does this sound like a good idea?
Would make people think twice about doing it all willy-nilly. Also could make it so that if you unblacklist someone there is a period of about 24 hours or something where you still can't enter their giveaways. Boom, the circumvention has been circumvented
Comment has been collapsed.
"you blacklisted this person"
ok
*unblacklists*
enters
ga ends
*blacklisted again*
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I know. Total dick move, and I'm hoping most of us wouldn't do that. then again, despite my highest hopes, I'm never surprised by how awful humanity is either
Guess I'm just an incorrigible optimist
Comment has been collapsed.
expect nothing but that from leeches.
most of us would ignore giveaways from people we blacklisted.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, most of us who use scripts to display that a user is blacklisted would indeed ignore their giveaways, but I'm pretty sure we're a very tiny minority.
Comment has been collapsed.
This, I didn't mean to enter someone's giveaway but I don't check everyone I enter. I also don't really enter much just for certain games. If I notice that I have blacklisted that person, I immediately leave the giveaway. Maybe instead of a script there's a little sign that shows that you've blacklisted the person or it's greyed out.
Comment has been collapsed.
I use the SG Games Tags script Yirg so I never enter giveaways made by the very bad and very ugly things that are on my BL. But I'm sure, as you self say, that those that use this or similar scripts are in the minority. :X
Comment has been collapsed.
People blacklisting are dicks too so... (let the blacklists begin!)
Comment has been collapsed.
Why? How does not wanting to give a game I paid for to someone who called me names, or is a repeated rule breaker, make me a dick?
Comment has been collapsed.
So, as long as there's a reason then it's perfectly okay to blacklist someone.
Comment has been collapsed.
If there are actual reasons yes, but that's not the thing always
Comment has been collapsed.
I can tell when a black list is for no reason , like blacklistings for thanking someone for their giveaway, or for expressing your believes and tastes on things. Of course it's someones choise and has the right to do it , I just find it fake to giveaway games and still be such a hateful person .
Comment has been collapsed.
When you are a hateful person for no reason then you got a problem, thats my point
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok since same shit said the other guy and then went and deleted his comments, I won't reply again got bored . Do whatever you want , blacklist whoever you want I don't care
Comment has been collapsed.
And this is not for a specific person, so don't take it personally I just don't see the reason on why someone would do so.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe they could add a cooldown for it? Like you unblacklist someone and can only enter their giveaways (and blacklist them again?) after 1-2 weeks.
Comment has been collapsed.
If cg wanted, he could put a cooldown of e.g. 1 month since your last entry in a giveaway hosted by the one you want to blacklist (if it already finished), or reminding you that blacklist will purge all your other entries (if there is no such finished giveaway).
Comment has been collapsed.
That honestly doesn't sound great. Maybe a couple of weeks after removing someone from your blacklist would be good, but often when you blacklist someone, you don't know you will beforehand and may have entered a GA from that person. Just put a cooldown after unblacklisting and it should (mostly) be fixed I think.
Comment has been collapsed.
What archi is pointing at I think is that if you BL someone, it would be morrally wrong to remain in his GA.
If you want that you cant enter their Ga anymore because you BL them, already entered still running Ga from the same person should be removed from your entries...
Comment has been collapsed.
This would kill some of the creative uses of the blacklist I've seen, like blacklist events. (Someone creates a number of consecutive giveaways and you're only allowed to enter one of them, not knowing what the remaining ones will be. As soon as you join one, you get blacklisted until the end of the event.)
I certainly wouldn't want someone who provides a fun event to be kicked out of my giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are right about that, didnt know about that.
However with the same logic it would be that he/she cant enter any new Ga's as well.
The only workaround I see that is viable, would be if this is implemented, that there is created some sort of switch as well that support or the person that is getting blacklisted. Can tick off
With support it should be like this: in advance the event creator sends support a ticket, explaining about the event and a request to be exempt from the counter BL in the duration of the event, and the ban time that blacklisting someone will give you as discussed in this topic to prevent abuse of the suggestion (bl someone, cant enter Ga? unBL, enter, BL).
Support will check 1 time a week a list if the exeptions are still needed. Or support can enter a duration time for the exemption.
This however would need a faster support, CG is working on that so it could be a possibillity for the future.
Another one is that everyone gets a unique code. To be found under the blacklist part of your acc settings, seems to be the logical place.
