now, would you still include no VAC Bans as a requirement?
The VAC system is notoriously flawed and has punished countless users with irreversible permanent bans for simply having a program that the system automatically detects, regardless of whether that program is used, provides a competitive advantage, or even related to the game. The VAC system is unreliable and untrustworthy as a credible source for determining whether a particular user is, or ever was, a cheater. By prohibiting users from entering into giveaways for simply having VAC bans, one is perpetuating and participating in this practice. How is having a VAC ban valid rationale for excluding someone from entering into a particular giveaway? If one believes that it is, then that implies that one thinks that permanent and irreversible punishments are justifiable responses to even innocuous mistakes, in which case I question that person's moral judgment.
While it is ultimately up to the individual to set whichever restrictions they wish on their giveaways, I personally believe that to do so is simply untenable. There is no valid reason to prohibit someone from entering into a giveaway for simply having a VAC ban. If it weren't for the fact that I disapprove of the blacklist system, I would consider such prohibitions to themselves be justifiable reasons to blacklist the giveaway creator.
Comment has been collapsed.
To many big words and now my head hurts..
There is a valid reason for disallowing someone from entering with a VAC simply because they can and wish to do so.Just because you think it is not a valid reason not not some how make it not valid.
In the end you can share your thoughts and opinion,but to try to say it is not a valid reason just because you say so is not how things work.I mean you can say it,i am just saying just because you think or say it is not valid,does not some how make it so.
I do agree that i think doing the VAC thing is a bit much,but this is just how i feel,whoever creates the GA,should if allowed be able to omit who they want.If you where to say this was unfair where do draw the line,how about it is unfair to exclude people because of a blacklist?After all most people use it to omit people they dislike.And in this case people want to omit those who they think are cheaters.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is a valid reason for disallowing someone from entering with a VAC simply because they can and wish to do so.Just because you think it is not a valid reason not not some how make it not valid.
Such as?
In the end you can share your thoughts and opinion,but to try to say it is not a valid reason just because you say so is not how things work.I mean you can say it,i am just saying just because you think or say it is not valid,does not some how make it so.
I say there is not valid or tenable reason to blacklist someone, or to restrict them from entering into one's giveaways, for having a VAC ban because I have yet to encounter a single argument or rationale that is both reasonable, cogent, and soundly based in logic and facts. As such, any argument or rationale would be indefensible.
I do agree that i think doing the VAC thing is a bit much,but this is just how i feel,whoever creates the GA,should if allowed be able to omit who they want.
I'm not saying that people should not be allowed to decide what to do with their personal property; I am saying that it is wrong and unjustifiable to prohibit or blacklist users for simply having a VAC ban.
If you where to say this was unfair where do draw the line,how about it is unfair to exclude people because of a blacklist? After all most people use it to omit people they dislike.And in this case people want to omit those who they think are cheaters.
I would actually be inclined to agree. I believe the blacklist system should be removed entirely because it is a tool of abuse.
Comment has been collapsed.
K i think you are taking this a bit to serious lol
All i was trying to say is just because i do not agree with something and think it may be wrong does not make it wrong.
I love how the world works if someone thinks it is wrong give what they call valid points and so forth it makes it wrong,no matter what someone else says or thinks.
In this world things are only wrong because others say they are,but to the person doing them it is perfectly normal,but since someone else comes along and says it is wrong,then that is how it has to be. lol
'm not saying that people should not be allowed to decide what to do with their personal property; I am saying that it is wrong and unjustifiable to prohibit or blacklist users for simply having a VAC ban.
Look you think it is wrong,fine with me,but do not...
Sit here and try say what i think is not valid or wrong or whatever because your hell bent on it being wrong.I still think it is fine even though i do not agree with it,i think it a bit over board,but again there GA,the rules,there choices.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why shouldn't I be taking this seriously? It's a significant issue that affects many people, an issue about which I have strong opinions.
All i was trying to say is just because i do not agree with something and think it may be wrong does not make it wrong.
Yes. And? We're all fallible. You still didn't address why you think I'm wrong or why you disagree with me, though, if either is the case, nor did you provide a single valid reason for blacklisting and restricting people for having VAC bans.
I love how the world works if someone thinks it is wrong give what they call valid points and so forth it makes it wrong,no matter what someone else says or thinks.
Instead of empty rhetoric and oblique critiques, perhaps you should actually provide a valid and tenable reason. I openly challenge you to do so and invite you to expose my hubris. If you think that I'm just saying what I'm saying because I'm a bigot, as you're clearly insinuating, then back it up and prove me wrong.
