Is there a degree of antagonism between high and low level people?
I don't really see much, although there is a divide between contributors and non contributors.
Comment has been collapsed.
So objectively so far :> NO : 69 users YES (small and large degree) : 82 users
So for the moment a little over 50% percent says YES there IS a degree of antagonism between LOW and HIGH level SG users!
Maybe this thread can be a wake up call to some of those (very) high level SG users that in the end can and will blacklist low level SG users for just about any reason they can conjure up or make up.
Also this " antagonism " festers already a long time on SG as SG users, who are longer on SG than me, I know said as such to me but I guess some don't believe this whilst others don't want to believe this but it is there and I think there's a fair chance that some SG users don't wan't to openly adhere to this/say this because they perhaps are afraid of being blacklisted or perhaps they be afraid like others to be reported to SG moderators for rocking the boat...
I'm not afraid to be blacklisted as I blacklist the blacklisters to have " symmetry" again. Btw this is given something so universal it's even written in the Torah and the Bible...
Don't forget and don't be afraid if one finds out that he or she is blacklisted that you have the choice of returning the favor...
Comment has been collapsed.
And it still looks like you are just trying to make it worse with your rhetoric. It sounds like you are trying to start an uprising, rather than try to bridge the gap and do something about the issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
He's decided to try and create a narrative in which he is an oppressed hero rising up against a corrupt institution and will not be dissuaded from this delusional line of thought. No point wasting time with him.
Comment has been collapsed.
And If one want's one can wipe everything and anything under the rug or carpet but the numbers show that after all your denials and when the dust settles there IS antagonism between high and low SG users.
Comment has been collapsed.
The way of dealing with antagonism is not by fanning the flames with fighting rhetoric though.That just makes it worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's more like your dishing out the rhetoric because maybe you don't like the numbers of your own survey. Maybe you forgot to add your " custom rules " to your own survey...
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably just a call from some users to others users " to rally around the flag ".
Comment has been collapsed.
it's funny how it changed from "the rebellion is winning in a legit battle!" to "we are losing, the empire is cheating! hacks! they called reinforcements! elitists!!!"
Comment has been collapsed.
Cause that's what I do, call my RL friends and be like, "ZOMG, I NEED YOU ALL TO GO VOTEZ ON THIS POLL ON INTERNET!!! WE MUST WINZORS AND SHOW DOZ REBELS!@!!!11!!!"
Comment has been collapsed.
careful, that comment got me blacklisted :O
Comment has been collapsed.
Shhh. Don't tell anyone... They'll wonder how I'm cheating with only bundled games...
Huh, wonder if I'll make it before the 10th
thx btw
Comment has been collapsed.
Level seven with bundles only will be a brick wall… up to that, it's just a question of patience. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, by the time I get that far, I'll have some decent checks coming again from Substituting.
I'll be able to do non-bundled games :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, you just made sure that everyone knows who the biased one is.
Comment has been collapsed.
I see that there is a problem, and it's far larger than I would have imagined (as I said on the last page, but in slightly different words), but I still don't see a reason for fanning the flames and making it a bigger problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you still on about high level people black listing over ratios? Because I do that when I find a leecher, and I am certainly no where near a high level user. There is a difference between people looking down on a leecher, and someone looking down on someone just for being low level. I do my fair share of lurking, and most of the time when I notice drama over CV, its a low level person having a spazz because someone with a higher CV for actually using their blacklist ever. But if you have solid proof, feel free to share it.
All of that aside, like it or not, their money, their giveaway, their rules. They spent the money, they can decide who they want to join their giveaways, or who they dont want in future ones. Literally no one here is entitled to someone else's giveaway.
Oh and for symmetry's sake, feel free to blacklist me. Personally, I dont like how youre using their CV to invalidate their opinions. If you want anyone to take your side seriously, present a level-headed argument and tone down the doomsday/here comes the uprising! rhetoric.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm going against the grain in this thread... Whitelisted :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Awww yeaaa! :D /highfive
I was going to whitelist you back, but youre already there xD Keep being awesome!
Comment has been collapsed.
What's? I'm on a whitelist that ... Awesome!
Wish I could put I a gif but on phone at the moment
Comment has been collapsed.
I hope you know that by quite a few people's standards you are classified as a leecher too. :)
Although I always found it funny. Leechers. On a charity site.
It's like saying only the richest African countries can receive charity group aids because the others are not giving back enough.
Comment has been collapsed.
And they are more than welcome to consider me whatever they want. At least I do try to give back when I can, unlike quite a few people Ive come across on here.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm honestly wondering if those who voted "yes" aren't confusing antagonism based on levels with the one based on ratio. Can you please provide any example of lvl based antagonism?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the question is clear enough:
Is there a degree of antagonism between high and low level people?
