What do you think of "deleting group GAs with 1-4 entries to re-post elsewhere"?
Lmao at people who delete giveaways "because CV!"
That's just plain douche-y, in my opinion. If you're going to limit your giveaways to such small groups that they might only get a handful of entries, be prepared to suck it up and not get your CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you're going to limit your giveaways to such small groups that they might only get a handful of entries, be prepared to suck it up and not get your CV.
Its one thing if you join a small group which tends to have lower average entries, because then you're knowingly putting your CV at risk unless you're in a group focused on CV farming.
Its another though if you're in a group of 100+ people with an average entries per GA of 20+, where I can understand there being less of a risk & more of a gifter expectation that entries will be 5+
Comment has been collapsed.
Its another though
To you, perhaps. To me it's still people trying to get something (in addition to whatever they already get for being in the group) for being "generous" with a very, very small portion of users.
For perspective, I have nearly 4x that many people just on my whitelist. I'm all for raising the number of entries required to get any CV at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting - First time that's been brought up here. Not sure I've noticed that before, but it wouldn't surprise me if it happens.
I would think that if its reported to Support, I'd hope they'd take action given that temporarily creating a GA seems like a blatant abuse, and may even violate this written guideline:
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.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not against the guidelines since you can enter the GA without even looking at whatever is promoted, but there will always be a certain amount of nice people who do. And most people won't even notice a GA being deleted instead of just not winning it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would think that if its reported to Support, I'd hope they'd take action
Gifting Non-Steam Redeemable Games - Suspension Length: 24 hours
Misleading Giveaways - Suspension Length: 3 days
Fake Giveaways - Suspension Length: 5 days
[>>]
Those are default suspension lengths for the forms of rule-breaking noted. Staff will typically increase the duration if a pattern emerges, and will place the user under a PermanentIndefinite Suspension if it's deemed necessary to stop their behavior.
The difficulty is in determining intent, especially given the user's full control over deletions pre-giveaway (meaning that staff doesn't typically vet deletions before they occur). Likewise, staff has previously stated that they don't bother checking against deleted comments for any reason, nor imposing punishments based off deleted comments. On the other hand, they'd still be able to check if a user has an unusually high deletion rate, and even if you can't alert staff to any admissions of wrong-doing while they're active, you can still provide screenshots to help staff lean towards imposing suspensions for the behavior.
In short, it's possible that staff is still taking a lenient approach on how they approach the matter, but such behaviors are already strictly against site rules. Given the necessity of allowing for users to delete giveaways on their own for legitimate reasons, there's not an easy way to improve strictness in such matters. That said, staff has always given the impression of being fairly alert to exploitative behaviors, so it may not be something to overly concern oneself over, either.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't care either way, but the creator of the giveaway should make public GAs if they care about CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've had that happened at least once, and I guess possibly more which I didn't notice.
Of course it's a bit frustrating to miss out on the high chance GA, but I do understand why the creator doesn't want to miss out on the CV. I find this way less of a problem than those who level up by making only GAs in tiny groups that are obviously meant to farm CV while exchanging games within a group of 5 friends...
Comment has been collapsed.
people get their points back when you delete, so I think it's fine
Comment has been collapsed.
27 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by Gamy7
1,533 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Whoosh
83 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by GarlicToast
901 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by InSpec
2,041 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by FranckCastle
160 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by arbutusridge
40 Comments - Last post 14 hours ago by OilBud
87 Comments - Last post 1 second ago by PossiblePsycho
811 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by Mitsukuni
89 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by LieEater
59 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by Mitsukuni
222 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by JMM72
51 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by CptWest
121 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by TinaG
If you enter a non-public GA and are the only entry or one of <4 entries for that GA, but that GA gets deleted before it ends, and then that same GA gets re-created elsewhere, how would you react?
If someone posts a non-public GA and it gets any number of entries, the gifter can delete it anytime before the GA ends. Why would someone do this? Gifter can repost it publicly or to a bigger audience to ensure they get 5+ entries required to get the GA's CV to count toward their sent total.
I have never seen a group with a rule against this practice, nor does SG have any guidelines against it, and did not find any prior forum topics about this. So I wanted to get other peoples' opinion on the practice.
This post is intended as a discussion starter & a mere observation. It is NOT a complaint to SG or group admins, as any concerns should be addressed directly with them.
My opinion is: At best I think the practice is a misleading use of the selectable reasons for deleting a GA, and at worst it is a manipulation of groups or the site into maximizing sent CV at the detriment to people who may enter.
EDIT: Is the existing penalty of subtracting one from the number of giveaway slots a sufficient penalty?
EDIT 2: If neither of the main poll options fit your view, feel free to vote "I don't care"
Comment has been collapsed.