Yes or no to nomination events?
I don't like it and thats why I tend to not participate in those
Comment has been collapsed.
In gym class what was even worse with being picked last was being told that my team would be the "skins" and not the "shirts"...
I was EXTREMELY skinny so it was double humiliation! Not picked, and sickening skinny... to play without a shirt--- Aughhh!
Comment has been collapsed.
Not like we usually played with shirts or no shirts, but being skinny was a major reason they always picked on me, till about 16-18 years i was still about 50kg (at 193cm) until i started lifting weights and gained like 25 kg in a year.
I still wouldn't mind some thicker arms and such, but that's life, and the build you were given. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Somewhat know the feeling.
Comment has been collapsed.
That sounds really unhealthy O.o Didn't you have problems with your back? I have the same height but had at least 63 kg. Then the army thought it would be a fun idea to call me in (ignoring my obvious underweight). Although I have to say it was a really good decision for me since I gained 10 kg in the first three months stabilizing my whole body. And then another 5 kg in the next 6 months mainly due to lazing around .....
Comment has been collapsed.
I realized that error yesterday i meant to say i am now 193cm, so at that age i was most likely still a bit shorter (maybe 170-180cm?, though still tall), i should now be at 75kg, but i haven't checked my weight in months.
My mother is also skinny (but short) while my dad is tall and a bit overweight, i inherited a bit of both. :p
Don't remember really having health issues back then, now i sometimes feel a strain in my back but i also sit alot, but i guess that happens with alot of people that sit often, regardless of their height.
Yeah exactly whoever might be reading this, is young and thinks he/she is skinny, go exercise, lift weights because it can definitely gain you a few kg's, just don't ever expect to become Arnold Schwarzenegger (without steroids and such) because there is a limit because your body isn't build like that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Since most of the time it's just same people being nominated over and over again I don't even see the point in people making those kind of threads anymore (and there have been like what, 3-4 of those this week?).
I have to admit those threads make me feel completely insignificant and like nobody cares about me on SG. So I don't like seeing those threads, but people can do whatever events they want to. I sometimes even come and nominate people I like.
Comment has been collapsed.
This complaint is like complaining about blacklists. Whether or not you agree with a person doing a certain thing a certain way, in the end it's really none of your business (no offense intended). If a person wants to do a nomination thread kind of thing, I don't care because that's really up to them, especially when their giveaways are involved - really, it's no worse than the whitelist, an official SG feature that people use all the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
I honestly expected more hate at my comment for being generally unpopular by the look of the other comments which were posted before mine.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is exactly the point, being popular has nothing to do with things, its about whats right. :3
Comment has been collapsed.
-1
it is much worse than whitelist/blacklist because everything happens on a public display
whitelist-blacklists are private you can do whatever you want with them without hurting/benefiting others
Same applies to public voting for group joins in my opinion where people post +1 under applications...
Comment has been collapsed.
whitelist-blacklists are private
Might want to tell that to the dozens of "whitelist recruitment" threads. :P
Kidding aside, I see your point of view.
Comment has been collapsed.
it's not anyone's business, just like my giveaway that got leaked.
but hypocrisy is strong on sg.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are there that many of them? I noticed one the other day, but I don't care for those kind of things either and just ignored it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems it started to be a trend here today. I have already seen 3 new threads like this today. :D I don't have a problem with them but it is kinda funny.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, that it is why they call them trends (I do not know who 'they' are lmao).
They come and go here :D like daily GA thread, ratio repair thread, jigdi threads (all of them are still here, but there are times of a peak) etc :)
Comment has been collapsed.
It's kinda the opposite, I didn't want to be picked at all on highschool.
no one picks me anyway, so yeah, a little salty >:c
Comment has been collapsed.
A few things.
-
It's each individuals game to give away however they see fit, why do people suddenly feel entitled to entries to their giveaways? It's more inclusive than whitelist, whilst being something slightly different.
-
Instead of people being negative about it, try changing the perspective of things and nominating the "lesser-known" people? So much negativity and hate surrounding this.
-
Why do people get up in arms about it at all? There are 3 events like this on going at the minute, all 3 are substantially different. We have Delta holding a birthday party, Revil holding an awards night which I suggested AND he suggested some time ago AND it got favoured responses, its been planned for months. Finally mine which is like an ongoing gameshow event which I'm hoping people will enjoy watching and taking part in. No one complains when puzzles are around, those are inclusive to the "puzzling" set of friends.
-
MAYBE the people who get constantly voted up, deserve to be voted up? I mean in school, the "cool" kids tended to get popularity for little to no reason. However some of the familiar names for these threads have contributed in a big way, be it with userscripts used by thousands, consistently top giveaways, being a friendly face or whatever.
-
Finally can we stop the constant negativity surrounding EVERYTHING everyone does. It feels like any time someone does something unique they get bashed for it.