Comment has been collapsed.
And that person's question was also very clear. Where are these examples since apparently about half of us that use this site missed it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Trying to change the question or adding custom rules to the question?
As it stands, I repeat the question is clear enough.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea it is. The person you replied to asked if you had examples. Im asking if you have examples. So yes, the question you replied to is quite clear and youre dodging it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nice bait, but I'm not biting. Giving specific examples would be the same as calling out and calling out is a SG banable offence.
But I give you a general tip, just follow the ' discussion giveaways threads ' on a regular basis for things as " custom rules " and who are making these specific kind of custom rules giveaways...
Comment has been collapsed.
Last I checked, giving a thread title wasnt listing names as part of a call-out. But whatever. I searched for "custom rules" and found a month old thread where someone asked if custom rules were still allowed, which they werent. There was also a support thread. For "special rules", there were year old, closed threads. So youre going to have to be more specific on what exactly you consider a "custom rule". Especially since I lurk here more than my fair share, and apparently Im missing all this custom rule drama.
If you mean getting blacklisted for a bad ratio, saying thanks when asked not to, literally anyone can do that. If people say "no comment or blacklisted", its generally because people are concerned the people not reading the description could be running a script/bot/whatever to enter giveaways. People blacklisting over ratios dont want to keep giving free stuff to people who arent also giving back to the community.
Again, like it or not, no one is entitled to anyone else's giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Obviously you don't search with a key word like " custom rules" (what I meant and knowing that English is not my native language but only my fourth language) is key words like: " be this" "be that" " you must be this or that" " "you must have this or that" " I reserve " " I judge" "criteria " "ratio " " I want "
Btw a recent level 7 user thread is more than making the case that some of those (very) high level are antagonising other SG users that don't fit his custom conjured " criteria " and the thing is in the end if they DO meet his criteria he can still change the criteria that he uses and he literally says so... In other words he says: follow my self imposed rules and if you do so and think you can enter I'll check your profile and if I don't like something I will change the rules again so you can't enter.... Very, very fair and honest rules imho.... I just hope when I eventually have high level that i DON'T turn out like this guy or some others like him...
Custom rules should not be allowed to determine who can participate on a giveaway because as I said many times before: there are other means to do a giveaway is the gifter finds that some SG users are not worthy and not good enough for his giveaways be it because they have broken rules, be it because they think they have broken rules or because they are just of to low CV level for their liking.
You can look at it from any angle but there IS something wrong between high and low SG users and it didn't just happend today.
The poll to date of now shows that 1 out of 2 users find that there's something wrong between high and low users. Maybe you don't like it but there it is and it's not gonna go away by being in denial or by just shrugging shoulders.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except that's not even close to antagonism. That's just people running their giveaways--you know, the ones where they're giving away their games that they own to other people for free--in the way they want to.
The only actual antagonism I ever see is lower level users picking fights about it in the forum because they feel like they're somehow being cheated because there are giveaways they can't join. Somehow they just can't get it through their heads that they don't have a God-given right to all the free games they want.
So yes, there's a little antagonism. So why don't you just stop antagonizing people? Or maybe find another outlet for your teenage persecution fantasies.
Comment has been collapsed.
Moderator when I try to google " steamgifts giveaways custom rules " I get ambiguous results. Are any kind of custom rules giveaways allowed on Steamgifts v2 or is this a grey zone?
Btw i'm not a maths wizard but 1 out of 2 SG users that voted on this poll do feel antagonism be it of large or small degree.
Comment has been collapsed.
Before the big site update, special rules were sometimes allowed, but only on private giveaways, and they had to be approved by staff. After the big update, when blacklists and whitelists were coded into the site, special rules were disallowed on all giveaways. I'm not real sure what that has to do with anything in this thread, though.
Also, you seem to be fearful of site staff and reprisal. You should be aware that, unless stated otherwise, what we say in the forum is just us as users. If we're acting in an official capacity, it should be clear. Furthermore, we almost never suspend anyone for something said in the forum unless it involves hate speech or the like.
Comment has been collapsed.
I asked this because I'm reading sometimes SG giveaways discussion threads that are making custom rules to enter.
Also It's sometimes confusing when I google or use the SG search function that SG1 hits and SG 2 hits are both showing up on the same inquiry.
No offense but mods have powers and I don't like to be punished for saying my peace in the same amount that I don't want to be scammed, have a VACation, a game ban or a trade ban.
Edit: Moderator out of curiosity do you think that there are SG users that are afraid/hesitate to comment/voice their peace in this thread for fear of reprisal by a mod or by another SG user?
