same xyz user wins game from you, you found about violation, create ticket. Should we punish xyz. No that's unfair. Just like your later example. This isn't granted by support too.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just as I said before - suspension is not the only punishment. Suspension + 1 month is a punishment. So if in 3 weeks xyz wins a game from me and I reroll it it's not another punishment - it's part of original punishment which said "5 days suspension and month of rerolls", same as in prison example it's "1 year in prison and when you get out 100h of community service" - if you don't get a job because you have to do community service and have no time ids it another punishment? No it's part of the same original punishment.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do we have that? I thought the user after suspension period can win games. Never knew about +1 month thing
Comment has been collapsed.
If someone did not activate wins but has already been suspended for it, we check if this happened during the past 30 days. If yes, we approve the reroll.
Comment has been collapsed.
or at the very minimum u get this...
Comment has been collapsed.
when you request the reroll see what the very first reason from the dropdown menu is :>
Comment has been collapsed.
Where it could show, is not on the user profile itself, but rather, when the user wins the GA, then show the suspension history, along with the non-activations/multiple wins each of the given suspensions were for, so that the GA creator can avoid sending a ticket that would get denied anyways.
Another case for this, is that you have a total of 20 ticket slots. Each ticket you send, puts one of your ticket slots on a 24 hour cooldown, right down to the second. Once all 20 of those slots are used, you have to wait for the oldest ticket you sent to run for its full 24 hours before you can send another ticket. Therefore, losing one of your ticket slots to a request that gets denied sucks that much more.
I 100% agree that there should be some way that we can see the suspension history if there is any, of each of the potential winners once the giveaway ends.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes exactly, just like how GA creater can see the email address of the winner, including just an info like "Actions taken for violation till [DATE/GAME win]" will be enough.
Now the GA creator can look for new violation after that particular date/game wins. If any exist create a ticket else give the game to winner.
Comment has been collapsed.
right now there are 20 reroll tickets queued, i don't see how giving info to anyone would significantly speed up the ga process.
Comment has been collapsed.
For those who report any rule breaking (regardless of date), being able to see history before creating the ticket would cut the number very significantly, in my case by at least a third.
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm 2 of those 20 tickets too that require admin to do. (entry removals)
Comment has been collapsed.
i think there are limits on the amount you can send per day, but that reroll queue has over 600 a few months ago before they added new support staff.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, 20 tickets/24 hrs. To prevent ticket spamming iirc.
Comment has been collapsed.
That would lead to naming and shaming. A simple automated system that prevents anyone with a served (and not lifted through granting an unsuspend request) suspension to win any giveaway for 30 more days should reduce the need to check and the load on support a lot. Since there is a system that prevents people with active suspensions from winning any giveaways, it is something that was already implemented to a degree, so not a new feature.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't this this will lead to naming and shaming. Info about violation by one can be accessed by any other user on sgtools easily. It will stay as it is.
The thing is, that extra info would only be accessed by GA creator. After GA has ended and winner has been chosen. just like email.
http://imgur.com/a/S2cug
Now the creator has to only look for new violation of the winner, if exists create a ticket else give away the game. Simple as that. No tickets for violations prior to action taken date/game.
If any creator has personal issues/grudges regarding past violation, but if the winner has already served time, even though GA creator creates a ticket support wouldn't grant it. This reduces the toxicity and bad practice.
I think its a bit better to know user has been served for violation rather than only knowing about list of violation.
Comment has been collapsed.
You should paste that img in the OP, it explains the thing up very well. The info would be as private as the email address, only visible by the GA creators.
Comment has been collapsed.
no, there is enough drama as it is here. don't need to throw fuel onto it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think it will fuel anything. GA creator doesn't have to make unnecessary tickets. Thats all. Extra Info is private and GA creator can only see it.
All other info is publicly found, I don't think that has created drama; its the necessity to protect community from taking advantage of.
I am sure most of GA creator will use sgtools to look users history. If any violation is found I am sure they will create ticket. I am just saying why create extra tickets that are bound to be rejected; taking time of both GA creator and support team.
