What level should the giveaway be?
Cool, thanks. It may be a factor that probably most of the community do not browse the discussions. And the people who do are likely to be level 1 or higher. And maybe the higher the level of the user, the more likely they are to be active in the discussions.
Interesting nonetheless! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I did realize this going in, and I would imagine it does impact the voting
Comment has been collapsed.
interesting to see that a level as high as 6 is the trendiest now 0_0
Comment has been collapsed.
My lowly level 5 group has no chance, so I put my vote in with the Level 4! Come on 4!
Comment has been collapsed.
vote in the poll results.
stopped reading there.
we need, like, a TON more of these threads. thanks so much, ChessPie!
<3
edit: juicier than thought!
7 for me. seven is pretty high, but not that much. also, the level where i'd hardest times reaching next one)
Comment has been collapsed.
logic would like everyone make ga at their own level so even if I am not level 8 I will vote level 8 because you are
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting you would vote that. Not that I would be participating in the giveaway, but still I usually do make giveaways my level most of the time
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't do it all the time either, depends the game i give..
But if we want to be logic, why reach a certain level (except for the beauty to give at someone) if it's not for participate in ga of this level and do the same for his own ga (more chance of winning on the one hand and we involve those who invest at least as much as we do)
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure about this logic, personally... There are many factors (especially money) that would prevent part of the community from reaching higher levels. Of course that is just my opinion, and that's why I usually choose level 2: at that level a person has given Something (not just a 1cent game to reach level 1). :D
On the other hand, if I wanted to giveaway something special, I would use different filters (like my whitelist, or Sgtools).
Comment has been collapsed.
as I said, it's more of a basic logic, it depends on the games.
for a game I consider good my logic "seems" good for me
personally I am level 6 and I have not spent any money to increase my level sg, I don't think there is any interest in doing so, in my opinion, no gain at the end and it would certainly be more profitable to buy the desired games directly
reaching level 4 I had no difficulty... level 5 it starts to take longer
so for more "common" games I would say that level 3+ or 4+ would be fine
but like you can see, i made mostly ga for my group or for invite only
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep, I think that I see your point, and many other people do the same here. Maybe when I'll be around here for a longer time I will change my mind :D
no gain at the end
Sure, I think that most of the level 3+ users are people who really like sharing, so many good people around here, it's a nice community :D
Comment has been collapsed.
well im level 8 so i voted 8..but anyways i only enter GA for games that i have in my WL(only 100 games) or some cases when i see a game that i would likely play(rarely cases).
I do almost all my GAs public because i hate the groups giveaways i think they are trash and only for people who thinks they are "selected" and only gives good games in their groups...i don't like that,is like the richier do gives for richier people...But yep...i realize that a lot of 4-5-6 lvls are just hoarder of games..and saw a lot of 7 too..
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you can find hoarders at any level.
The climb to reach higher levels gets exponentially steeper, by design, so those up at levels 7+ are either the most generous and/or financially able or exploit the bundles that return the most CV per investment.
I feel like level 4-5 is a good compromise to target those that contribute and are active, and may actually play the game, without excluding those that can't contribute unbundled games on a regular basis or chose not to take advantage of exploitative bundles.
Comment has been collapsed.
well..if you see my usally gives winner in ranks 5-6...you will see that they are a lot of game hoarders...or only group givers.... I hate that....So... for me now the safer zone to give is 8-9-10
Comment has been collapsed.
I fear that a high level does not necessarily prevent someone from hoarding or giving mostly to groups, while excluding many that do fit your criteria.
It sounds like you may be better served using a custom SGTools filter, where you can specify having X amount given to public giveaways and Y giveaway or Real CV ratio. That way you get all the people you want (those that don't hoard and give to public giveaways) while excluding all those you don't.
Comment has been collapsed.
im not a bitch...anyone can win my gives...but then..if when he won i saw he is just leeching games like crazy i just blacklist them... People can change...then i revise the blacklisth and some people then started to gift games,and i removed them... Im not a crazy giver anyways..im not in groups because of that..no one wants me in any group, but im fine with it. I just give when i can.
Comment has been collapsed.
Instead of limiting entries by level, I'm more a fan of limiting it to people who have the game wishlisted (and have a reasonable sized wishlist) via SGTools.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am a SGTools newbie so always more time to try new experiments with different qualifiers
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh yea I did a lot of experimenting with custom rules when first learning about SGTools.