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't use slurs (racial, sexual preference, etc.) and don't call anyone out (i.e., making public accusations of wrongdoing/rule-breaking or whatever because it tends to start witchhunts) or any of the other stuff you can do in the forum that's against the rules and you'll be fine. And categories were introduced after the update, so if a thread is uncategorized, then it predates the update.
Comment has been collapsed.
Edit; another moderator was here and I asked him this question.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for clearing things up, one last question if you please?
A couple of SG users asked me yesterday to post examples of things I said. I denied to do so because I thought that one of them was baiting me to break the SG no call out rule what is a banable offence.
Moderator; is posting a screenshot or a link to a/ or of a SG discussion thread seen as calling out/breaking SG rules?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's difficult for me to think of a situation where posting a link to a forum thread would be against the rules. Maybe if you posted a referral link in a thread and closed it to try and avoid suspension and then linked it elsewhere to try and slip referrals under the radar or something, but that's not what you're talking about. So linking threads should probably be safe. If you linked to someone's specific comment, that might be more of a grey area, depending on the context.
As for screenshots and things, you can always edit out the avatars and usernames to conceal people's identities, like putting a black box over them, just something that simple. People come and post things like that where someone tried to scam them or something all the time.
The main thing with calling out is just to not make clear accusations against someone that could start a mob or a witch-hunt, where everyone goes and harasses somebody for something they may not even have done, and they accomplish nothing but making them conceal any evidence before someone like a member of staff who can actually do something useful about it can see that evidence.
If you need any further clarification or have other questions, feel free.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for answering.
The thing is moderator that some posts above these of ours I have been asked/challenged to give examples of SG discussions threads concerning custom rules that antagonise/put in a corner certain SG users/groups of SG users.
Also it's my personal believe that the cat one (not the budgie one) is trying to bait me by me posting screenshots that wil break SG rules and then report me to SG mods for punishment while saying at the very same time that I have no examples.
Is there anyway but not by breaking SG rules that I can show you a example screenshot so you can see if this would break SG rules or not?
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, with screenshots, like I said, if you censor the avatars and usernames, usually they're okay. Don't post a screenshot, but tell me what's in the screenshot(s) you want to link so I can have a better idea of whether or not it's okay.
For example, is it a screenshot of a conversation? Is it a screenshot of a forum thread? Is it a screenshot of a giveaway? Is it a screenshot of a profile?
I will say that if it's a profile, you probably shouldn't post it. I would worry that someone might be able to figure out who it was, even if you tried to edit out the identifying information.
Comment has been collapsed.
To give just 1 very recent example to the " cat " person that called me out in a sense or another.
It's about screenshots (before and after editing) of a recent high level SG discussions giveaway thread that list custom rules but the clue is that even when SG users that are complying to these custom rules the giveaway gifter states that even after compliance by the SG users that want to enter his giveaway he has a special rule that he would judge their profile for other (non listed) criteria.
I think this would be a very fine example of " custom rules on SG " that has been asked/challenged by the 2 SG users that claim I don't have any examples and say that they are not existant or only to be found in the old SG threads and in one old thread made by a SG moderator.
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is, someone can just say whatever they want. Just because somebody says something doesn't mean it's true. We don't enforce anyone's special rules under any circumstance. The only way someone can try to have 'special rules' is to blacklist people who don't comply with their requests, which of course doesn't take effect until after the fact if they've already entered the giveaway in question, and if one of those people wins, they'll just have to give them the game or else take the 'not received' feedback. And as far as their blacklist goes, that's their business and we don't get involved with what users do with their blacklists and whitelists. So really, the only 'special rules' anyone can use are blacklisting or one of the other means of restricting entries offered by the site like whitelist, group, and private giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks again.
But is posting a screenshot of that SG discussions giveaway thread here (to answer those that said they couldn't find such a recent thread) a breaking of SG rules yes or no?
Comment has been collapsed.
There are no rules to be broken about posting a link to a discussion that merely states "custom rules". The topic about no longer accepting special rules only means that support will NOT reroll a legit winner if his/her only fault was that broke the custom rule. For example I can make a giveaway stating only greeks could enter. Or girls. Or users with numbers in their names. And it would be legit. But if a german boy would with it with the name SauerKraut with no numbers, I would be still forced (by basic rules) to send him the game or face the consequesces of not delivering it - suspension.
I think the only "semi-custom" rule is tied to bundled/packs - The creator can decide the entry level, but it's usually about not owning the majority. Though I don't know how often anyone asks for reroll regarding these, so how support decides.