As I've said above, due to the nature of the internet and having opposing viewpoints, its VERY difficult to have these kinds of debates without seeming angry or argumentative. I'd rather open debate than start a slanging match.
Comment has been collapsed.
Look at it from the outside. A new person enters the forum ans what they see? That if you manage to win a typical high.school like popularity contest, you can get more games this way. This won't really help to abolish the accusation of the active community being elitist and inbred. And having three of those floating on the top of the discussion pages may just make it worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd agree if it was new users but the people that are complaining should know better. I tried to do some additional analysis as well regarding the issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why instead just +1ing everyone here that agrees with you, focus on some of the negative sides that been said?
- Everyone is entitled to do and make what they want, correct, where did anyone said they felt entitled to want entries?
Nowhere, the majority has a thing against such nomination events because the way a selected group is usually selected.
Not because they want (or expect) to be picked, but because we know beforehand it's the same group yet again. - Because we don't know each and everyone, like someone here also posted a story about a guy making $80-90 a month and still tries to gift games, i surely didn't know about him before, but there are so many similar stories probably, i wouldn't know which one to pick, you could? Regardless some people might actually try to do that, but it's really only a handful.
- Different events but SAME nominations, that is what the whole discussion is about, some even joke about "oh i will just copy and paste my nominations from the other thread".
There is nothing wrong with the events itself, i probably will even follow your deal or no deal event, even if i don't like the style how people have been selected. - Someone that made a script 4 years ago and still get nominated for it, someone knowing someone in real life, someone who did just 1 helpful thing to someone (heck there are hundreds of people here doing just the same and don't get elected either) many many such trivial reasons people get nominated for it's silly and if you think people deserve that?.
It should be divided in 2 groups, noone would probably argue about people like budgie, archie or sadisticchicken (even though yeah it's also still the same group) but there is also the group i mentioned starting this point, the ones getting nominated for whatever reason. - There is no negativity, there is an open discussion about it, in which i am respectful to both sides (it's not a bash) and as Tzaar says ahead in this topic, the poll does speak volumes.
I am not angry about not being nominated wherever (people like me just skip and ignore it), just like you shouldn't be angry if there are people that don't like these kind of things so much.
Going back to point 1, everyone is and should be entitled to do and make what they want (and kudos to you and Delta and Revil), it's just the way these nominations are handled that's something people are questioning.
As Sadisticchicken said, like if Delta put them all into 1 bag, then yeah there would be atleast a bit more fairness to it..
Comment has been collapsed.
I did some investigation into the claims of the same people being nominated and its just not true. As I've said before, the people who are getting repeat nominations are the people who deserve to get repeat nominations. So point 1 and the whole point surrounding this entire debate, is just wrong, its a baseless claim. Even now after being presented with the math, people are STILL saying the same names and no new names get nominated, but its just not true, less than 30% of people are the "same names"
Just on point 4, yes, they do all deserve to be nominated. If people don't like it, vote for someone else instead of replying saying "this is a circle jerk" or something along those lines, then getting annoyed when people disagree with them. not aimed at you
The problem is people aren't trying to change anything, people are just being negative about it, posting "oh its going to be the same people" or "this is a popularity contest" helps no one, it just promotes negativity or anger. Instead wouldn't it be better to post a different name with a measured response as to why they picked a different name?
As I've said before, I feel the need to put this disclaimer, I'm not angry at you, I don't mean to "attack" you. I actually appreciate the debate and discussion in an adult manner. There's just very little way this can be discussed via the internet without people sometimes misreading things that are wrote due to conversational tone/intonation etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Regardless of the math, In yours or Delta's, maybe part is also the actual nominations get snowed under by all the +1s people are giving on those that are the known/popular people here.
If those +1's are taken into account, with you, Delta or anyone, it's never clear, if it is from the start i think you will find alot less negativity.
Someone who hosts such a thing could also step up and just say you know what, i will exclude everyone from that same name list, regardless if there are many or not, do you think those people that it is based on (apparently there is already a private group for them anyway), would really mind?
To be honest i don't know how many events there have been in the past (searching nominate etc didn't produce much results) maybe i am searching wrong or there weren't even that many.
Is it just a coincidence that there are 3 such events this week? Is it going to be a new trend? Who knows. Could have been the last for a year and it might not even matter.
While i see you point, "vote someone else or don't complain" (not your direct words but how i put it), I don't feel like nominating period. Because there are hundreds of nice people here, and don't want to restrict it to a few, choosing someone just because that person stayed longer in my mind because i remember him/her doing something like 2 weeks ago unlike that person from months ago.
I can imagine alot of people feel a similar opinon against it.
No hard feelings taken, i got a thick skin.
Comment has been collapsed.
The +1's do nothing in all my events, once you've been voted, you've been voted. I didn't say where I was going once I had a list of candidates, to be honest, I didn't know myself.