I'd appreciate it if you stopped evading my questions and points, and start actually contributing to this exchange, since I'm more than glad to explain how each and every reason you could muster is, indeed, invalid and untenable. If you can provide me with a valid and tenable reason—one that reasonably justifies blacklisting and restricting people based on their VAC bans—then I have no problem admitting as much because I am not a bigot who just thinks any opinion that doesn't fit my narrative is wrong.
Sit here and try say what i think is not valid or wrong or whatever because your hell bent on it being wrong.I still think it is fine even though i do not agree with it,i think it a bit over board,but again there GA,the rules,there choices.
I'm not "hell bent" on anything, aside perhaps on having a bit of discussion about this because I don't have much else better to do. I say that nobody, not even you, can provide a valid and tenable reason for blacklisting and restricting people for having VAC bans because that is what I have observed and experienced through other discussions about this topic. That is what I believe because I am confident in my position, but I have no problem with being proven wrong. If you disagree with my position, then please enumerate and elaborate your points. I'm glad to discuss this so long as you're willing, but it accomplishes nothing to simply chastise me for having the temerity to suggest that something reprehensible is untenable and cannot be substantiated by valid arguments.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said you where wrong lol
Just because you do not agree with someone does not always imply you are saying they are wrong,i just do not see this as an issue so i can not agree with you,if you do fine.
You for some reason want me to give some sort of valid reason for it for whatever reason and it is not that serious,though you say it is,it just a simple vac ban and someone deciding they do not want someone with it enter a give away.You make it sound like they are committing mass murder or something lol.
Now you are saying i am evading you because you demand some sort of answer or explanation when i gave my answer which i do not see anything wrong with it but that not what you want to hear so now you call me out on evading lol,and if that not good enough then i can not help that.I should not have to explain explain in detail over such a minor issues,like we are trying to avoid world war III
Comment has been collapsed.
Why would there be any reason to convince anyone to take a side on pure evidence because there will never be any.This whole thread is based on opinions and not facts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well then i do not know what else to say....
Other then it just means how can there be any evidence of it being right or wrong when this is a matter of opinion.
Wrong would be trying to fit a triangle into a circle....
This is about 2 sides.....the sides that think this is not right,and the side that thinks this is wrong....how can there be any evidence when it just boils down to opinion.Again trying to fit a triangle into a circle is clearly wrong,in this case there is no right or wrong,just opinions on it if it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
VAC bans have nothing to do with game giveaways. Checkmate.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then why not get rid of levels and whitelist as they do the same thing,they weed out those you do not want to join your GA.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why don't we live on the Moon? What's the reason of me having no supernatural powers? Dude your reply isn't related to OP and my post at all.
Levels filter people from leechers. Whitelists have even more obvious use.
I repeat VACs have nothing to do with game giveaways. Stop the non-related bullshit, there are already 4 pages of useless text without arguments.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've made a similar discussion in one of my giveaways a while ago =)
To me, VAC bans and giveaways are totally unrelated things, so I never use that condition in SGTools.
Also, I think the ban is the permanent punishment itself, so I see no reason to add to it.
Finally, I don't play multiplayer games, so no one can really ruin my fun (except for the developers) =)
Comment has been collapsed.
People are giving away games for free, they can choose any kind of requirement they want and it still will be fair.
What's not fair is getting banned for no reason, not preventing people who got banned before from entering your giveaways. Most of the people who got VAC banned before have probably done something wrong, the minority doesn't matter in this kind of situation..
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't configure SGTools giveaways to check VAC bans or multiple wins, and don't intend to. But I also don't have any problem with those who do. It's the giveaway creator prerogative to decide what rules appeal to him or her.
Comment has been collapsed.
Poeple saying how notoriously VAC flawed is are just full of shit. Most of the bans and I mean like 99% of them are legitimate bans. Also you cannot get VAC banned in single player games or mods as VAC is only enabled after connecting to VAC protected servers.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hahaha people are seriously posting few VAC unbans as a proof that VAC is ridiculously flawed and not reliable.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
There's a brain doc workin' nearby?
Comment has been collapsed.
IMO it's a stretch.
Everyone makes mistakes, and some kids might have tried cheats and now regret that.
Comment has been collapsed.
in the end this is what i wanted to show to the peeps, in this world not everything is black and white, not every VAC banned is a cheater and not every cheater its VAC banned, just dont be harsh on people, cause they might be the result of an error, or a mistake they made in the past.
Everybody makes mistakes
everybody has those days
1..2..3...4!
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes.
/thread
But its basically irrelevant, not everyone uses sgtools, and not everyone that uses sgtool, uses the vac ban option, so in the case that a user was falsely vac banned, i dont think not being able to enter some games will hurt them.. when there is thousands of GA's on SteamGifts
Comment has been collapsed.
im sure not, but what about the community, would somebody think of the children!!!