Comment has been collapsed.
he keeps complaining about yunie and winthorp setting rules to INVITE people to a group, not to ENTER a giveaway. it's really sad because those two are giving away stuff for low-lv users and instead of helping he keeps attacking them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think he is talking about yunie's telltale bundle giveaway thread. Though I still can't figure out how it relates to lvl based antagonism, since in that thread the min requirement is 1 and none of the other requirements have anything to do with lvls.
Comment has been collapsed.
Budgie; I think you only saw his " edited " thread and not the silently uncut version after the survey started were he plainly says after making initial rules for SG users that want to enter the giveaways that he'll judge people based on profile and on other (non listed) criteria what makes my point that some high level users are very happy to use self-entitled, self imposed, twisted and elitist rules to judge people if they are worthy or good enough for their " precious " while at the same time the very same people are ambiguously entering and winning level 0 and 1 giveaways.
If that isn't pushing in a corner some SG users/groups of SG users whilst having a blown up high opinion of themselves...I really, really hope when I gain CV I won't turn into something like those 4/5 high level users here that are rallying together. But of course some are used to rally together from their dealings in shady, small (private) groups...
What can one call those that don't want certain groups of people entering and winning their giveaways but at the same time enter and win giveaways form the same certain groups that they desperately and by any means try to avoid?
As for these; as of now I don't even see their posts anymore (and their insults when they band together and call me asshole, steamgifts extreme communist and making slurs like that " I'm blacklisting because I discriminate against ethnic minorities " and more...) as they don't exist anymore.
But then again that says more about them than it will ever say about me...
When you havent' anything more to say that could tip the balance then the very last things in their conjurer bags are insults...
I just sincerely hope that they have blacklisted me as I woudn't want to win a game from those 4/5 be it Bad Rats or Mad Max. Some may think that they are hot shots here or that they are something more than the average low level John/Joe/Jill and because of that; they think that they have more to say than other (low level) SG users.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi, thanks for your insights but it's not about rerolls it' s about that i was called out by a couple of SG users that I don't have recent examples about some high level SG users that are making custom and special rules for their giveaways.
I have screenshots examples of such certain giveaways and I'm asking a SG moderator if by placing said screenshots on this thread if I am breaking any SG rules.
Comment has been collapsed.
Custom rules cannot be ground for a reroll, but users are free to filter the entrants based on whatever requirements they want by using their whitelist / blacklist / private or group giveaways.
However they are responsible for this filtering, and we will not allow a reroll if they let someone who does not fill their requirements enter by mistake.
If you want to post screenshots, just make sure the users are not identifiable by hiding their username & avatar.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the explanation moderator.
Some SG rules are self explanatory whilst others are more difficult to comprehend fully. Also searching for answers with the SG search function can give SG1 and SG2 hits on the same inquiry and asking SG users in the discussions can lead to many answers and variations of answers that are confusing for a average computer/non native English user like myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
I really think you're worrying about this way too much. I don't think anyone is trying to trick you into getting suspended here. It doesn't sound like there's a problem with whatever you're wanting to post, and if I was to start going through this thread looking for people to suspend for calling out, you wouldn't be the first one to go. If it's out of line, someone will surely say something about it, and we don't go around suspending people for deleted comments because usually it's just a mistake. Normally it's someone who didn't know a rule in the first place (like referrals, for example), but here it would be because we're not sure if it crosses the line into calling out or not. Just go ahead and post it, and if it seems like too much, you can just delete it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here's the thread you are looking for:
http://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/ELLi0/psa-support-no-longer-accepting-special-rules-for-giveaways
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the link to that thread moderator, can I ask if the following format/example is considered as special rules?
Giveaway in SG discussion forum
To enter:
" Be this "
"Have this "
"Have that "
Followed by :
" I reserve the right to judge your profile also according to other criteria "
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't matter what wording the special rule used. You can write whatever you want in a giveaway, as long as it follows the rules established in the FAQ and Guidelines. If you do not have a valid reason in one of the categories for rerolls, we won't perform the reroll and you'll be stuck giving the game to the person, even if they have "violated" your rules.
Comment has been collapsed.
Again, just because a giveaway exists, doesnt mean we are entitled to be allowed to enter it. If they dont want a leecher winning, or someone potentially using scripts, or someone who is too lazy to read a description, blacklisting those people is something the contributor is entitled to do
Blacklists arent something only high level contributors have access to. Literally everyone here has a blacklist and is capable of using it. Even you apparently, judging from another post in this thread. So since by your own words "custom rules"/blacklisting shouldnt be allowed, you should go remove him because "custom rules" shouldnt determine who can enter a giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
So while moaning about blacklisting people for made up reasons, can I ask what the not-conjured-up reason you have blacklisted me for is? Just out of curiosity?