If creator know that the winner has served their time for violation, then s/he will not create ticket at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
All other info is publicly found
it will tell me that they even had suspensions for stuff they have since redeemed or activated. there is no way to distinguish a "accident" or "deliberate theft of key". you cannot tell me that info could be publicly found because it's not even known by support.
therefore, excess unnecessary fuel when there isn't a ticket issue anymore to begin with. 20 tickets 2 of which are mine and only admin can handle is quite a accomplishment and no need to attempt to dwindle it down even further by making other peoples past mistakes public knowledge.
additionally u are only request rules and punishments to be public. not even specifying that you only want specific kind of rulebreaks. so we'd additionally see thousands of "callout" violation past suspensions that would additionally cause other "call outs". just not worth the trouble it would create.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not getting you.
I mean Non-activated/multiple wins violation are public.
Extra Info on Action taken against user's violation is private.
Current Scenario
- create giveaway
- Winner gets Selected
- Check winner on sgtools for multiple wins/non-activated wins
- If exists ask for reroll else gift the game
- If ticket gets denied(i.e has served time for violation *this info you get eventually privately with support); Accepted chose a new winner
What I am Saying
- Create giveaway
- Winner gets Selected
- Check winner on sgtools for multiple wins/non-activated wins
- If exists look for info that I am suggesting, If user has served previous violation no tickets necessary(gift game) else create for new ticket
How is this an excess unnecessary fuel when you are just gonna end up in the same situation but with fewer steps and less tickets.
If you mean we should not know about the info about support already taken action against violator(Non-activated/multiple wins), we eventually end with the info from support " The suspensions have already been served in this instance so we cannot provide a reroll.".
additionally u are only request rules and punishments to be public. not even specifying that you only want specific kind of rulebreaks. so we'd additionally see thousands of "callout" violation past suspensions that would additionally cause other "call outs". just not worth the trouble it would create.
I am not asking for punishment to the public. If I create a GA and the winner has past violation shouldn't I be concerned about who I am going to give the key to; do they deserve it? Most of the GA creator will create ticket. Do you call this a "Call-out" because its not. Calling-Out refers to calling names, liking profile publicly. And why do you think what I am suggesting will bring the name of user out in public. It wont. If anyone does they will be breaking SG code of conducts and they will get punished for.
If a potential winner has past violation, and they served their time for their violation. we have to give them the game. If anyone has issues and creates a ticket to reroll because of those issues, they will be rejected. Why still hold issues when they have already got for what they have done.
Comment has been collapsed.
How is this an excess unnecessary fuel when you are just gonna end up in the same situation but with fewer steps and less tickets.
because not only do i have information on anything that was already visible to me on sgtools, i would additionally know if they broke rules and repaired those past mistakes by purchasing the game they didn't activated back in 2015, or by replacing and having a gifter reroll their second win from mid 2016.
you keep claiming this is info we either already have access too or can obtained by requesting a re-roll and support tells you that suspensions have been served but you don't actually know what all details and info is inside those infraction notes. there could be many more mistakes you are not nor never would have known about without this full disclosure you are asking for, therefore this will never happen no matter how passionately you want it.
calling out does not mean calling names, it is to draw attention towards someones wrong-doings in an attempt to shame or humiliate them, or in this case maybe even get them blacklisted or kicked from groups.
Comment has been collapsed.
... but you don't actually know what all details and info is inside those infraction notes. there could be many more mistakes you are not nor never would have known about without this full disclosure you are asking for, therefore this will never happen no matter how passionately you want it.
Actually I have never said about full details. Whole details of violation isn't needed for a creator and shouldn't be given to. For example
http://imgur.com/a/S2cug
Once a ticket is created Support can look at the history take appropriate actions. They will have records for violation and action taken. Support will update the field till which win/date the user has been taken action against.
Now all we have to look for new violations, no need to look at the past. If I see any user that had already punished, I wont hesitate to give them a game. But if same user violates again I guess there is more harsh action against new violations taken by the Support team.
I know there isn't any certainty whether this feature will be implemented or not. Its just an idea. Everything has its pros and cons.
Comment has been collapsed.
you assume it's as simple as that kind of details, or assume its easy to just pull that detail out of whatever information is available inside the infraction notes. or you expect them to go thru the 2.6million separate giveaways and make all the notes compatible for public viewing. either way your entire suggestion is based off of assumptions that are most likely inaccurate.
Comment has been collapsed.
When a user creates a support ticket. Support takes action and based on that ticket and violators history, support updates the field.