This is the first nomination event I've posted, but it isn't the first nomination thread period, they've been around for years and years.
As for excluding every repeat name on a list, as I've discussed with yirg(can't remember where), that requires a lot of extra effort. It'd need coordinating with every other event currently running. Events are stressful to run as it is, the extra effort and coordination is not something I'd be willing to undertake.
Also, I can't remember where I've said this, but I don't want to "punish" those nominated, at the end of the day, they really DO deserve to be nominated. Excluding them from my event because they may have been in Delta's event is not something that I want to do.
At the end of the day, I'm just some guy who wanted to entertain people with an event I thought might be a bit of a laugh and a few people could get involved in.
The animosity directed towards me can be seen in the replies here, the thread I made to give an opposing more statistical approach to this one and practically everything I've done since this entire may I say quite needless trouble.
I find it not even remotely ironic that some of the people leading the charge are people who were caught bad mouthing me not so long ago for little to no reason. Hey-ho, thus is life, I can continue trying to discuss it with people and trying to get them to see my side of things, or I can try and ignore it and them. Unfortunately I don't like "giving up" on people or completely hating people, I'd rather discuss my differences like an adult rather than start some silly smeer campaign against them in everything they do.
I think its best any further discussion got removed to a private chat on steam as others are clearly itching to get involved. I am more than happy and open to discuss it though, just I would really rather not drag the forums down any more than they already are!
Comment has been collapsed.
Nominations aside,
Would you bet that it won't be the same people winning in most of these?
Comment has been collapsed.
I would bet it will not be the same people who "win" nomination events, as people are constantly doing nice things and new people will emerge as people who deserve the votes.
Llama, Student, Keo....all been amazing contributors and left/taken a break. All these people have been nominated for things in my time in the forums. All got voted even after "leaving". However, some amazing names who were nominated, are now not nominated because they aren't around any more. New names are getting nominated instead.
I don't understand what negativity surrounding something that is meant to be a chance to promote nice people is going to do? If people really don't like it, vote with your silence and I won't do it again. If an event fails, its obviously not something that the community would like to take part in.
Comment has been collapsed.
My point is that the numbers that are important for disproving things are those.
Not how many unknown people got nominated.
Like I said elsewhere, your event seems very interesting/fun for the people that get to participate (good luck with it).
Comment has been collapsed.
I for one have seen no negativity in this thread -- none at all -- despite what another has said. It's just people stating their opinions. Of course, that's just my simple perception of things, but perception is everything in life.
Realistically, it's not even how many (supposedly 30%) repeat nominations there are that matters. Someone could spew numbers as "proof" of a point all day long, and that means absolutely nothing at all. What is important is how the community perceives those repeat nominations, events, and threads, and the poll is a clear indication of that perception, regardless of any "statistics" provided elsewhere.
What I do find odd is that the people saying "mind your own business" or "don't worry about it" are the same ones replying to everyone or making their own counter-threads to debate it further. A bit ironic, to say the least. -_-
Comment has been collapsed.
Claims maths isn't proof of anything. Uses a poll to prove his point. Logic.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said your numbers don't prove anything. Please don't put words into my mouth. I said they don't mean anything.
I did, however, say that the community's perception is far more important than numbers and that the poll is an indicator of that factor.
Comment has been collapsed.
Someone could spew numbers as "proof" of a point all day long, and that means absolutely nothing at all.
Literal quote. Not engaging in whatever argument you are trying to bait out of me here. Thanks for your response.
Comment has been collapsed.
It means exactly what I said - community perception of something is more important than numbers provided to oppose that perception. Of course, it's been removed from context for your quote.
It wasn't bait, it wasn't arguing -- it's an opinion supported by the poll above. Nothing more. Oh, and you replied to me, so thank you. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
You are using a subjective poll to argue against objective data. Look no matter how much you don't like me, you can't argue with the numbers.
Argument: Nomination events are popularity contests where the same "popular" users get voted for.
Investigation: 70% of the nominated people are unique users.
Conclusion: 70% of users are unique or the "popular" crowd has around 300 members to it.
Last thing I'm going to say on the matter, if you want to discuss it I won't be doing. Feel free to have the last say though.
Comment has been collapsed.
A wise man once told me "it's not the words you say that make what you say right or wrong -- it's how the other person perceives what you've said that makes it right or wrong."
Perception is everything, despite numbers to the contrary. But yes, I'll leave it at that. and no need to make it personal
EDIT: In the spirit of positivity, instead of collecting data to "prove" opinions wrong, perhaps time would be better spent changing those opinions in a more constructive fashion.
Comment has been collapsed.
You should get back to the numbers after a pool of the same 10 people win all of those.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Comment has been collapsed.
If you want to tell me the 10 people who "always" get voted for these things before they get voted, THEN those 10 people get voted. I'll 100% agree with you and never do an event again.