Comment has been collapsed.
Disconcerting; maybe shocking isn't if you suddenly get the taste of some of your own cod-liver oil medicine...
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually not even slightly disconcerting or shocking. If that is what you hoped then it hasn't worked. I clearly don't even enter many giveaways so this is something unlikely to ever impact me, and I have found myself blacklisted many times before and this is the first time I have ever bothered to ask.
And I ask not out of any upset, but out of genuine curiosity. After complaining so bitterly about other people blacklisting people for bad reasons what is your reason that is so much better?
Comment has been collapsed.
welcome to the team, 4th revenge-blacklist for me
Comment has been collapsed.
I haven't even blacklisted that person yet. I feel so far I have done my best to be reasonable despite the various bizarre allegations that have been levelled at me, from blacklisting people for 'conjured up petty rules' to being part of some high level 'apartheid'. I am simply entirely bemused.
But I am losing patience and will blacklist the hell out of them before my next round of giveaways if this isn't resolved. I honestly don't even know what to do with my next round of giveaways after this. It always felt fairer to to post a nice train with stuff for all levels in discussions and just blacklist anyone I had a problem with to give other users a better chance. But clearly it causes so much trouble I'm just tempted to stick to whitelist and group giveaways...
Comment has been collapsed.
Aww don't punish people that had nothing to do with it.
Trains were one of the coolest things I discovered when I came to SG almost two months ago.
But they are your GAs so do as you please. Just remember not all newbies are noobs:-)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll probably think like that in the morning. Just sometimes I have a 'why do I do bother?' moment...
Comment has been collapsed.
Truthfully, after reading much of the discussion that happened during the night that wasn't how I felt at all.
I had a really good go at giving away a bunch of games and trying to be fair about it while taking as little as possible in return and there was a lot of positivity and I tried to focus on that. But I also received a lot of abuse for not doing things the way other people wanted.
I have now received as much crap as I am prepared to take for trying to give games away and will be doing things quite differently in the future.
Comment has been collapsed.
They are your giveaways, you get to do them how you want. :)
That's the great thing about SG. It caters to many different ways of being generous. :)
I'm off to make another puzzle train myself soon. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, unfortunately as I heard it by this one comedian....
Society moves forward at the pace of the slowest member.
Which frustrates me... but whatever, not much I can do about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, but in the end is a "whatever" from me. i tried my best and explained the situation in the other thread. made one snarky/funny reply in here and blacklist-incoming.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I don't follow the "tit-for-tat" school of blacklisting,
it seems that this principle is so important to you that you had to cite the Torah/Bible.
So out of my respect to your beliefs, and in order to maintain "symmetry", please blacklist me in return.
Comment has been collapsed.
Theres more tension between good and bad ratio users than high and low level users.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, that I've noticed quite a lot of as of late. Personally I've never blacklisted anyone for poor ratio, but I've seen quite a few other people talk about doing so.
Comment has been collapsed.
i used to bl for ratio, but it made no sense in the end. can't punish people for being lucky and entering everything.
Comment has been collapsed.
You sir, deserve a spot on my bright side :) Impressive. Very impressive.
Comment has been collapsed.
ALL WILL BE CRUSHED IN THE NEVERENDING BATTLE BETWEEN LOW AND HIGH LEVEL USERS. ALL HAIL THE LOW LEVEL PESEANTS! WE RISE UNITED!
Comment has been collapsed.
starts a Borderlands session and gathers pitchforks to provide the risen low-level ones with weapons
Comment has been collapsed.
Personally, I find regifters and leechers to be very annoying. I also see the logical understanding that there will almost always be a statistical spread and more leechers than actual gifters.
I wish that we could see a formal or informal way to encourage leechers to gift to keep a sense of balance. Although, I would not want it to be rather totalitarian or pollyanna-ish for this kind of a effort to happen.
Perhaps, the site could be scripted in such a way that dependent on the users level, the site would remind them of the rules and guidelines when they win a game or create a giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the level 'advantage' should be (and probably is) enough to encourage people to gift at least something. I totally understand what you mean, but making it mandatory (or even just strongly suggested) to create giveaways is indeed against the basic idea of this site. I also think people should consider to have a somewhat balanced giveaway ratio, but I think it's up to everybody on their own how to handle people who win (much) more than they giveaway. The notion about pointing to the rules during your first (or the first three) giveaways (and also wins) is really something to consider :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I wish that we could see a formal or informal way to encourage leechers to gift to keep a sense of balance.