Comment has been collapsed.
okay, i gotcha.
but that still doesn't solve the issue of you seeing a past infraction that no longer is even there (a game i was suspended and tag field updated on, but then corrected after my suspension was up and you'd of otherwise never known about it)
Comment has been collapsed.
We never need to know about it. If we need to know about list of violation there is always SGtools. I am not talking about user's history, but if s/he served time for past violation, rectified the mistake no issues I will just give the game. If s/he has pending violations s/he must pay the price.
Yeah I know there are some issues. With was mentioned on one of the comments here by fubarnocaps
Comment has been collapsed.
sgtools doesn't show a list of corrected violations, i don't think you are understanding some people fix their mistakes and your suggestion will not reduce tickets instead it will increase the "please remove my infraction notice" tickets from people correcting their mistakes after a suspension.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet it might, but should we have to let it removed? For example I violated by not activating a game I won on SG. Someone found out and I got punished for it. Wouldn't I be able to enter and win other games, obviously after my suspension? I would, If a GA creator found about my violation and that I served time, will it stop me from receiving my won game? No. Even if the creator creates a ticket requesting new winner support won't grant it because I have got my punishment and served my time.
That extra info wont matter at all.
Fine, the user corrects his mistake/violation by buying and activating a game. good for the user. No issues. Though not morally right not-activating a game that moment, but at least he did the right thing later. No issues here.
Comment has been collapsed.
That extra info wont matter at all.
to you maybe, but to someone else if you scroll down a little ways you'll read they don't care if people were punished they want that information for blacklist purposes.
Fine, the user corrects his mistake/violation by buying and activating a game. good for the user. No issues.
if it's not to be removed after correcting it what incientive is there to correct it in the first place? take me for example, would it surprise you to hear i have had a non-activation and have corrected it?? (i haven't ofc though, only suspension here was for a vague call-out) if i knew correcting my mistake wouldn't make any difference and that scar would remain on me forever why the hell would i bother fixing the mistake to begin with? you basically are requesting a system that makes people not want to correct their mistakes if they ever happen to make a genuine mistake since it will be noted on their account forever or until another note comes along to replace it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Really should we worry about BL. I will say one thing about that if you think people will BL the user if they have seen "scar" right. But that would only happen when the user happens to win the game, other than that no one can see the scar.
Going by it, lets take my example I have won 7 games in 7 months out of 2,235 entries, it would take me other 93 wins to reach 100 BL. And there are only few users who would use BL going by the past history, not all do that, even me(only on serious cases).
Would such thing matter where their are hundreds of thousand users in a community.
Yeah one thing I agree is there might be some BL for user for their "scar", but it won't stop them from claiming the GA won by them.
One thing that will stop users if they haven't corrected the problem is SGtools protected GA (which normally contains better games), Joining Groups. That's the loss user has to pay.
Comment has been collapsed.
doesn't matter if it's only to gifters, that's 3k peoples information i'd have access too.. spend $250.00 on $0.01 games that hardly anyone owns and i'd have access to ~25k peoples information in one GA (practically all active members). i could care less about blacklists personally or i'd of probably not admitted my prior suspension, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored entirely as a factor on why it should or shouldn't be implemented. just because it can work, doesn't mean it should work like that -- even support has chimed in and said it'll never happen.
Comment has been collapsed.
You have a point. I can see where you are coming from on this. There would be people out there that would create giveaways that are as large as possible, in order to collect the bad history of those users, (the scars), then publish that information publicly for all to see.
Now that I see that, the other thing that could happen, is not necessarily remove the 20 ticket limit, but just make request new winner tickets NOT count towards that 20.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, i'm not opposed to steamgifts gaining it's own live (as in current) "activation checker" to insure peoples won games are all currently activated or not. but to show someones past mistakes that may of already even been corrected just won't ever happen.
Comment has been collapsed.
This will never be implemented.
Just like in real life, someone's past should be personal. No one should have their mistakes, purposely made or not, out on the open for everyone or "just the GA creator" to see.
Rules aren't perfect. There will be always pros and cons, there will always be features some do or do not agree with, but this one is not something that deserves a change.
Comment has been collapsed.
It wont be open to all. Not publicly displayed on user's profile. It would be only accessible to GA creator when the winner is selected just like winners email address.
http://imgur.com/a/S2cug
The extra info to be shown is Action taken by support or not, no more than than. No need for what punishment is given and for how long.