Comment has been collapsed.
At the time of writing yes, you would be correct in your assertion, within I'd say an accuracy of 10 + or - as I'm not mathematician or scientist, I quite possibly miscounted once or twice. As I said in my findings, it is not to be called 100% accurate and I'd be happy for someone else to investigate.
Since then there have been further nominations, a more thorough investigation would need to be taken once the events are over for more quantifiable data.
However, out of 250-300(can't remember specific numbers now 270+?) 46 were voted on three threads. My thread had not even been up for 24 hours so it had hardly had time to gather many votes. Revils hid votes. Delta's had been up for quite a while. I'd say across 3 threads 46 out of 250-300 people is enough to disprove that the "popular" people are the ones who dominate such events.
Comment has been collapsed.
Absolutely no worries, I hate it too, which is why I try and talk to people and sort these differences out rather than let them fester. I don't know, maybe I'm a fool, I'd rather get the hate of some if it helps sort out whatever issues there are.
My thread definitely has around 50% repeat nominees, but even then I'd argue that's not really enough to say that the same people get voted every time. I'd argue that around 50% of people have done things that are incredibly worthy of being nominated.
I see it as glass half full, rather than half empty. Instead of seeing as a popularity contest, lets see it as highlighting the good deeds people have done and be thankful for it. Then ultimately, lets all try and have some fun!
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I can't say something to every point (also I am not motivated enough for that) but I would like to say a bit to some points:
-
and 3, I don't think this is true. Wallister has made some counting and others as well but the dataset and method could be flawed. But if this is in any way remotely true then I have an offer. Everyone who says he knows who will be picked is free to send me a list with those individuals before the voting and picking ends. After the event host has chosen we can compare the two lists and check if the claim that they knew it beforehand is true.
-
I do not understand the logic behind this. If you say there are people who get nominated for doing just 1 helpful thing to someone then why are so many people NOT nominated? Does it mean they couldn't even do 1 helfpul thing to someone? Probably not. But isn't the "problem of the same people appearing over and over again" not caused by the people who do not suggest anyone? I'm always a bit baffled by people complaining (I do not mean anyone specifically) about something but doing nothing to change the result although they could.
-
A forum is written communication so it is hard to tell if something is meant in a positive, neutral or negative way but there is a lot of subtle information which can be interpreted negatively. For example using small words like "always" (always the same people nominated) does hint towards a negative emotion. Also your example with gym class is one which us usually overshadowed with negative emotion.
Bonus points:
- Granted that a lot of those school time scenarios have been influenced by stupid points (like being cool or goodlooking) there was also another reason why we weren't chosen during gym class. We did choose not to have interest in sport, not to do any sports, not to interact with certain groups. There is often a part we can influence but we did choose not to do so. Instead of just blaming the result we should have used our time better or just ignore it.
- Please do not use poll results to prove a point. Nearly every poll is useless. This one is useless by the fact alone that there is a meaningless voting option and that it tries to trigger emotions instead of staying neutral (again the example with the gym class).
- The example with gym class doesn't work well because the people there was a lot smaller. Most times at least half the people present would be chosen. So not be chosen was something negative. Here we have about 100 active forum users (actually a lot more) and people can chose three for nominations and up to a list of 15 or whatever numner. My point is that statistically it is highly unlikely to be chosen. So it is not punishment for those chosen but either a pleasent surprise for the other ones.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks! Some people are ignoring any sort of counter-argument or even logic behind things. I mean, apparently counting the actual votes and users involved doesn't prove anything in comparison to their beliefs.
I'm starting to think this is not something that can be rationalised or people are even willing to discuss.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's take a closer look at that same name list we all keep talking about (but noone actually seen), i quickly glanced at the names that stood out alot (just a quick glance so not a full "list"); Steffke, JustArchi, Budgie, Yirg, Khalaq, Deltablade, Sadisticchicken, Revilheart, LostSoulVL, Tsukichild, Zelghadis, Konrad!?, dLo (who even posts here saying he doesn't feel comfortable with it), MilleW, Mulli, Wallister, SillyScream.
That's already 17 names, and if we would pick through further, i have no doubt that list would be twice as long, be nice if someone would actually compare all 3 events and make an exact list, that would prove a point (whichever side it will be).
Okay fair enough, Wallister already seemed to have calculated it; "Currently out of the 269 nominations including multiple nominations on the same thread for the same person 46 users have been nominated on both threads."
However if we go all number like, how about taking it even further and include past nomination events even?
Noone says a poll defines proving a point, it's that plus the comments that been made here that proves a general view on how people view these events.
True there isn't just a simple yes or no in the poll answers, but to imply using gym or school triggers emotions, well that's exactly how some might feel here not being nominated or picked again, so thus in that way it's fully relevant.
