Hamsters should be allowed to have fun. :3

Y U NO READ THE RULEZ?!

No.

Yes, you can join my blacklist, welcome!

Are you still accepting members? Or do I not qualify?

+1

Section 8 Prejudice + DLC, Don't Starve, Dead Pixels, Chivalry: Medieval Warfare, Borderlands GOTY, Velvet Assassin?

In a way, I like how we're stuck at 88. It's kind of weirdly fitting.

Just wanted to let you know that somebody already made a giveaway for that game in the group.

So no more bumping? (I ask as I bump.)

;p

The following is my own opinion and doesn't require a response (this is not meant to turn into a debate); however your post and the general mindset of the SG community that the post eludes to struck a nerve that compelled me to respond with the following:

As true as it may be that people violate the ToS of HumbleBundle & IndieGala, I personally don't believe that most people are aware of their violation (many including yourself have made this mistake) or will choose to seperate the keys when there is no bundle option rather than wait (which I will assume is the correct course of action) or only needed a few keys of the bundle. Moreover the massive amount of such giveaways gives the public a false sense of acceptance to follow suit and make similar giveaways. In regards to non-*'ed contribution boosting as well as the above bundle boosting, I believe there is a two-fold problem which compounds on itself.

When people see that most public giveaways are "penny-fillers", it gives people less incentive to contribute more. Moreover, when the uncommon $3+ (actual cost to giftee) game actually pops up, there's usually a contribution restriction. As the value of the game rises, so does the barriers to entry (contribution value + private group). Now it makes natural sense for a giftee to want to protect their charitable investment from undeserving hands and it's also true some people are truly just interested in only personal gain, but the resulting problem is an elitist culture.

The result of the elitist restrictions and high barriers to entry results in a Catch-22 in which a new member is unable to join others in giveaways of actual games rather than penny-fillers. They are instead stuck with true leechers and will be at a loss to either giveaway penny-filler or take a loss and giveaway games to potential leechers.

If one is willing to take the loss, they are either truly altruistic and/or unaware/indifferent to the concept of leechers or they are incurring a loss in hopes of gaining acceptance into private groups. Overall, I would say far and few are willing to take the loss as a new member. But, of the ones who do, the former (true altruism) should not care to join a private giveaway; if anything they should object the idea of a private entity potentially capitalizing on their charitability. As for members of the latter (acceptance), one should question their true intent of joining a private group. Could they be looking purely for RoI once they've joined a private group? A Catch-22.

Understandably, the above does not describe all people. If anything it merely highlights the middle and ends of the spectrum and the inherent problem in joining and forming private groups of outstanding members.

I would like to end in saying that this is once again my mere opinion and that I am in no means trying to provoke a response.

And yes I do now realize how much I've written as a reply to a post on the 4th page of a thread... ._. Oh well ^___^ Happy readings I hope!

Edit: Oh! P.S. - I'd like to thank Snake (doubt he'll ever see this) for accepting me into his family :)

6 :3