They eventually got complex enough that no one could understand them at all :p
Comment has been collapsed.
That's one way to do it, though it takes more effort, and it's always annoying when you come across such a giveaway and realize you forgot to add the game to your wishlist. ;)
But that brings up another issue, how do you define reasonable wishlist size? 200? 250? 300+?
Comment has been collapsed.
I polled SG before and 300 was the most popular answer: https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/GbQXo/how-many-wishlist-games-are-too-many
In fact, I'm doing such a wishlist-only giveaway based on that here right now :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I think my wishlist is reasonable.. 14. Personally I think those with 300 are more likely to not play their games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, that's a pretty small wishlist.
Mine was about 100 before SG, and has ballooned to 170 (although that includes a bunch of DLC and free games) after SG. Every game that I want to play, or sounds like something I would want to play, goes on my wishlist, since I browse SG by just checking the Wishlist and Recommended links. I feel like the rate of interesting games that I want to play coming out greatly eclipses my ability to get them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I keep my wishlist small right now around 20. these are games I REALLY want to play.
Comment has been collapsed.
That makes sense. Mine has grown to encompass every game I want to play largely due to SG, since I don't want to miss a possible giveaway for a game I want to play.
Comment has been collapsed.
Level 0 will not win, I can tell you that right now. It will most likely be something in the 4–6 range.
Comment has been collapsed.
Looks like you are right. I know most giveaways cap out around 6 or 7, wasn't sure how that would translate to this
Comment has been collapsed.
Level 4–6 is the golden mean. Mathematically and also in terms of user base behaviour. High enough so those that think SG is a free cookie jar to take as much as they can without thinking about anything else have been weeded out, but not high enough that those who actually sit atop the biggest hoarded piles are not in range yet. The level 5–7 pack is similar, although the averages do not really work by then; however, that is the last group which has a decent number of users, as the last three levels are quite underpopulated.
(Coincidentally, if someone really wants to use levels instead of giving to the general public, level 4 is the best bet as it sits in the best place when it comes to most any arbitrary terms you may want to limit a giveaway to. If you use SGTools, you can even go as far as level 3.75–7.25 to encompass as many as possible.)
Comment has been collapsed.
... since the vast majority of users are level 0 ...
Not on /discussion :p
low\mid levels will vote for their level, higher levels will vote for mid levels because they know that their vote would be wasted otherwise
Comment has been collapsed.
Shit everyone voting his level :D
Thanks for the giveaway tho :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I wish all of you an awesome new year and thanks for the initiative and the poll =)
Comment has been collapsed.
I did not vote my level. I choose a level for a giveaway that I could enter and have a reasonable chance of getting the most votes.
Comment has been collapsed.
The vast majority of registered users may be level 0 and 1, but a large percent of them do not use the site anymore. Also, only the users that are active in the discussions will see this and I think a large percentage of those users are at higher levels.
This type of poll has been done a few times in the past and I think level 5 or 6 usually won.
Edit: Here is a previous thread.
And this is the reason I gave as to why I think level 5 and 6 usually wins.
The results are interesting. You would think according to the statistics, there should be a lot of low level users, but maybe they just don't frequent the discussions as much. You would think nobody would vote higher than their own level because they wouldn't be able to enter the giveaway (there are probably some lower level users trolling and voting 10). You would also think there will be a lot of users voting below their own level because they feel the lower level users should have a chance to enter.
All of these things (other than a few troll level 10 votes) would make me think the results should heavily favor the lower levels, but that is not the case. Maybe it is just the combined efforts of the mid and high level users settling on a compromise. Maybe the level 5 and 6 users feel their level is a good place to be because it is too easy to get to level 4 now, so they vote for their level. Then the higher levels know they don't have a good chance of winning if they vote for a higher level and by doing that, they will basically be throwing the vote away and be giving the lower levels a higher chance to win, so they compromise and select level 5 or 6. Plus, a lot of the higher levels may just feel that it's not necessary to restrict it to that high of a level and they feel 5 or 6 is a good place to pick.
Comment has been collapsed.
That was a very well put way of recapping what it looks like I am trying to accomplish. Thanks for sharing, although I don't recall the topic which I must have missed and just goes to support the not frequenting the discussions logic... 9/10 times I am on forums it is for the "deals" category
Comment has been collapsed.