Besides a majority can make a clear distinction between a simple yes or no answer, just as that the potato option is similar to "i don't care". As for the Party Saboteur one, yes that is a joke, but might also be for those don't even care to vote at all about this.
But again i also agree with Tzaar, it's based on perception and not only numbers, and i think perception is the bigger issue here.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's were I'd argue your perception needs to change. Instead of seeing this kind of thing as a negative, why not see it as a positive for all the good people are doing.
That list of names you mentioned, dLo only commented after the fact and now he has said it, I won't make him compete. Konrad is obviously a troll vote. Me, I have literally NEVER been in a nominated event, not once. So I personally(can't speak for the others), totally go against your grain of "always nominated". I am going to take a wild guess and say that a few other of the "popular always voted" people have never been in a nominated event as well. A lot of people on that list also fully deserve their place on there. This is where we are going to disagree, but this is also where I think "perception" comes into things.
If you have done something that has given even one person the feeling that you should be nominated, then you deserve that nomination. If you are doing things that are getting you consistently nominated, then you are consistently doing things that make you deserve to be nominated.
I'd argue the onus is on yourself to change things by either not participating or by voting for someone a bit different(but like I said, around 70% of the votes have done that). Starting threads like this, making comments like people have done, does nothing but promote negativity in my opinion, of course you are entitled to your own.
I have done unsuccessful events in the past, I didn't repeat the process because people clearly didn't like it, understand it or it didn't interest them. If this had gone by and was unsuccessful I wouldn't have repeated it. The entire argument for me is pointless, if you don't like it, ignore it and move on. Any comment about it can only really be seen in a negative light and again can only speak for myself puts people off trying to do new things.
When did we become such a cynical group of people that have to try and turn every good turn into something bad? I wanted to have a little bit of fun with everyone, not start some kind of horrific debate. This spiral of hating on things HAS to stop from all sides.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excuse me, why does my perception needs to change? I never said your perception needs to change, i am just pointing and have pointed out there is clearly a big divide between those that agree with me, and those that agree with you, thus with that given, are nomination events really a positive vibe to bring to the forum?
I am not refraining from any of my views i made in the op, i still stand by them.
Again it's not only just the same people list, that's 1 issue we can debate on. I never claimed people like Budgie, Archie, Zelghadis, Millew etc etc don't deserve recognition, on the contrary they are very nice people and deserve recognition, we can be clear on that.
What's the point of nominating them over and over again while there seemingly is already a private giveaway group between them?
You mostly talk about that, but what about the other part, in where people get nominated for the silliest reasons, like "i know that guy in real life so i pick him", or "he helped me gift a game so i like him, i will nominate him", while there are hundreds that are just as nice and done so much more but don't get recognized.
You keep pointing out negativty, hate etc, where did anyone ever get hostile or thrown in hate here or even in the events they are about?
People not liking it or saying "oh it's the same list again", that's just expressing an opinion in a civilized manner, nothing more, and they should have the right.
One could say such nominating events, picking people is exactly causing even a bigger gap between people, causing them to be cynical.
Rather then make events that can include everyone, even the newcomers.
The majority has nothing against those events created by itself, i think many will appreciate new ideas, it's just how it's executed that is debatable. And i think we can continue debating in a style where one just feels the need the need to prove the other they are right, but there are also so many reasonings from both sides it just gets snowed under each time by the other.
But we both keep our different views on this, and you already made your own topic to express your views against it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm getting pretty tired(literally physically, not in a "im angry" way) of typing now so let me try and be as brief as possible.
There is negativity surrounding the events with phrasing such as "circle jerking" being used, this thread itself is negative towards nomination events comparing it to a popularity contest, go to my thread and see some of the replies I've got which can be perceived as nothing but negative such as being told I'm "special" and I need my own thread etc. Even if expressing an opinion in a civilised manner is the aim, it is not what is being achieved. The entire drum banging about it is negative, let me give you an example.
Imagine for a second, you create a puzzle, would you expect people who didn't like puzzles to comment on your thread saying "I hate puzzles" or "puzzles are for the puzzling elitists, the same people always solve them". I can say with quite a degree of certainty that people would simply ignore the puzzle and go about their day. No need to post a civilised opinion as you are claiming. You CERTAINLY wouldn't go and post a thread about the evils of puzzles and how you hated puzzles as a child so it evokes memories of that. On the incredibly rare occasion that has happened, its usually by a new user who is completely and unequivocally told to shut up. I don't see where the difference is here, if you don't like events, don't take part in them, just like puzzles or anything else on the forum.
Now I'm only going to touch on this as I'm not saying this is YOUR opinion, but it is something that needs addressing. The thing that REALLY annoys me about all this is the perception(which is what I think needs to change) that there is some secret elite group at the top of SG giving each other games. It's absolute nonsense. There is no giveaway group involving JUST these people were they all plot everyone else's demise, the entire thought of that is laughable to me. Yet I've been painted before now INTO that group.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well i am mentally getting tired of this (it cost me half a day replying), and in no offense to you, but as i said before it revolved into an "i am right, and let me prove it till you agree with me, sort of way", and those discussions are usually endless until someone gets enough of it
I actually do have a Jigidi thread thing going on, people can say there if they don't like Jigidi puzzles, and yes i don't had it happen.