Eventually the creator will find out whether the winner has been taken action by support, but by creating ticket bound to be rejected. Why not reduce this extra step which will save no of tickets created and time and resources of Support staffs and GA creator.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, false sense of security. Say you want to scam SG system. You make a FO4 giveaway among 5 friends. I win on April 1. You send me the Steam gift for the game. I add it to my library, then I win more giveaways afterwards. I don't activate one of the games that I won April 15, and I get suspended. (You could even report me to ensure that I was suspended!) My suspension record would show that action was taken April 15. BUT, you then refund FO4, and I would never get caught because everyone would assume I was already suspended for that.
Rinse, repeat, scam all the way to lvl 10.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know its complicated how to present info. I am just presenting ideas. When I thought of how it should be displayed I also came to that issue.
"Can it be implemented or not, if it can be how should it be implemented?" is the topic for staffs and admin.
Comment has been collapsed.
cg can probably implement it, but it seems pointless=> might as well have an automated system to suspend rulebreakers. But that has even more issues.
Comment has been collapsed.
I win on April 1Stopped reading there, you would have to enter it to win in the first place! ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
Also to play a little devil's advocate here - I don't like idea myself and am opposed of it same as you, but argument you raised can be countered with simple alteration of impolementation. Let's say the game you used to scam on April 15 is Fortix, just to make example easier to read.
What you say is that if you win FO4 on April 1, activate it, Win Fortix on April 15, don't activate it, get reported, suspended, then creator of FO4 revokes gift and your profile only says "Suspended on April 15" everyone will assume it was suspension for FO4 or FO4+Fortix and noone will ever again report you giving contributor 60$ of free CV.
But all that would have to change in implementation is saying both date of suspension and game ;) If your suspension report would say "Suspended on April 15 for not activating Fortix" ppl would still report you for not activating FO4 and your scam would not work ;)
That ofc does not mean that I support idea of showing information "Suspended on April 15 for not activating Fortix". I don't support idea of showing any suspension information at all, because it's a private data between user and SG staff, not between user and any other random user just because they happen to win something from someone so now they can see all their suspensions history.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oo, that's a good one. I guess that would solve a lot. Hm, in that case, is date of suspension even needed? Because you would need to cross reference with SGTools anyways to verify that they activated won games since their suspension.
I need to think of how to scam SG in the case if all nonactivation/multiwin suspensions were listed.
Comment has been collapsed.
But non-activation is out in the open already. An extra # icon of suspension served would save time me creating (and waiting), you processing the ticket.
I'd also say, that if that icon stayed after the game was activated would be badge of honour. Showing he's going to stick to his end of the deal
Comment has been collapsed.
Except that some peoples mistakes are a matter of public record - see criminals, politicians, and ceo's.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know if if this should be addressed to SG or sgtools by knsys.
It's been suggested on SG before, always shot down by support staff. Support doesn't mind checking user suspension history, they've stated it multiple times.
You might want to pitch the idea to some of the scripters since they're already attempting to track username changes. But as it's crowdsourced, you'll need to figure out a way to verify that the information is true (maybe only giveaway creators can submit information about their winners once a reroll is approved/denied) etc. It's complicated.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think just like you said it is complicated. Action for violation are known by the Staffs only. I wish it will stay that way.
Making it public doesn't look like a nice idea.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am confused, are you looking for specific rule breaks? And does SGtools not cover this?
Comment has been collapsed.
If I encounter a winner who has past violation (multiple wins/non-activated wins) I usually create a ticket. And some of the tickets ends up being denied because the potential winner had already taken actions by Support team.
I am saying if we had that info i.e. punishment served for particular violation no tickets should have been made saving time of both GA creator and Support team.
Yes SGtools covers those things but not regarding the action taken towards the violation.
Comment has been collapsed.
So what you want to know is if individuals violations have been punished?
Comment has been collapsed.
yes, so that if s/he already served the time. I wont bother creating useless tickets that would certainly be denied. Saving time and resources.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting, I have a question related to this, what do you guys use to check GA activations? its quite a pain to check each user on sgtools, at least if you do lots of GA.
In relation to allow the giveaway creator to check a steamgifts user history can create some discomfort.
Comment has been collapsed.
that's really all there is afaik (sgtools), short of manually checking the win against the library for yourself.
there are tools that can make that process a little easier on you, but they all rely on sgtools to do the real work. (ESGST for example)
Comment has been collapsed.