The Event creator gives his code, during the event, the use of this code is that the persons that get BL because of the event can exempt the event creator from the counterBl that the bl creates, also whenever the BL is lifted so will be the exempt.
I am sure there are other possibilitys or improvements on what I say. Just something that came to mind :)
Comment has been collapsed.
The more "special cases" you need to take into account, the more work it creates for cg to build a reliable infrastructure to support it all.
There's just so many things that would be way more useful than this that I personally prefer cg to spend the little time he has for improving Steamgifts with features that will benefit more people. But hey, every suggestion is welcome and it's up to him to pick and choose what he does with the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree, the people involved with these events are rather small considering the active user base.
And I am sure, that some even dont care not being able to enter a small amount of Ga for the duration of the event.
It is more important to spend the available resources to the majority of the site then the people that want to do something special as you say..
Comment has been collapsed.
True, although I was talking more about the whole blacklist reciprocity thing. I would rather time be spent on other area of the site than on petty blacklist revenge.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not that you insinuate it towards me (blacklist revenge), but I am one of the people that would like this with the ethical reason behind it. There are only 4 people that have put me on bl and if I have to take a wager they dont give much if at all. However I have a couple entries in my own bl, and would rather not enter their GA, although chances are low of that what I can recall of their profile at the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't mean to offend anyone with that remark. I use the term "revenge" loosely here, mostly because I personally don't care about this. If anyone has me blacklisted, they are welcome to join my giveaways. And I have a script that adds an icon to blacklisted (and whitelisted) people on the site so I probably wouldn't enter a giveaway from someone I have blacklisted anyway. (Although, I think I never saw one)
Comment has been collapsed.
I dont think it was offencive, only wanted to make sure, when I explained, that my reasoning for implementation would be ethical and not the revenge reason
Because with text only it can sometimes be hard to get the real meaning of the message because you dont have an intonation or facial expression/ bodylanguage to base the intent from :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Someone might even write a script for "blacklist entry"
This is a great anime btw ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Giveaways from people who have blacklisted you don't show up on the giveaway list, though, so most of the time people wouldn't even know they exist to circumvent it for them.
Comment has been collapsed.
But if the blacklister doesn't even see the gibeaway blacklistee made, it might reduce this significantly.
Comment has been collapsed.
what if there is 1 month cooldown before you can join the other people giveaway that you unblacklist? :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Potato - Cause I just don't care or worry bout such things. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I have another solution. Stop caring so much about blacklists. There are so many people on SG, a couple of blacklists here and there make virtually no difference.
People know who the good guys are. That's way more important than any number.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excellent idea. I think that most people who enter GAs of people they blacklisted do it by mistake. This would help them prevent it.
Comment has been collapsed.
this, I dont feel like for every small thing a script :)
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be a start. It's not cool that people can blacklist you for whatever and then continue leeching off of you.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, pretty nice idea. Sounds fair and won't affect anyone using the BL reasonably.
Comment has been collapsed.
Or even better automatically hide the GAs from people you have blacklisted and if you try to access them with a direct link get the "cannot see this giveaway blah blah" message. Still doesn't fix the temporary unblacklisting loophole but it's something.
Although my personal preference in dealing with that would be let them enter and if they do enter a GA from someone they have blacklisted pop this up automatically!
Comment has been collapsed.
I like the idea. Especially when i am using my phone to enter some gibs, it would be a nice addition.
Comment has been collapsed.
this seems like something sgtools would do (if it can):
- Your account must have activated all the won gifts
- Your account is not allowed to have won the same game multiple times.
- Your account must not have the gifter blacklisted.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think there's a way for SGTool to check for blacklists... technically speaking
Comment has been collapsed.
If it's optional like you said, I'd agree. But it's also abusable.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see how. I mean, it only affects people who blacklisted you, but it doesn't tell you who they are.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's more potato answers then there are no's. Id count that as a yes ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Comment has been collapsed.
A solution would imply that there is a problem to solve. Irrationally getting pissed at someone because they happened to blacklist you but can still enter your giveaways is not a problem. If you dislike them so much for it then blacklist them back and they won't be able to enter your giveaways. No-one ever said that "reciprocal" (had to look this word up...) blacklists are bad. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't know you've been bl'ed by someone unless you check.