Personally i never expressed my opinions there in your event or any other, i exactly made a seperate topic, about discussing this, rather then it happening in the events itself.
This topic was made long after Delta's and even after yours started, so this topic isn't really fueling anything, i have no control on what others will post in your topic, and there will be haters anyway, regardless of this topic or not.
A majority doesn't have a single thing against the events itself, just how it's done, how people are nominated.
You can't also claim again about my topic creating cynicism between people, while wanting people to pick certain people isn't exactly just causing that, again if you truely want to remove that part of this forum, then you should exactly have been the one to have created an event for everyone included.
Just because you haven't heared of it (me neither) or aren't in it, doesn't mean there isn't one, there are already certain people that already sticked to level 7 and above giveaways, it's just the same but in a different form.
I am not claiming it exists, but you can't just claim it doesn't, neither of us truely can.
We can debate about numbers, about polls, you read a majority in this thread, and let's say 50% agrees with my point, 50% on yours, isn't that alone enough to question these type of things?
You can't truely say oh those 50% just need to change their opinion, you can't.
Comment has been collapsed.
This isn't getting anywhere I agree. Lets leave it here.
My last point is unrelated though to say, there really really really isn't some kind of hidden hand guiding SG. It's tinfoil hat type conspiracy.
EDIT: To comment on your edit, you can't say the opposing 50% are "wrong" either. My point is, you CAN ignore it though, just move on with life, which is what I would argue should have been done in the first place.
Comment has been collapsed.
For the "look at the comments" part I would still argue that the nay-sayers are usually more vocal then the supporters (or the don't carer). Just look at the fun-faction from PEGIDA in germany. They are certainly not the majority but they are the most vocal. But let's ignore that since it is really only at the sideline.
Let's concentrate on the difficult part: I agree that perception is a major problem in such stuff because most people will not be convinced no matter how much logic and numbers you throw at them. But there are at least some which are open to arguments. Convinving them alone is worth a lot already since it takes wind out of the sails of the rest as well.
An easy solution to change perception does not exist since it is primarily based on personal experience. That is to say that there does not exists a way to do it. If someone is organized enough, fast and motivated he could for example do a parallel event where people can gamble on the nominations: People shall post/send their list of who they think will be nominated (since it is always the same it should be easy enough) and afterwards we compare. This way we could prove or disprove this argument while providing personal experience to everyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can give you enough (dutch) examples on where a majority is against, but they barely win or even lose.
Why? because people got tired of voting or thinking nothing will change anyway.
That thing is debateable.
Wallister made a calculation of his and Delta's event, even better numbers will be Revil's included but also past events.
However what i just thought of and i think Wallister for example is forgetting, there is a large part that gives out +1's are actually people also thinking that will work and thus give their vote, while actually by the event hosts, it doesn't.
That also needs to be taken into account.
By all means, show us prove, anyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
you know the problem with these "stats" used as proof against your pool poll?
they don't take into account any other nomination event made in the last 1-2 years, where the same names are repeated over and over again, nominated by their friends.
that's the problem here, not these 3 last events. i've noted a lot of new users mentioned in these, but i assume it's because some of us are starting to complain about favoritism.
Comment has been collapsed.
i assume it's because some of us are starting to complain about favoritism.
psychology 101: tell people it will become the same nominee list, they prove you wrong by thinking outside the box =)
Comment has been collapsed.
I seriously would have wanted to get more information about those older events, but couldn't remember or find any of them.
Probably yeah whole different lists would come up and lesser new users like in the last 3 events, it be curious enough for someone to actually do find out.
It must me on my, and a large part of people's, minds that most likely in the older events there were also the same names, be it favortism. It wouldn't be a "thing" if it wasn't.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, people being tired is something we can observe everywhere. That is true. Although I do not support the thought people thinking they can't change anything.
To the perception problem maybe: Prove works in both directions and let's be honest there exists nothing which could prove either side (or at least would convince one side). Problem actually begins before: At what percentage would a nomination thread considered diverse enough and not "the same old bunch"? 10 % repeat names? 30 %? 50 %? At the moment we just have different arguments:
- Look at the threads and old ones. Same names everytime. - Valid argument
- Look at all the new nominations and also if you think it is not diverse enough YOU can suggest someone yourself - Equally valid argument (this one is actually interesting since the non-voters so far have the possibility to either prove or disprove their own argument)
As for the +1 it is hard to tell how to interpret them. It can mean something like "I'm okay with them." It can mean "I vote for these too." We could check if people who used a +1 did nominate someone else. Also the +1's are irrelevant as long as the OP didn't state otherwise.