It's strange because it wouldn't be too difficult to automate this process inside steamgifts, for example check for activation of gifts that ended a couple of weeks ago automatically and give feedback to the giveaway creator so he/she can decide what to do next. I know there can be false positives but in those cases of non activation notification the creator can check manually, but can make this task easier.
Comment has been collapsed.
automating everything especially those that can create false positives is not a good idea. that automation process could and would create a whole different issue when "free weekend" pops up and the game that is going that weekend also had a ton of GAs end the week before. the steam api system is way to flawed to have any automation rely on it that heavily. even sgtools has enough issues with false positives and complaints due to those false positives because of the faulty steam api and servers.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's why I said that in case of positive non activation of a gift the creator should decide what to do, check manually, send a report to support or whatever, it's the same as now but automated in some way, there would be people that would close that notification anc continue, and others will check what happened, just like it is now but everything inside steamgifts.
Comment has been collapsed.
a false positive can't be caught, that's the nature of a false positive. if it could catch the false positive it would simply correct it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, you can not get rid of false positive automatically that is when the user has to do his/her job, if you want to check manually (go to steam profile and check manually or whatever) you can do it, if you just want to dismiss the notification you can also do it.
Comment has been collapsed.
but if i win game xyz today, and not receive it for a whole week, then suddenly xyz goes on a free weekenend the next weekend when it checks if it is inside my library it would automatically claim i redeemed the game when i haven't even received it. that's your false positive i'm talking about.. how is the system going to tell me i need to do anything when it falsly marked something for me?
this entire automation process creates a whole additional issue that is not needed when the current system works just fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
And how is that issue solved now? would not that be undetectable also to manual check?
Comment has been collapsed.
what issue is to be solved right now?? currently it would sit there unmarked either way until it was actually received or decided that it is time to mark it not received.
i don't understand the second sentence, sorry.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok, I see your concern but, the atomation I talk about has nothing to do with marking received or not, it would be a tool to help check if a user activated the gift or not, but that user still has to mark it as received, I think we mixed concepts here ;-P
Comment has been collapsed.
ahh, indeed i was mixing it up with the automation of the marking. what you want is ESGST. it has buttons everywhere (on profile pages, on winner pages, etc) needed to check for rulebreakers very easily.
but yes, in those regards they could of given us some better tools for checking into other people directly from steamgifts rather then manually checking one by one or relying on a 3rd party site or tools.
Comment has been collapsed.
Obviously this might create issue if every user could see one another's past, but the option should only be given to GA creator. Just like GA creator can see winners e-mail address if they want to sent gifts.
I think this is the best way to implement such feature, +1
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the pros counterweight that kind of little cons. There are already several of ways to cheat the system.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm all ears on how to cheat the system :) CV pl0x
Comment has been collapsed.
Farming with friends (you have to spend money but you don't need to give games to strangers to farm CV): group of 6 friends. One of them create a private giveaway with 5 copies. Each friend buy his own copy but don't activate it until the GA ends. The GA ends, everyone activates their copy and mark the game as received. If the game is an unbundled AAA the CV farming is obviously better.
"Developer" method: get thousands of keys for free from developers. Create massive giveaways. Free CV!
There will always be ways to cheat the system so we always have to put on a scale the pros and cons of each new feature.
Comment has been collapsed.
The first is already semi-accepted with the ratio-based groups. It would be undetectable though, you're right.
Dev method has a safeguard in that past 5 copies of the same game the value decreases. IIRC past 50-100 copies you don't get any CV or something.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, some ratio based groups are basically random trading groups, they farm CV to be able to leech from public high level giveaways. My blacklist is full of that kind of members.
The dev method works like a charm if you create a lot of different giveaways. Currently there are several level 9-10 members who reached their level for free with this method. Obviously they're not real developers, they enter every single high level GA to leech games like there's no tomorrow.
Comment has been collapsed.
Didn't know about that. Its nice to see that the topic was already raised.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wouldn't mind if it shows on the profile. Valve does the same with VAC bans. However, I think a much better solution would be that instead of suspending users for breaking the rules, we'd require them to rectify their mistake before they can win again. Unactivated wins should be easy to fix. In case of multiple wins, they would either need to manage getting their multiple wins rerolled (providing keys for compensation, if necessary) or if it's too long and not possible anymore, create a same value giveaway for compensation and have their multiple wins removed by support afterwards.