You would also think there will be a lot of users voting below their own level because they feel the lower level users should have a chance to enter.
S'why I chose level 7 over 6. Seven is only divisible by one and itself. If I vote 7 and I'm still under 7 and 7 wins, I'll only have myself to blame!
Comment has been collapsed.
I would disagree that many of the level o and 1s are inactive and they either don't speak English or are bots./script users.
Comment has been collapsed.
Level 0 user account make up over 85% of all the registered users on the site. Level 1 users make up another 10%. That's over 95% of all users are level 0 or 1. Out of the 1,079,060 users, 1,027,171 are level 0 or 1.
I would guess that there is around 100 thousand or less active users on the site (If someone has an Alexa account, I would be interested to know what they say for the number of unique visitors per month). If that is true, over 90% of all level 0 users are not active. This is probably because they join the site just to see what it is about and then never come back. They might use it for a little while, but find that it's not worth their time because it takes too long to win, so they just stop coming back.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting you would bring this up. I had thought out everything you did and even had a spreadsheet going but at the end of the day did not choose to mention it because of the whole active/non-active (and what would qualify, log in <30 days?)
Comment has been collapsed.
Chances are a lot zero and one levels don't even utilize the forums. They're just here for the free goodies, why bother taking time to contribute to the forum? 🔥 ζ༼Ɵ͆ل͜Ɵ͆༽ᶘ 🔥
I voted level 7 (currently 6.87) because I can.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting experiment! At least possibly shows the level distribution of forum users!
Comment has been collapsed.
Ha yes good point. Maybe this was also even just a ploy or excuse for me to justify buying and giving an unbundled game to giveaway, who knows
Comment has been collapsed.
I think most level 0 users sign up and then don't use the site or forget about it, and certainly don't come into the forums to participate in discussions.
Comment has been collapsed.
If the popular vote is for Level 0, then the game will be some bundled garbage. BUT, if the vote can manage any level other than 0 then I will make the game unbundled. It is your choice.
I'm thinking that many will simply view the current result of the poll, and vote on the winning non-level 0 option unless they are under the level required (in which case they will vote on the second highest voted result, and so on).
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup! I am trying to think what I would do, and imagine it would be vote my level -1, so 7
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep, that is me :)
I voted for level 3 first. Then saw poll results and changed my vote to level 4. By the way I am lvl 5.
Comment has been collapsed.
Level 6 is currently accepted as the "sweet spot".
Comment has been collapsed.
"I don't need a crystal ball to imagine what will happen. That is, since the vast majority of users are level 0, this would then translate to what people vote for." <<
I don't need a crystal ball too, to know that the end result will not be level 0 because the majority of the poll active users aren't level 0.
I am sure at least Level 2 will be the result.
I voted for 6. 69 was not possible :-D but have low hopes that this will be the winner at the end.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, you are right. I blame the flawed logic of the topic creator. Probably why I am not a math or statistics person
Comment has been collapsed.
:-D
Maybe that are a part of your experiment...
Or at least you can sell it this way :-D ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
The results are already turning out pretty interesting. I wonder if they'll shift significantly the longer the voting goes on?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, looked like initially 6 would be a clear winner and now 4 may at least catch up and even overtake
Comment has been collapsed.
Normally it is someone like talgaby doing these type of things, and who knows maybe what I am proposing has been done before ¯\(ツ)/¯. So what exactly will I be doing? Well, good question: I will be doing a public giveaway which I will create exactly 4 days from when this discussion goes live. HOWEVER, the catch is level restriction will be set by you, the Steamgifts community as indicated via the popular vote in the poll results.
Now, I don't need a crystal ball to imagine what will happen. That is, since the vast majority of users are level 0, this would then translate to what people vote for. So, with that said, I am asking you to prove me wrong. Regardless of poll results I will create a giveaway either way. If the popular vote is for Level 0, then the game will be some bundled garbage. BUT, if the vote can manage any level other than 0 then I will make the game unbundled. It is your choice.
In other news: I hope everybody has been having a great start to 2019. Feel free to bump the topic, or not, it doesn't impact me or the giveaway. Also, there is no hidden giveaway or freebie giveaway for those reading, sorry, maybe next time. Best of luck to everybody ^^
Comment has been collapsed.