More blacklist spaces.

you do alot of level 2+ giveaways , the only thing i can suggest is remove all the people from your BL that are level 1- and do only level 2+ gibs.

It is tricky though ,and i dont think that will solve your problem

das racist

There are so many rule-breakers? I'm pretty sure most of them are already permabanned though.

Those are the people likely to be perma-banned anyway so it may be worth it to find the script PraiseRhollor suggested and see if it can free up some space (no point in having some on the BL if they can't use the site anyway.) If you absolutely refuse to use scripts, than just look through the list manually for those who have been banned. You will likely either have to use a script or "spend time on 'those' people."

That being said, I do think your suggestion has some merit. Even considering half the users on the site are inactive, that leaves nearly 500,000 people. Though I'm not sure what the daily active user numbers are, which I'm sure is significantly less, making the 1000 slots a little more proportionally reasonable. I would suggest 2000 if there is to be any increase. 5000 just seems like it would make people a little too eager to punish.

That's clearly bullshit because you have me (and others) blacklisted despite us never or almost never interacting (that I can recall) and despite me never breaking any rule, especially any of the ones you mentioned. Don't make excuses for your abusive and petulant use of the blacklisting system.

You should probably just stop blacklisting any and every person who momentarily triggers you into having a blood pressure spike. That way, you'll have more room on your blacklist and you won't have to waste your time blacklisting a significant portion of the site, many of whom would have never entered into your giveaways in the first place.

U can use sgtools! besides, U can call a re-roll if that guy is a rule breaker.
any way, take it EZ. it's not a big problem in this big world!

Now I have 172 BL after that giveaway, about 75 rules breakers (even many times) in 1 batch.
So I guess it can reach 1000 in few month easily.
I was wondering about the limit, now I know and I agree with OP 1000 is not enough at all.

It's ok if you do it like that but I doubt that all the other passionate blacklisters do it as well.

I never had him on my list, he got enough from everybody else, I don't want to add extra :3.

Then, they should also place a limit on how many users may blacklist you. In terms of Big-O, such a limit will be even more useful :)

Also, expanding 5 entries rule to be applicable for public giveaways will solve the problem of small groups of friends.

You hurt my feelings
(free bump)

And yet my 20%, in numbers is more than your 100% achieved in one year of subscription. Forgive my rude answer but I find it out of place to criticize where someone's willing to put his money and games.
If you'd blacklist someone for being in conflict with your perception of SG, it would mean you think your perception of things is right and mine is wrong, and that's pretentious.

But honestly I would like to have like 5 or 10k in space ;D

Hmm, I'm not sure if you are joking, but then again not that it matters if I look at your giveaways ;D

I appreciate your support but to be honest I'm not even that active in looking up rule breakers, all one has to do is once in a while check the free games that are given away. You'll be surprised how many users you'll find with multiple infractions.

referralgate?

Admittedly yes. I'm blue-skying here a little bit. I was just trying to think what would be a more ideal way of doing things.

Here's one idea for dealing with that: move something like the SGtools cheat detection suite onto SG itself. Then, when a check is run and reveals that somebody has cheated, add the mark to their profile. Do this instead of something else that would be computationally intensive like checking the entire database weekly. (And, when a mark was present, a check wouldn't need to be run at all. That would be no more computationally demanding than checking group membership or some such.) It would be like all the people who care about cheating would collaborate on a cheating blacklist.

Here are what I take to be the advantages of my suggestion:

• It cuts out the reduplication of effort needed for many people to maintain lists of cheaters
• It makes for a better list than they'd construct individually anyway
• It potentially uses less data (a few fields per profile rather than thousands)
• It makes it easier to exclude recent cheaters from GAs, meaning many more people would probably do it
• Potential it also would give staff some useful data to work with.

I suppose I can see the worry. But when I said "mark" I was thinking data, not a visible mark. Perhaps if it didn't actually show this would allay their worries. You wouldn't actually know who you were blacklisting, and finding out would be just as hard as it is now.

Yeah, thats a good point. I don't know why I never though of that.

lol

Oh, I totally forgot about trains and link based giveaways. I only assumed public giveaways. Still though, even though that I am not a contributor in this website (although I give leftovers to my friends) the only ones I would black list are those who insult me directly in a non-jokingly manner. Life is too short to blacklist everyone that I don't agree with or to hunt for rule breakers.

public = everyone. if u want to 'control' who joins and need a BL that big, it's much more convenient to just make a group for the people you like. most of your GAs arent public anyways and i can say that at least from last year, none, if only some of your GAs even reach 1k entries. so really, there's no point of increasing your BL....

im sorry, i totally misread the scripts part. thought u were requesting one. my bad.

ahh thanks and sorry =)
i dont use it personally cause i only have a tiny blacklist. was a super fast search result to try and beat the *(edited) tag =) lol

you can see here