Comment has been collapsed.
its not that i don't like where you were going with this cause i do.
but this part wouldn't quite work
create a same value giveaway for compensation and have their multiple wins removed by support afterwards.
that's still not fair to the person that created the 2nd win that's being removed and if it's done without their approval then that ruins the entire system. inactive, uncooperative, it doesn't matter. support would have no right to take their legit GA away.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, don't remove the giveaway then. Just flag the winner, so it doesn't show as won on the winners profile anymore, if they compensate for it. Should be only necessary, if it can't be rerolled anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
i like the idea, but i don't think it would work all that well. not now that it's been going so long like this anyways i mean, if it were implemented like that in the first place though it could of worked really well i think.
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay, then just pick a day zero and from that day on, rulebreakers would have to recompensate/fix their errors or they won't be able to win again. We'd all know, that if some rule was broken before that, it's in the past, otherwise they'd have to make up for it. It might be hard at first, but I'm sure it wold worth it in the end, not having to deal with all those reroll requests.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah i can't argue this one, it's a good idea imo. ^^
basically start with day 0 and any rule-breaks regarding non-activation or multiple wins would have to be corrected in order to even enter into giveaways. once it was caught and reported they get the 1-3day suspension or whatever it would be (normal) and they get flagged with a button or whatever that doesn't allow them to enter into stuff until they correct their infraction and submit a ticket showing proof of correction in one form or another.
giveaway suspension, site suspension, full blown banned from site.. its a lighter version of a suspension basically.
Comment has been collapsed.
problem with unactivated wins is also that some games become impossible or next-to-impossible to get later on. Games get pulled off from Steam, there were cases of devs massively invalidating all unused keys for bundle sites or even mass revoking keys and so on and on. Game you did not activate may today be a bundle game or game from sale, it may cost few cents up to few dolars, but in a year or two it may be removed gem worth tens if not hundreds of dollars or absolutelly impossible to get in any way at all. Don't get me wrong - I like the idea, it's what I say myself people with non-activations - clean your profiles yourself, but it's what we can say but not something we should enforce via rules, because rules should be the same for everyone, punishment should be the same for everyone as well, and enforcing such a rule would mean punishment much harsher or basically oimpossible for some people.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 this is an extended version of what i meant by "not now that it's been going so long like this".
if it were implemented originally with this design it could of worked out well, but it's pretty much too late to do it now unless we're going to ignore everything prior to its implementation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I understand how this can be useful to gifters. I've also encountered some 'rule-breakers'. Whenever I did, I would check for 2 things:
- Was the infraction recent?
- Was the infraction done when they were new to the site or new to winning?
So far, I haven't asked for any rerolls, because the infraction was always not recent enough, I want to think that it was just an accident and I don't want to add work for support. But at the same time, I always had a little bit of doubt in the back of my mind: "Maybe I should've reported the winner?" So for me, this would be good for peace of mind.
However, I do understand that not everyone is very nice, so about the concern of just displaying the information in the winners page, maybe a compromise could be that the gifter still has to request for the reroll, but instead of support having to manually check and reply to the gifter that "nope, we've done something about it already, request not granted", there be a system in place that can look it up and reply automatically. If it turns out that the user has already served his punishment, the system can automatically deny the request; if not, the request gets sent to support for manual review.
Though implementation-wise this can be a problem. The current architecture of SG might not support this kind of automatic system and the modification to support this kind of automatic system would also be expensive time-wise as you'll be dealing with not just implementing it code-wise and maybe even database-wise, but also you'll have to import previous infractions and punishments. Also, as mentioned in comments above as well, depending on the execution, this could still be taken advantage of, so how this feature would be executed would also have to be planned carefully.
tl;dr:
- It could be good if executed right.
- Suggestion of a compromise based on comments above.
- Comments on difficulty in implementation.
Comment has been collapsed.
there is not such a thing as "infraction not recent enough" - I've seen people suspended for infractions from more than a year ago! Simply because noone caught them in first few months and then even if someone caught them they assumed that "this rulebreaking is so old that he must have been suspended for it already".
Comment has been collapsed.