Edit: And what's wrong with making sure people can't enter your GA if they don't like you?
Comment has been collapsed.
What does it matter that they like you or not? The general idea behind this site seems to be to give gifts to those who actually want them.
Comment has been collapsed.
You haven't even given anything yet oO
But anyway, a GA creator can occlude people who they deem not worthy of a gift from them. What's wrong with that? A reciprocal BL is just fair play. The way to implement that of course is reason for debate, we don't need any more drama here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why would it matter if I've given anything yet? The only requirements I've seen for starting a giveaway is the level a ga creator sets the giveaway at. Ga creators setting a requirement of "who they deem worthy" outside of the level requirement would pretty much ruin this site. And would open giveaway's up to various sorts of advertising/publicity stunts.
The drama you, and others that feel the same way, are imagining is all in your mind. Some of you have decided to take it as a personal slight because someone that bl'd you won one of your giveaway's. I personally don't have a problem with a reciprocal blacklist method, but at it's extreme I can see how that would be a problem. Same can be said with this suggestion. All op is suggesting is a pop up to encourage people to unblacklist the ga creator. Which in an extreme situation could result in the same outcome as an extreme reciprocal blacklist scenario. Either way it's a wasted effort, if someone wants to bl someone as well as have a chance at a game they're offering, they'll just unblacklist long enough to enter. Or at least until the duration of the giveaway.
Op's suggestion should be tweaked to auto-hide giveaway's of users a person blacklists by DEFAULT. Any prior entries in the giveaway should be removed and the points returned to the user. With the ga creator having the option to set whether someone who blacklists them can see it or not. Otherwise the original system of not knowing who bl'd you would remain the same. No need for a notification because there's no "situation" to remedy. People have their reasons for blacklisting, being "encouraged" to unblacklist someone isn't going to change that.
Or drastically lower the chance to win for users who enter the giveaway's of people they blacklist. Therefore attempting to cut down on blacklisters who win giveaways of blacklisted users, but still giving them the chance to enter because they meet the requirements of the giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
It matters because you might you change your view when someone joins or even wins a GA of yours while at the same time having blacklisted you.
Also, BL drama is a thing, especially in discussions for invite only GAs even if you may not see it so. Why do you think some big event threads specifically ask for no BL drama in their thread?
Comment has been collapsed.
I assure you, I wouldn't change my mind. And it's highly more likely that I would drop any game in an orphan thread instead.
I don't spend my time rummaging through the forums. All I see is ga creators who can't handle blacklisters winning their giveaway. :/ And it honestly sounds petty and ridiculous.
Comment has been collapsed.
actually, a thread pops up every few months demanding reciprocal blacklists, and they're generally decreed a bad idea because it'd result in a shitshow
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly, looking too deeply into the whole blacklist thing generally tends to result in a shitshow. That's why I strongly believe that the reasonable thing to do is not care about getting blacklisted. They're intended as just another tool to give giveaway creators more options, but people seem to take them too personally. Instead of "Oh, look, I've been blacklisted. Whatever." their reaction often seems to be "How dare they! I must have my reveeeenge!" (ok, that was maybe too exaggerated XD ).
Anyway, since I'm getting sidetracked here- if your suggestion is to be implemented then people would be complaining about why it's like that in they same way some random person occasionally decides to complain why it's not like that right now. Ultimately nothing would change except that the time which could be spend to improve something that matters would be lost to blacklists.
Comment has been collapsed.
Personally I think you should just be able to know who blacklisted/whitelisted you.. I don't see the point of it being a secret operation to add someone without them knowing. And if you would know who added you to their BL/WL it would be easy to return the favor. I had this exact case last week where I discovered someone who blacklisted me and can't recall ever crossing path with, but I did realize that same person entered my train in the week just before, so have me blacklisted and enters my giveaways.. kinda stupid. I simply asked if they minded telling me the reason for the BL but never got an answer, so I did the only normal thing to do and did the same for him/her.
To me that's the simplest solution, remove the secrecy surrounding those lists.. who's that gonna hurt.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sounds about right, i've found loads of people who have blacklisted me joining my giveaways which is down right dirty if you ask me.
Comment has been collapsed.
there's a script to check blacklists and whitelists. search the addons thread and you will find it https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/Zevqn/
and yes, since scripts to find lists are fine, i see no point in hiding them any more.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 there are scripts now anyway, so they can implement it now
Comment has been collapsed.