You do realize that not everyone has the money to buy games, right? For a lot of people this website is the only legal way of acquiring games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe true, maybe not, but imo there's a difference between winning a handful of games to enjoy legally on the computer you can't afford to run, and going all out repeatedly to win many tens or hundreds of games in what to most people comes across and is perceived as an abuse of other's generosity (and it can deny other 'no' or 'low' win users here a chance)
Comment has been collapsed.
+27 rep from trades tell us that you do have a way to get games and trade them. So that's not the problem for you at least.
Comment has been collapsed.
i wouldn't want to force/encourage people to give away, it sounds like a subscription... like those steam groups that require X GAs per month.
but the true encouragement is already here. make GAs because you will get some kind of satisfaction from giving away stuff (if people are here just to level up and get free stuff... i think it's easier to spend $1000-3000 in games for yourself), and at the same time you will level up and will be able to enter GAs with less people and possibly better prices. :3
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah! I hate these damn high-levelers who think they own this Goddamn website! Rich brats with so much money they can give us free games, fucking show offs...
/sarcasm
Seriously though, it depends. I don't approve of users who have low or no level, and yet leech dozens, even hundreds of games. But that isn't because of their level, but because they are obvious leechers, and leechers are people I don't necessarily respect.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't approve of users who have low or no level, and yet leech dozens, even hundreds of games. But that isn't because of their level, but because they are obvious leechers, and leechers are people I don't necessarily respect.
Or they're just people that can't afford to buy games.
Now you can say they could use Tremor to get games, but some countries are banned on that website.
Of course they could trade the cards they've obtained from won games for games and then make giveaways but considering bundle games barely give any CV at all I can understand why they wouldn't want to.
Comment has been collapsed.
I understand your concern, but there's no way of distinguishing between someone like that and someone who's just greedy and abuses others' generosity just by looking at their profile. You can't expect people to assume everyone is in that situation.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a tough one. I try not to discriminate against users just because they have a bad ratio because they might not be in a position to give much, and I'm quite happy to gift games to people who might be good people but not otherwise be able to afford them. And simple maths says that not everyone here can have a good ratio.
But also there are just leeches. If in doubt I take a look at peoples steam profiles. If somebody has 50 games and has played the hell out of them all I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. If somebody has 3,000 games, has gifted 1 piece of DLC and has won 200 games then they can probably get stuffed...
Comment has been collapsed.
Somehow I expected someone would want to justify leechers.
The fact is, back when I couldn't afford games, I wouldn't keep entering for giveaways. I waited until I could get some games from trades or selling cards, and after giving them away, I would resume entering giveaways.
I'm talking about obvious leechers here, people who win dozens of game and haven't given away a single game, or only one DLC or something. I know it can be hard for some people to acquire games, so it is understandable for most users on Steamgifts. However, there is a handful of accounts I've seen which are simply shameful. And by that, I mean that they don't even actively participate in the community (very low comments count), don't giveaway crap, and simply keep on leeching.
considering bundle games barely give any CV at all I can understand why they wouldn't want to
Like I said in my previous post - I don't judge people by their CV. I never cared about CV myself. What really matters is whether or not you're a complete leecher or not, and even then, I won't blacklist the person or even mention it (unless the discussion is provoked). I simply won't look up to them and say; "yes, that user is definitely not greedy."
What can I say, that's how I am. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, there's a difference between being in a bad situation where you can't afford anything, and being plain greedy... i suppose the people in here that grab 100 games without creating a single GA are the same that go to the supermarket and eat all the free cookies in the promo stand just because "they are free".
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly. Take one, take two, but don't take the whole basket if you don't intend to share any.
Comment has been collapsed.
So very much this. It's okay if you win a few more games than you give, but you should feel the itch to give some back once you can if you do. If you pass the 50% more wins than giveaways mark and still wonder why people exclude you from their giveaways then you might have read the reason right here.
Comment has been collapsed.
An even more accurate analogy in some cases (if i may), would be...
Take one, take two, but don't take the whole basket... if you don't intend to consume everything on it (or almost all of it) and just let most of it (if not all of it) go to waste.
I say this, because i see people just about entering for everything, saw for instance the other day a guy with 200+ wins, AAA games, bundle games, everything... you name it. All he plays... Warframe. :/
Literally... all... he... plays.
I get not being able to play everything right away and how sometimes RL gets in the way and such, or how you can get demotivated about playing this or that particular game for a while to come back to it only weeks/months later, but c'mon, 200+ won games, plays 0... :/
Now that's leeching x infinity.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oops..Ninja'd.. :D
http://www.steamgifts.com/go/comment/gjWfpKe
Comment has been collapsed.