Regrettably, i think this thread has polarized more people on either side.
Comment has been collapsed.
Introduction of sgtool Platinum Account should fix this issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
Watch out for using words like Platinum and Premium here in the forums! ^ ^
Comment has been collapsed.
Pff. Not worth the sub unless you go with the 5 star super duper golden platinum one. With all the AAA games you win with it, it is worth the $1k yearly cost imo.
Comment has been collapsed.
I still need a year to get a slave of my own as a long-term subscriber benefit :(
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted NO because... well, you explained well why. What I would put, is a "no VAC ban in last X months", where X is at giveaway creator's discretion, something like 1-12 months.
Comment has been collapsed.
Meh. Their money so if they don't want to give to peeps wth VAC bans then they shouldn't be forced to. So long as the follow the rules of the site, idgaf :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it's not 100% correct to have that requierement for a giveaway. If it said more than 1 or 2 VAC bans would be a fair requierement imo.
There is a plugin you can install on you CSGO server that blocks VAC banned users (other games ofc) to join that server, the same thing as the video in op. The problem with that is even if your VAC ban gets removed (let's say you were baned in MW2 like many other people for not actually cheating) you still won't be able to joing those servers because that plugin just checks if you were ever banned but not if the ban is still active. I hope that sgtools doesn't work in the same way as this plugin.
Comment has been collapsed.
None of the three basic rules used on SGTools is really fair: you're always permanently punishing a user for one action done in the past. Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do about it. If those rules considered only the past 12 months or so, then I'd totally support it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Intentional cheating makes you an ass, nothing more- and there's no way to clarify that a VAC ban was, in fact, due to intentional behavior.
Trade scamming means you deliberately tried to fuck over a specific person, and steal from them.
Getting a community ban on steam is near impossible, and requires mindblowingly negative conduct.
VAC banning is certainly not on the same tier as the other two, in amount of outright fuckery.
Also, 'not fair'?
Under what premise is holding to responsibility for your actions, 'not fair'?
And here I thought that was the entire premise for legal liability, nevermind moral conduct.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't agree with you many times, but I mostly approve of this post.
(Maybe you should be worried?)
Two very unpopular words in America... "Personal Responsibility"
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the "unfair" part comes from the fact that the way the tools work, you're stuck with the consequences forever.
In other words, even if you make an mistake once and make amends afterwards, you're stuck with a lifelong sentence instead of serving your time and moving on.
That easily turns into disproportionate retribution.
Comment has been collapsed.
Noone argued that current VAC implementation was especially fair, but given the severity and intentional nature of the other two misdeeds, there's no way at all to perceive those actions as mistakes.
Nevermind that making amends isn't really an option with those.
Keep in mind that being banned for trading scamming requires somewhere in the range of a dozen reports against your account, and community bans seem to only be implemented if your conduct is outright criminal, in the vein of ranted death threats- I've never seen the casual bigots or trolls or the like punished in any way.
The individuals who have those two bans are not innocent or readily redeemable, and have such negative debt that even if their conduct changes, they never feel the need to tackle the mountain of debt they owe.
My topic, however, seems to differ from CR7's; so, as far as that goes:
sg misdeeds are just as unfathomable to not restrict for, since you can theoretically remove those black marks at any time, just by activating the copy of the game to your account [Non-Activation] or giving a copy of the game to the giveaway creator [Multi-Win/Regifting].
If you actually redeemed yourself on those, then you CAN'T be held accountable for those, since those black marks are no longer visible to anyone [including sgtools filters].
So if that's your topic, not at all sure how any of "make amends afterwards, you're stuck with a lifelong sentence instead of serving your time and moving on. That easily turns into disproportionate retribution." fits, since there's no 'lifelong' component, and if you've made amends and served your time, then you're no longer able to be restricted. :X
Comment has been collapsed.
It's true. Although I detest cheaters, it's true that VAC can be triggered unreasonably. And I don't understand why you would exclude a vac banned user from your giveaways. Ok, maybe it's normal if you are giving away a game that has a cheat protection system, but if not, then why is it even a rule? :P
Comment has been collapsed.
- deny entry for unactivated win
- multiple wins
- vac ban
in the end, it's the same. all are mistakes the user made and he has to live with the consequences.
and i dare to put a vac ban at the same level of a multiple win, considering they are both almost impossible to get rid off (try contacting a giveaway creator that hasn't been online for 1 year or someone unwilling to reroll...).
so people, don't be so self-righteous. when you filter out unwanted people you are probably thinking of intentional rule-breakers, but you also affect people that made mistakes.