So in summary we have to agree that we can't say with proof which side is "correct". What we can say is there exists one side which assumes something slightly negative "no influence, always the same" and another side which assumes something positive "everyone can be suggested, lots of new faces". And now let's come back to the perception again. To a certain degree how we perceive something is decided by us (mostly subconciously but also conciously). So the final question for this part would be: Why do people willingly want to perceive something in a way which "offends" them (Not being nominated is something negative. I feel like being left out in gym class again)?
And as a small bonus, some questions for you, me and everyone else reading this. Assuming this thread would be closed this very moment: What did we learn here? Was it helpful for us/for the community? What could be the consequence taken from here? What should be the consequence? I would kindly ask people to not answer those last questions. They are just something for everyone's personal thinking.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1's are relevant if it's not clear from op and the start if people think they have been voting and nominating (doesn't matter if they done it seperately too) don't count. There is no clear prove for either side.
That last comment is a bit snide, if something can't be discussed openly (or you even think should be closed?), and regardless what you personally! feel about the poll, read the comments, you can't disagree there is a big gap on both sides how they feel about it
Comment has been collapsed.
You mean the bonus question? Hm, I didn't intend to offend you. If so I would prefer if you let it slide. I admit I am conflicted by such threads. I would like to believe that I am open for every kind of discussion but I always get the impression that these threads have the possibility to change the general perception in a negative way ...... Therefore I am a bit snarky about their creation (for that I will aplogize). But is a personal opinion.
Well it seems we concluded the same. We have no proof and two sides who perceive differently. I, personally have chosen to try and perceive everything in a positve way first. It usually eases my life.
Comment has been collapsed.
No offense taken, and i respect your views and opinions.
Glad atleast you agree there is no solid proof for either side, and i wish atleast Wallister would also atleast agree on that, even let us close both topics, for forum sake. and if it's truely numbers or people's perceptions, something atleast managed to create some reasoning behind why some people have these ideas.
It's a good way to think everything positive first, it's not what everyone can do, but perhaps sometimes should.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was too lazy during gym classes, just slacking, so I'd have thought it was weird if I wasn't picked last! ;)
Nominations are good imo, sure it might not always be someone who deserves to be nominated that gets it, like you mentioned some examples of. But if they along with the nomination give a good reason to why they should be nominated, then I think it's a good way to find nice people that you might not otherwise notice, for example if they aren't too active in the forums but still have been nice enough to warrant a nomination. Same goes for those who always gets nominated, for all I know they might deserve it.
Like, as long as they aren't intentionally rude and offensive, what's there to complain about?
Just my opinion though
Comment has been collapsed.
i nominate lugum to make a new nomination whitelist4whitelist thread, we could reach 10 by friday!
Comment has been collapsed.
The same people are nominated over and over again because the same people nominate them over and over again. Come, nominate somebody who is never nominated! Every vote nomination matters!
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe someone should start an underrated nomination event?
Comment has been collapsed.
Ratio is not everything. I would nominate a user with 0 games given, but since he never enters giveaways (0 entries, 0 wins) there's not much point in him being added to the event group. Still, a great guy and one that's active on the forums here for a long while.
This is just one extreme example, but I have many on my whitelist who have negative ratio, and as such are not likely to get many votes.
Comment has been collapsed.
0/0 is a great ratio imo, nothing wrong with waiting to win before you give. but i see your point and agree there. got one friend who no longer uses SG just because they are technically now a rule breaker by deleting most of their library of junk. but met them in trades here and been sum1 i chat with more then my irl friends.. they no longer visit the site due to their own rulebreaking but constantly are considering restoring their wins just to return.. but god forbid i prematurely even mention them or their bl would go off the chart and they'd likely get a perm suspension when they do want the option to return (undelete) if they ever decide too.
point being though: ppl way to judge'y on that stuff. and jump to the wrong conclusion too fast, even i'm partly in the wrong and jump to the wrong conclusion though sometimes, so i don't fault people there either.
what if that 1sent to 50win ratio that ppl think is so horrible were GTA5 (sent) & 50x bad rat equivalent (wins)... i'd say they'r due for another 10-20 before they need to worry about another give still.. but thats my opinion..
i stopped worrying about such things, did the blacklist wipe. and had a clean slate all around.. forgeting all about white and black lists both xD don't even return blacklist personally either, so if someone wants a free blacklist have at it, i won't even return the favor.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never had problems being picked in school
except by girls :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Here's the thing.
Nomination events are likely to be held by people active in the community. This, in turn, means that those nominated are more likely to be known among those active in the community. In short, the more you participate, the more likely you are to be nominated. Does this lead to those "within the circle" being nominated at every such event? Of course it does. Is that a bad thing? Of course it isn't. When people are picking teams for dodge-ball, they don't check the library for players. The only way to become known in any social group is to become involved in that social group. Those who don't participate won't be primary candidates for inclusion in group activities.