Funny, the ones I see with three-digits wins are exclusively the high-level users. :) The worst "leecher" I ever saw was with in the thirties in wins for zero giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
Somewhere in this thread is (was?) link to a guy 194-0.
You probably should hurry up, as it might be considered calling out by some mod.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, that certainly is a hefty amount. o.O
Thanks for the heads up, but I'm among the few who doesn't really care about the ratio.
Or, more precisely I'd like the ratio to be the basis of the levels, not just the sent items, but I think that would cause a mutiny among the 4+ crowd. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I think there are various misunderstandings - new users can especially wonder how more experienced users can win so many games. And I think a few high level users can make people feel a bit excluded when they just seem to hand games back and forth between each other.
But I try quite hard not to leech and take advantage of the giveaways I have access to, and also to make a range of giveaways for as many users as possible. And clearly many other high level users do the same. So I was quite surprised by some of the views and accusations expressed in the thread that I believe you are talking about!
Comment has been collapsed.
I've never had it happen to me...but, yea...I have seen higher level people on her talk down to people of lower level for not giving more, but usually it's less to do with the level difference and more to do with GA Ratio...basically it seems like if you don't give more than you win some people think you are pretty much garbage.
Granted, not everyone....but enough to make lower level people or newbies assume everyone is like that and just withdraw from the forums in order to avoid being ridiculed. Not happened to me though...Everyone loves me >_> I tell myself that every morning.
Comment has been collapsed.
For me:
- zero tier => level 0
- low tier => levels 1 - 3
- medium tier => level 4
- high tier => levels 5 - 6
- MEGA tier => levels 7 - 10
Comment has been collapsed.
Iggy Azalea - Fancy (Explicit) ft. Charli XCX . It is a spoof of the film 'Clueless'. And although I don't usually go around having crushes on female celebrities, I do have to say that Iggy Azalea is quite lovely...
Comment has been collapsed.
I think its more between the low and mid tier users than with the high tier users, but I could be wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm pretty close to halfway. I never bore any antagonism for those higher, and I never feel like the lower levels are lesser people. You may note I only really create leveled giveaways now. That isn't out of spite at all, but rather a reward for those who strive to give.
I said there was no problem, based on all the time I've been here and what I've witnessed. However, if there are people who think there is a problem, it becomes a problem. This idea is prevalent in every social issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
The only high level of antagonism is between the idiots of the site and the normal users.
Comment has been collapsed.
There probably is like everyone before me say, but I can say from personnal experience, I'm pretty new here and still level 1,
that everybody has been really nice and friendly to me since I join, although I do participate in the forum and such. I think for the most part,
the SG community is really great:)
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm low lvl (mostly due to lack of funds to get things to gift or to get to my self too xD) but i dont dislike any 1 be ppl with no lvl at all or be lvl 10 so what i cant enter those ga's with lesser ppl that requires u to have lvl 3 or 5 or what ever past 1 xD if u gave more than the others i think u should have a way to also get "better" chances at win some games and better be like that than having higher odds on all ga's so meh i dont mind what ppl think about the others being higher lvl than that person or lower level
Comment has been collapsed.
Why it should be antagonism between high levels and low levels sg users?Sry but i cant understand the reason.Its a site not some kind of competition ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes.
They only consist of a small percentage tho considering how many users are on this website, but the negative overshadows the the positive and the blacklist fodder of the week, which always lightens up our day in the forum, makes more noise than every giveback - the community is so great bla bla thread.
You gotta take a closer look tho. It's mostly people that are whiny because they cannot enter for better games that are mostly reserved for higher levels and/or groups/whitelists and you can be sure they will come up with some lengthy justification why they don't feel like giving away more.
The best example I ever saw was a guy ranting about the whitelist requirements of a user, because he said "You have to be level 5 or higher... Thanks for being generous" and he argued that he was offended because he isn't considered generous enough with the 3 DLCs he gave away.
Comment has been collapsed.
i was also planning on giving away some dlc, but, ok, make fun of me all you want...
Comment has been collapsed.
i appreciate your contribution to this thread, but but but is BS nowdays is banable offence? :O
Comment has been collapsed.
BS = Bachelor of Science, an educational degree. I was just making a bad pun.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wouldn't go so far to call it a problem, but there always will be antagonism to a certain degree. As already mentioned before, this is less a community or site problem, it's more a social problem, which finds itself reflected here. You will always find your special someone, that fits right into the image you are seeking.
More frequently I noticed discussions about the amount of games given away and the ratio itself, which weren't really kept on the friendly side of conversation.
Well talking about my personal point of view as low level for now, I don't really differ where the giveaway is coming from or going to. The only thing I am not so sure about is, if I should envy the high levels for being able to create so many giveaways, or if I should feel sorry for them wasting so much money, which could be used way better than giving away games to strangers.