Comment has been collapsed.
when you filter out unwanted people you are probably thinking of intentional rule-breakers, but you also affect people that made mistakes.
I've just set up a very small train with cheap bundle games, and it got leaked (or brute-forced) within the first hour. Sgtools rules made it very easy to spot the lowlife in question.
I know and respect some of those who have made mistakes and showed some form of regret, having in fact whitelisted two or three of them, but it's not always possible to be completely fair, unfortunately.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, i just wanted to point out that vac bans can be made by mistake, and so are multiple wins (unaware how the site works, or won the same game in a short period of time).
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep. A single non-activation a long time ago is not that terrible, I can accept it. But if one repeated doesn't activate games every few months, or did it recently as an old-timer member, I blacklist them. Not knowing the rules at start is one thing, breaking them again and again is another.
Comment has been collapsed.
I give a bit more leeway if it's an older member with some wins, but only one infraction. A surprising number of times, it turns out to be an oversight - like accidentally adding to inventory instead of library (actually happened to me before), or activating the game, but it turns out to be the wrong one, but very similar (recent example: giveaway for Still Life 2, key given was Still Life 1 and winner didn't realize since they were so similar).
Comment has been collapsed.
(It was pretty late, I didn't want to sound so coldhearted :D )
Good point, very likely it's just a mistake. On the other hand I've seen a 2-3 YO user creating a giveaway for a game that was free, under the name of different game - at that situation it's really unclear how that could happened, as once can't accidentally create differerent giveaway + description about what it really is. Or another one who immediately cretes a giveaway for an ongoing free game, and starts arguing with people who try to convince him about deleting it before support does.
Comment has been collapsed.
Heh, the week sgtools rolled out these new rules, we had tons of support tickets that cropped up about fixing their multiple wins.
Us: Why are you making this ticket just now, 2 years after the fact?
Them: Oh no reason in particular! I just wanted to clear up my profile!
Comment has been collapsed.
SG community just wants to be good people out of nowhere. It's a miracle D:
Comment has been collapsed.
Like if any of the concerned parties didn't know the answer. Such diplomacy. :)
Still, I wish it was a native feature. I don't want to make invite-only GAs. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
I never noticed that Half-Life though i have not played it much on Steam,though it still has online play so i suppose the lumped it in with it,i just assumed the online part was not connected to a VAC server,i see that is the only way you could have been flagged.As it only is in use when connected to a VAC server.
So i am not sure how modding single player would get you banned,unless it connected to a VAC server even while in single player,in that case it should be obvious not to use any mods,If you unsure you have could always contact Support or forums to see if it connects to VAC servers even in single player.You can only get a VAC if you are connected to a VAC server.
Though i do not see how this is unfair to be blocked from a GA because you had a VAC ban,they made the rule.On that note i think VAC is a bit over board when single player is VAC protected.I do not think it is unfair to be barred from a GA anymore then it is unfair for me to be blocked from GA because i can not always afford to have my ratio at 1:1 or better i do try though.
Comment has been collapsed.
As a VAC-infected i'd say it have nothing to do with the games gifts or whatsoever related generally. I personally don't mind people putting a "VAC protection" in their giveaways but i think all those guys are kiddos with dead brain creating and posting in their profile some of the most retarded rules in the whole universe. (you probably already know what i'm talking about)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well VAC ban sucks. I definitely wouldn't let it become obsolate, but having a "not having a VAC ban in the last X days" option quite good. A little weird example, but I was pirating game exclusively 2-3? years ago. Then since I barely downloaded games, I'm informed about deals, DRM, options, supporting developers and such and I really don't want to go back to pirating. SImilarly at least some banned users maybe changed their mindset. Maybe not. But regardless, older VAC bans are not as terrifying as new ones IMO: (also lots of people can change positively if their main gets VAC'd and suddenly they need to face the consequences.
Anyways, I wouldn't lash out like that. Quite a few people who said "VAC ban is VAC ban, I'll filter" are active members of SG with considerable giveaways, so most definitely not kiddos. I think you really should think over thrashtalking others while according to Steam you're the one who did something against the community. Really, it's just an advice. Like I said about VAC timings, I don't really mind it, everyone can make mistakes. The important thing is to learn from them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your text is a pleasure to read. Appreciated. BUT:
I wasn't really talking about how having a VAC sucks. My thoughts are about people treating VAC-banned guys as if it have something to do with games giveaways.
active members of SG with considerable giveaways
It doesn't prove some (most?) aren't stupid and/or have some logic sense. Creating alot of giveways and/or being an active community member doesn't mean "you" 're not a kid with stupid rules created by "your"self. From my personal experience its rather the opposite.
according to Steam you're the one who did something against the community
Got an instaban. The moment i started the game with a cheat injected. I understand this sort of cruel deeds can't be ignored but: Сonsequently there are alot people getting VAC in really different situations. Blocking all of them with a filter sounds like a nonsense for me.
