Do you agree?
it's funny because your last lvl9 GA have 0 winners
Comment has been collapsed.
er, I dunno what you're looking at because they all had winners and multiple entrys. only one had no winner.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hard filters, claim for lower levels. It's a natural compensation. But i agree in public GAs.
Comment has been collapsed.
i say the same about group giveaways, what's the point in being generous if people are going to trade inside groups?
i guess it should be renamed to """"generous"""". 💗
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm a member of Playing Appreciated, and I like that group because I think it helps connect games with the right people. I don't think it has any exclusivity rules -- just put an effort into playing games you win within a month. That seems fair to me, since certain games I would rather see go to someone who will at least put an honest try into it than to an account that enters giveaways for any game and doesn't play it/only card farms.
Comment has been collapsed.
92.9% of your giveaways are group-only, most with less than 20 entries, while you've entered and won a lot of public giveaways.
Perhaps it'd be better to give back to the levels from which you've won.
Comment has been collapsed.
I mostly tend to give away bundles or smaller indie titles so do no restrictions or +1-3 because i figure people that have traded enough to get any higher than that are not bothered by X unknown new game from first time developer of genre they don't like...
If I ever give away anything decent I'll probably make sure to make the level a little higher than usual.
Comment has been collapsed.
By my last public, lvl 2, (test) GA i set from 337 that entered it around 180 on my BL.
Public GA's are autojoiner, bot and extreme leecher infested (i would say from lvl 0 - 4, the users are pushed often with software GA's to the higher levels).
So in my opinion are public GA's mostly only feeding of the wrong people.
In groups it is a bit better.
With sgtools protection (and a 0.5 real CV ratio) i had never problems after the wins.
So are the public GA's from me sometimes good for winning (and not let all go to the autojoiners and extreme leechers) but not for giving away games that should be played or have a higher worth.
When cg REALLY make anything against the autojoiner armies this will MAYBE change (i hope so) -at the moment i see only words what should be happen...................-
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally agree with you about bots and leechers on low level giveaways. Which is why I want to encourage people to set the bar higher.
Comment has been collapsed.
Would not happen....
It tried this with people that set NO lvl by the public GA's -and only from my wishlist-.
I earned 20-30 BL for that (too lazy to look exactly) and around 10 WL.
A good amount of people feeled attacked and thinked i want take all GA's away from them.....
and yes they were mostly lvl 0 or 1.
I adviced security measures like ith with a easy question like "are you a bot ?" to make it joinable for lvl 0 too.
The most people don't want to make themself the work AND want that there giveaways can be seen from all (maybe because they want more WL and hope that more entries = more WL for them. So the public GA function is needed for them -and that make all security measures impossible :o( -.
I gave up to try to change anything -for the moment-.
Only GA's for groups or over my thread with the sgtools protection (all lvl1 or higher with a fair gift/won ratio can enter) and sometimes throw a test GA into the autojoiners and extreme leecher hordes to hunt a few hundreds down (my BL would be, after around 4 test GA's, full -when all on lvl 2 and games with cards-).
1k for BL is much too less
Comment has been collapsed.
Because you don't deserve anything. Gifts are given freely with no strings attached. The idea that you need to be rewarded for your generosity is the antithesis of what it means to be generous and goes against the spirit of the site.
But if circlejerking gifts to your high level, low win ratio, private group members of 15 people who don't want to enter anything for fear of ruining their ratios is what makes you happy then by all means go for it. The fact that there are not as many giveaway types as people like you want shows that there is still plenty of worthwhile individuals on the site/ That gives me hope for he community's future.
Comment has been collapsed.
At a certain point the levels are just grinding. Meaningless, even, if you win more than you give away anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe this is a little true but remember that what in the first place made you use this site is a public giveaway
Comment has been collapsed.
I try to make low level public GAs whenever I can. Due to some bad experiences with level 0 GAs I started making them level 1.
From time to time I make forum GAs and I tend to set those to level 0 or 1.
I belong to a couple of private groups, and I also like to make GAs for Playing appreciated which I set to level 0.
I for one do not consider making high level GAs since I believe that people with low disposible income also deserve to get a chance to win on this site.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm tired of seeing tons of giveaways with no level restrictions. What's the point of having CV and gaining levels if hardly anyone gives away games for only those who have gained X levels. And when I do see level restrictions usually it's only +1 or +2. Big whooping deal. Let's see some high level giveaways! I did some for Christmas myself. Show some love for your fellow whatever number you're at giver's awayers!
[er, guess I should have setup a giveaway along with this post but it was more spontaneous. maybe later I do that]
Comment has been collapsed.