I use the SG Game Tags script so I see directly who is on my BL and so that I never enter their giveaways. But there are people that are just that greedy, that perverted or really don't care that they enter your giveaways even when they know that they have blacklisted you.
This is not a myth, people that have blacklisted you and entered and win your giveaways. I have had some of these cowards in my SGTools trains winning games. I hope they choke on them...
So taking into account the above I voted yes to your suggestion Dingbat! :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Blacklist should go both ways . That would remove all the silent hating behind the shadows. Good portion of 'blacklisters' are people who dont even contribute anything to this community so i would just love to see how hard leeching would become for them. For the others who just likes drama and vendettas would have to deal with consequences of blacklisting someone and not being able to enter their GA's. Blacklists in that case would actually mean something for once.
Comment has been collapsed.
yes agree with that, it should be like this and we had less drama here
Comment has been collapsed.
I use Sighery's anti-shitposting script to hide their giveaways.
Don't wanna listen to them whine like little bitches. :X
Comment has been collapsed.
The solution is Mutual Blacklist.
One blacklist action would trigger both blacklists at both ends. Simple, quick and above all, fair.
Cancellation of mutual blacklist could be triggered by two support tickets, simultaneously opened from both ends. The tickets should have 7 days expiration date. Then, the system could automatically cancel both blacklists and the respective support tickets. Please note the word "automatically" before starting raging about support loads etc
Comment has been collapsed.
no. i don't want to blacklist people.. regardless if they have me blacklisted or not. idc if they change it so they can't enter mine cause of their own doing. but i want my blacklist menu to remain at 0.. not be forced to have it be used for me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah you didn't get the whole picture, i mean, there's no need for a "blacklist" counter or a "black list" in general. Blacklist could be named "block" thus providing an option for anyone to filter himself out of interactions with specific users.
In that case, If i block you or you block me, nothing happened at the far end and no counter increases, but we have limited interaction. If you want to unblock me later, you ask for my permission via a system message or a special-made support ticket, that can be either accepted/declined by the receiver or just expire after 7d. Well you get the idea, it can be tweaked to work as expected..
Hope i cleared it up somehow ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
sounds like it would create even more drama then blacklists already do to me.
"why doesn't xyz even see my messages or ever reply to me?"
"how come i can see this user is creating giveaways in a small group, but i cannot see their giveaways?"
5x new threads a day:
"how do i unblock a user?"
"why doesn't my unblock work, what am i doing wrong?"
"why is it i have to contact somebody that i blocked on accident just to have them unblocked?"
trading one set of problems out for a whole different set of the same problems.
Comment has been collapsed.
More drama!... That was my first thought while writing the initial comment. But will it be more drama? Let's see:
"why doesn't xyz even see my messages or ever reply to me?"
I don't get that question. The block doesn't have to be global , it can only happen in giveaways, or expanded in discussion threads, that's CG's decision.
"how come i can see this user is creating giveaways in a small group, but i cannot see their giveaways?"
Because he doesn't want you to, same as blacklists. Groups owners have the option to tolerate with blocks amongst users, it happens right now. Same questions same answers.
5x new threads a day:
"how do i unblock a user?"
"why doesn't my unblock work, what am i doing wrong?"
"why is it i have to contact somebody that i blocked on accident just to have them unblocked?"
Answers: a simple link to FAQ , like it happens now for dozens for other purposes like "how i can level-up", "why i can't trade games everywhere" etc. All in all, It's not a trade of problems, It's the same problem (blacklisting) which brings drama every now and then because of its nature: "I blacklist you because of this and that and that", but this is not mutual and the far end feels attacked. One way Blacklisting is attacking action while mutual Block is defending action. This detail makes a lot of difference, imho. ;)
What brings more drama is that a silly notion is being forced that everyone can be friends with everyone. That's not true at all, apart from the obvious (age differences and social statuses), many people come here with entirely different purposes and way of thinking than others. It's like trying to match wolves with sheep, the result will be blood and drama :p
.