I personally prefer to put in some logic thoughts in posts rather than acting like those false ass-lickers i meet in most of the threads. (sorry for my english, it sucks)
Comment has been collapsed.
having the no vac ban policy is useful for giving away games that have the vac ban and apparently to give away games like dark souls 2 which only let those on the servers that don't have a vac ban
Comment has been collapsed.
True, but on game page there is no info that DS2 is protected by VAC.
So even if I'd make GA for it I'd have no idea that someone with VAC ban can't play in it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's quite simple for me, really.
Adding an SGTools filter for a VAC-ban is no different than vetting a group for certain requirements, adding people to a whitelist that meet certain requirements, making puzzles that only certain people can solve, level restricted giveaways, and yes, even the blacklist. All of these things I've listed do one thing - keep people from entering GAs that the giveaway creator doesn't want entering.
To tell the giveaway creator what they can and cannot filter, to me at least, is telling them how to spend their money. While I choose not to use SGTools myself, I certainly cannot go about telling someone else how to run their GAS and spend their hard-earned money.
Comment has been collapsed.
Totally.
More options, not less, is always preferable.
Doesn't mean that how the VAC filter restriction is presented in sgtools couldn't potentially be improved some, to offer more control over how you can apply it.
Comment has been collapsed.
The way I look at it, every SGTools filter that gets removed will just push more people to group and whitelist-only giveaways, which even fewer users can enter. I have yet to see any use of SGTools that I've found unreasonable, and I often get filtered out for various reasons (ratio, level, # wins, etc), and still there are more giveaways created than I could ever hope to enter.
I agree, some of the filters (VAC ban included) could use some improvement. For instance, the ability to filter out recent VAC bans as opposed to all VAC bans would definitely be useful. I have zero experience using SGTools, so I have no idea how hard it would be to implement, if it's possible at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
SGTools itself is lovely, you should try it if you want to host mini-events - give to the people who are new to the site. Or to the people who won much less than given. Give to the people who's level is between your favourite two numbers. If you have a goal/target group, SGTools is fantastic :) (you can set minimum and maximum for almost everything)
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh I admit, it's a wonderful tool, the only reason I don't use it is because I'm too lazy to bother. ;)
Perhaps I'll take a closer look at it and learn how to use it. I imagine it's much easier to use after the first few trials.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't use SG tool and would even less restrict users who were VAC banned in the past. It is none of my business to judge a person here based on his/her activity on Steam.
However, I won't justify that getting VAC banned is something that happens "for no reason" and isn't the user's fault. It's either by accident or by trying to mod/cheat, but either way, it's a mistake from the person for joining a multiplayer game while having a mod/cheat running. I still won't use the VAC restriction in SG tools, and that's IF I ever use SG tools.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why would someone reward you for being dishonorable gamer that ruins the fun for others in gaming?
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 OP
I was aware that someone could be VAC banned for using mods from Workshop (this is the reason why i dont download mods). However, i was not aware that people could get banned for stupid reasons.
Interesting video too. Will keep that in mind next time someone with a VAC ban wants to add me in his friend list. Proves once again why Origin Support interacts way better with its customers than Steam Support.
Thank you for sharing it with us.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am actually eating popcorn right now. XD
(Peppermint flavored with chocolate chunks in it!)
Comment has been collapsed.
oohhh i get it now as a mix i never tried it is that good? considering its salt and sweet?
Comment has been collapsed.
I purchased one of those tins with 3 different kinds in separate packaging inside -- thought it was going to be regular, cheese, and caramel corn.
Turns out it was almond & honey, chocolate peppermint, and snickerdoodle flavors. And yes, they're all amazing! The salty and & sweet flavors work out surprisingly well together. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
sgtools has been used a lot lately for giveaways and i have no problems with most of the requirements peeps are using, ratios, maximums and minimums received and given its all well and good, BUT for one:
NOT ever being VAC banned.
but why...as i am not a cheater and i have to plans on cheating i should be allright... right?. The thing is that as with many things Valve does, the VAC ban system is incredibly flawed... As seen in the video, VAC bans can be triggered by mods, even Half Life 1 single player mods...
Exibit
So think twice before you go around judging peeps by a VAC bans.
<3
Comment has been collapsed.