As far as SG is concerned, this Community is more inclusive than most. Older members (who all know each other) actively track newer members and, if they seem friendly, invite them to group events. Take Simultaneous Giveaways as an example. Something like 20% of the group participants were invited from "outside the circle." In the years that I've been with SG, I have consistently seen that pattern of recruiting "new blood" during Community events. The primary characteristics associated with those who get invited to such events are friendly, giving, and active. From that, it's pretty clear what kind of behavior will get you invited to events.
(Hint: Neither length of membership nor wallet size are in that list.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes.
Couldn't have said it better myself! <3
Comment has been collapsed.
Simultaneous giveaways may be the utter worst example you can give though, Khalaq. It's almost strictly about wallet and I'm not sure anyone under level (I'll be generous, because I think it's higher) Seven has any chance of making that cut. Especially anyone "New"
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree that SimGives is probably the worst example to use, but that is precisely why I used it. Despite it being one of the most demanding events on SteamGifts, (the event's members try to one-up themselves, every time), I can't remember a SimGives event that didn't include "new blood." This last one included nominees who hadn't even made it to the level 5 minimum, and multiple people were included despite a history of almost all bundled games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well nominees are one thing, did any make the cut for the 3 or so spots? (I admit I hardly looked at either thread this year)
You have to admit that particular event is ALL about wallet. (thus the one upping) I didn't even bother trying this year because I figure there is almost a 0% chance to get in.
Comment has been collapsed.
People know that I spend very little compared to others in the SimGive group, and I'm not exactly a AAA giver, am I?
Yet I've been in 2 now. I've seen people that give even less than I do, that get in
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I'm obviously not going to sit around and debate it too much more, (although at level 8.83 AND with a fan club I think you make my point better :P ) especially since I pretty much ignored the threads the past 2 events (saw them, just didn't bother)
Plus I was pretty happy with the groups I was in ( C.Losers and BAA and Yutopia plus a few Christmas groups) <-- At least I still have C.Losers (like until Delta tosses me out on my ear or something)
Here, I found you a picture...
Comment has been collapsed.
I seem to recall that one accepted nominee was "close enough" to level 5, and quite a few members had thin wallets. Even so, the event was quite successful. Based on all of the SimGives events I've been in, I'll have to disagree with your assessment.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fair enough, not like I'm doing a research project on it.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is similar to what I said but I'm not popular so no one cares :^)
Comment has been collapsed.
You and three other people. Great minds think alike.
Comment has been collapsed.
exactly, i dont know if this was your intention but your thread kinda feels like creating drama for drama sakes...
Comment has been collapsed.
Twas ever thus. Will likely stay the same.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't even know what you are talking about...¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Comment has been collapsed.
I dont care about that stuff tbh .
I found out the forum is an inside thing long long ago the hard way :)
so i just nominate Konrad for everything .
The whole Nominations thing is just plain stupid as it just limits the stuff to the ppl who are forum hermits , and not the genuenly nice ppl .
There is a guy in my WL , who have insanely poor ratio .... hes there cause he works for ~92$ a month and still manages to give a game every 2 weeks or so , which is admirable to say the least .
will he EVER get nominated for such event ? i highly doubt ....
I dont condemn such events , i just think of them as another one of those inside things allover again :)
Comment has been collapsed.
will he EVER get nominated for such event ? i highly doubt ....
He will if he gets exposure.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do it!
I'll also take you recommendation and add him to my whitelist (you're already there since long).
Comment has been collapsed.
Please do nominate him. That is some amazing generosity if I've ever heard of it. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
But i got no income at all, and look what i gave away (not fishing for a nomination).
I am very blessed to have Tremorgames and i know fully well it's not for all, in the past i could do a few surveys to get some paypal credit, there were free bitcoin events, just pointing out that without a salary you can also get some things done.
I fully agree it's still admirable though from that person.
Comment has been collapsed.
if the event creator planned the event that way, then theres little right for the ones not picked to complain about, gotta get more friends.
Comment has been collapsed.
Does it feel for anyone else like being "picked" (aka not picked) last in gym class all over again?
Don't get me wrong, lots of people deserve it, i don't even care if i am not nominated, i'll just pass the event.
However what strikes me is when i see certain people get nominated that i barely seen on the forum, some even with ratios to be deeply ashamed of (600+ wins against 100+ sends), or someone that made a script 4 years ago or someone knows someone IRL, so usually it tends to be the same lists over and over.
Personally i think it shouldn't be just about ratio, or just 1 nice thing someone did, but a more total package (as in a good ratio but also a nice person or done some nice scripts, howevere you mix it).
https://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/IB9yt/party-saboteurs Anyone is invited to my party.
Comment has been collapsed.