Comment has been collapsed.
on the first example i meant it to be more of a discussion question too.. people asking why they aren't getting a reply from their support ticket on trying to get unblocked by people. because 90% of the blockers will just flat ignore their requests for an unblock. (same as most blacklisters ignore the question "why do you have me blacklisted")
at least a blacklist tells you that you are blacklisted, just not seeing anything at all instead (how a block would work) will not give you the info to know you are even blocked.. so people will just wonder what is even going on, not understanding how the system functions.
i know there is the equivalent amount of blacklist related threads, that was just more to point out how it doesn't solve anything at all.. it just trades in one set of problems for another.
block is an attack action too, regardless how you spin it, it does the exact same thing.. if we added in this suggestions "not be able to enter those you blacklist" you could just rename the word "blacklist" to "blocklist" and its still the same ol' thing. all you're adding is the really annoying addition of "will you unblock me" messages coming in every couple weeks thru tickets being filed.
Comment has been collapsed.
As i said earlier, it's just a draft thought and thoughts can be tweaked to work as expected. Technically speaking, blocks are doable and viable, while i get your fears about possible misunderstandings and more drama which are totally manageable too.
The notion and main difference of blocks from blacklists is the idea that blocks would be more serious and strict, one should decide well before blocking someone and blocks cannot be easily undone. Consider block as an automated user request to support staff , something like "please block ME from this user". It could be more formal or it can be presented as being a more formal request.
I strongly disagree that a block is offensive, It is definitely not an offensive action 'cause the applicant himself has the exact same treatment as the one he requests. Whereas blacklists like there are now, have become a bullying game where the enforcing part has nothing to lose and the blacklisted part can be easily tricked into giving, thus the existence of this very discussion thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
the idea is certainly not as bad as i was imagining at first.. i was imagining the word blacklist changing to blocklist and without me adding anyone too it people start adding themselves to it, which i don't want to manage or care about at all. a blocklist would force me into actually caring about those people and wonder what i did to get there, versus the current system that just doesn't bother me that much.
no matter what system is used, it will have the a large amount of threads and complaints about it either way really. i just assume not have either at all, and then people can rely on groups or whitelists instead if they care about certain people not gaining access to enter. you can have one without the other imo (whitelists can exist without blacklists or blocklists)
Comment has been collapsed.
Would very much agree. To prevent abuse from those douches who would just un-blacklist you enter your giveaway and then re-blacklist you,
I would have a 7 day wait period during which time them un-blacklisting you would result on the reciprocal blacklist to automatically be removed with the actual account owner having the option to do it manually before that moment and another 7 day cool down before you were allowed to blacklist them again to force a level of fairness and they can't just un-blacklist you for a single giveaway as they would be forced to miss it anyways most likely unless it was over a week waiting period.
Would so support this as it is pretty much just fair play. If I you blacklist them you shouldn't be trying to enter their stuff anyways.
Comment has been collapsed.
The solution for the unblacklist/reblacklist is actually reasonably simple.
Any GA's made before you removed your blacklist on someone, remain unaccessable. You can only access NEW GA's created after that date. This no added workload with tickets and such, and no way to just get around it for a juicy GA.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's indeed a decent solution. It might be good to also make it so that any entries you already have get automatically removed though.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would never blacklist anyone. I don't discriminate.
Comment has been collapsed.
Been there, said that... ^^
Although blacklists are mainly used for discrimination purposes, many of us still use the tool for its initial purpose and that is to avoid interactions with people who continuously don't give a s... about others, constantly breaking rules, always take advantage of the system or the kindness of others.
I honestly hope you never come across any of them, or else, you'd have a hard time breaking your own rule. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I know many of those people. They aren't blacklisted :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Why not? And how is this discrimination ("the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex")?
Comment has been collapsed.
ok, so, reciprocal blacklists are a bad idea, but at the same time, a lot of people find it wrong that someone can blacklist you and still enter your GAs.
So how about we (have an option to choose) don't allow people to enter GAs for someone they've blacklisted? Just like now, you don't know who blacklisted you, but you don't have to suffer the indignity of having someone blacklist you and still win your GAs. The person who did the blacklisting, when trying to enter such a GA is reminded that they've blacklisted said person, and can choose to remedy the situation, by unblacklisting them.
This will hopefully cut down on the number of blacklists, and placate people who want the reciprocal blacklist, without really changing how this website operates, nor will it make the community any worse.
What do y'all think of this?
yes, I know that it's possible to circumvent, but I'm hoping very few people would go to such trouble
Comment has been collapsed.