So actually the problem wouldn't be the antagonism, but the point of view, which is spread and taken by each person. At some points I do feel bad about not being able to give away games frequently, since I am not that rich to afford it. So I am seeking different options to get a hand on games, even if they are just bundles - at least I do care and am trying to be able to be an active part of this community.
But since this is just a personal way of seeing things, there is no guaranty other people will do as I do. Just think of the early GTA V giveaways, every second thread was filled with some flaming about fake giveaway and things like: "this has to be a fake, since he is giving away a game that is on his wishlist."
I already gave away a game that was on my wishlist as well, because it is more fun to win something you want instead of just keeping it (not talking about regifts here).
After all I do agree with Vee79, SG is a great community and seeing a high lvl starting such a topic proves, that people still do care about others. So it is a bad thing to notice, but nothing to worry about as long as people still care about the topic.
Comment has been collapsed.
I confirm, he's not an addict. Not at all. Not at all indeed.
And no, he didn't offered me photos of Barbie in skimpy clothing for confirming that. Not at all. not at all indeed.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's threads like this that keep me convinced putting a level restriction on my GAs is a bad thing.
I do have a lot of private GAs though, and that's where most of the "better" stuff is. (for varying definitions of "better")/ But those were all done through these very forums in one way or the other. Because I find that a more effective way to limit entries to people who're active in the community.
The only people who i really don't like are regifters. Any that I can identify ywith enough certainity go onto my blacklist, no questions asked.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why do you think lvl restriction is a bad thing? Ever though of the other way around? Why wouldn't a low lvl create a GA with a high lvl restriction, to make sure he can reach the higher lvls and thank them that way.
Besides, why would you feel bad about it? Everyone has been small at some point and sure has come to a point where he wasn't able to enter a GA for what reason ever. Feeling bad about this would be too much.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's my personal feeling. No more, no less.
I value the social activity on the site much more than any perceived monetary value, and I just don't think anyone should be excluded/included based on wether they can give back or not.
Comment has been collapsed.
I haven't experienced any hostility personally but from lurking in discussions I'd say yes, to a small degree. (Not sure I'd call it antagonism though)
(And thanks for the GA!)
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't make giveaway under Level 1 because I don't want to deal with people who might not have read the rules/don't participate in some capacity. In general I set giveaway level based on the amount of effort it takes to access the giveaway/value of the gift.
If it has a puzzle = level 2.
If it's public = level 5+.
I also enjoy making level 7+ flash giveaways.
I don't enter public, non-level restricted giveaways unless there are several copies of the game, or there is another compelling reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
There shouldn't be. We're all in it for fun. ...And some of us just like to make someones day when that little winner cat gif pops up. But then, I got a little serious there I apologize...
What I am really saying is: No matter how many potatoes are in the bowl, you should leave a little room for the fish to grow. Know what I mean?
(Me either)
Comment has been collapsed.
There is one simple reason. Just pushing my lvl to get a higher rating and getting access granted to "nicer" games, just by giving away some higher priced bundles, would make me feel more like a leecher than anything else. I rather do gift a game bought to a friend I do know in real life, than some random stranger. That way I can ensure the game reaches the person I want it do to reach. If I do have a share or fell like giving something out, I try to organize games to give away.
Besides, given your background and condition I would rather save the money to ensure some savings for upcoming bills if anything gets worse and needs further treatment. I do feel you from an emotional point of view, but looking at this from a rational point, this is the worst thing you can do.
I hope you don't feel offended the way I put it here, didn't mean to.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't worry, it sure is a lot that you packed there, but you clearly pointed out your self-awareness . So it rather is something you can look up to, instead of pitying it. From the looks, you are dealing with it just fine.
Your physical situation just reminded me a lot of a good friend of mine. Only difference would be, he officially can't work anymore and is pretty much living on painkillers - this image in mind... well, life is expensive. He is one of those we (my friends and me) usually help out a bit. That's why I said I rather give away a game to a real life friend instead of a stranger.
Comment has been collapsed.
I base my restriction levels on what the value the gift has to me,
Or ini other words
How much would I ask for the game if I would be selling it. for real money.
Comment has been collapsed.
A statement was made in another tread about there being a high degree of antagonism between low level and high level people, something that I've personally not noticed. My experience it's that it's mainly down to individuals clashing, not "high level people" looking down at "low level people", and "low level people" generally disliking "high level people".
Also, exact definitions of high & low level were not given, but level 7 is at least considered high level in this context.
Obligatory GA
Comment has been collapsed.