My last Zombie Zoeds giveaway with 400 copies (had over 100 re-rolls :D) is the best example. People suspended for 2012 wins :D Hahahaha, i'm an evil :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I would really like to see this feature.
If someone has unactivated wins from a while back (and they still haven't fixed the issue) they deserve to be blacklisted.
Time served doesn't mean a damn thing, they'll continue making the same mistakes if they haven't fixed the issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think its an awful idea tbh ... just run SGTools check and ask for re-roll on everyone who fails it ...
I can see it causing more work for support in the long run from people calling each other out on stuff that may have happened in 2014 >.>
Comment has been collapsed.
how are you letting any violations go by if you report users? its up to the creators discretion whether to re-roll, report, or ignore. the "past violation" will just sway them into reporting or re-rolling that much more if anything for those that normally didn't even care about such things.
i think it will have the opposite effect and have far more re-roll/reports then normal due to the mere existance of them knowing about past infractions to begin with. not to mention like i said before the people who actually fix mistakes will have to fill out a support ticket to have the notice removed from their account or if it's not to be removed there is no incentive in bothering in ever fixing a mistake since it would be a permanent scar on their account.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok fine I will let that go for once, but It's only a matter of time the user gets caught.
And I don't think I will let such violations go by, I am buying games from my hard-earned money, wanting to have the winner that might play the game is what I hope.
There is no need to create ticket system for past violation. Because if the user have got the punishment, there wont be punishment for same case again. And even if GA creator wants to re-roll the user, knowing s/he had already served punishment, support wont agree to that re-roll ticket.
Comment has been collapsed.
Rule violations and playing games has nothing to do with it. Many users who are considered active on the forums don't even play most of their won games, even up single-digit% EVER started. Just because someone doesn't break rules that does not mean that they will play your game even for a second.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ofc not ... when ppl win a game multiple times or dont activate a win they do get suspended ( eventually ) for it ...
But i dont think that marking their profile with a exclamation mark saying hey that guy didnt activate the original space invaders in 1978 and got suspended for it ...is necessary after the original suspension .
And not everyone care if the winner of their game broke a rule ( Once ) ... ofc if its one of the ppl with multiple rule breaks its different story , but i can kinda get on the side of ppl who won the same game twice ( when it was given away on mass ) and didnt know they need to Ask for re-roll on it ... Yeah ofc they should get suspended for that ... but other then that iwouldnt always re-roll just for that .
Having it right in your face from the start , people wont even bother checking what the circumstances ware and will just ask for a re-roll ... which will eventually create even more tickets then now :)
Comment has been collapsed.
should that be a public information ?
well it kinda is now.. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
No that information isn't publicly displayed. It only displays when a winner gets selected. Only GA creator has this info.
That example though :P; If I found that displayed on winners detail I am pretty sure I'm gonna give him an extra key for Bad Rats XD
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree rule violations should be shown, but only for active ones and not the violations that were already served.
Comment has been collapsed.
NO.
- Support is not flooded, with the new support member, it's just toxic curiosity to show it to everyone.
- What about people who have clean their past ? If the person finally activated the game on their account, or give back the key of their multiple win ? They already served, and fixed it, no need for shame each time they win something.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my GA description I usually include a clause where I say "I'll ask for re-roll if the potential winner has broken a rule i.e. NON-ACTIVATED/MULTIPLE-WINS." Recently I faced a problems on my GAs. Some users had broken the rule, I created a ticket most of them were granted, some were not because the potential winner had already served punishment/judgement (2/3 verified by Support, 1 that I didn't create a ticket because the user said s/he had already served his/her violation and also because I didn't like to bother support).
So, to the topic, I am suggesting SG should include information regarding user's past violation and punishment so that useless tickets are not created that would would result in saving precious time of the Support staff.
Obviously this might create issue if every user could see one another's past, but the option should only be given to GA creator. Just like GA creator can see winners e-mail address if they want to sent gifts.
I know changing a small detail will impact on a system 's design and database on a whole different level. I am also a developer. I know its consequences, believe me but on a smaller scale I too faced it. Adding a field created a headache for me. But it will save a lot of time and resources in a long run.
If we had information regarding potential winners' past violation and punishment/judgement we wouldn't create unnecessary tickets. I don't know if if this should be addressed to SG or sgtools by knsys. But I am certainly sure that both working together will help this community more.
Just my opinion..
Comment has been collapsed.