Orphan Keys Drop Thread

I perfectly understand what you're trying to convey, it's how you handled it I'm disagreeing with. We both agree that comment was needless, no argument there. But let's go point by point.

"The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who is restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt remains, the accused is to be acquitted."
source: Wikipedia

In this case the role of prosecutor falls to you and the role of the accused goes to said user. So you are the one that has to collect the "evidence" to discredit him.

Sufficient proof exists, the user has no way of proving that it can offer the compensation for the unbundled keys. The defense has no way of backing it's claims turning this into a fraud. He backed out, case dismissed.

And that's where our disagreement(and your misunderstanding) lies. Let's clear the misunderstanding first. He never said unbundled games, he said games that were not given out in big scale free giveaways like all those gleam.io we see every day. I don't know if that changes anything in your perspective but the rest of your argument remains valid. As long as the giveaway system includes said game in the list, bundled or not, that could be used instead.
To the disagreement now. What you judge to be "sufficient proof" I simply don't. You have nothing to base your argument besides the LACK of proof. There's not a single indication that there was "malicious" intent. None.
And the fact that he backed out doesn't automatically prove you right, he might as well just not feel like dealing with this drama.

I'm gonna skip the next part and jump to this:

I conclude that the only way the user could have made this correct and fair was to silently add people without asking for a favor in return... []

Only again, he never asked to drop those keys to him which would consist a favour. He simply encouraged key drops which I choose to interpret as encouraging an act he viewed as positive(which if you look at it this way is more generous than making a giveaway considering you get absolutely nothing in return, not even CV, and it's open to everyone)

the user promised a probable giveaway in the future, maybe, for the people that satisfy his criteria. He has to "deliver" that. I pointed out that this kind of comment has no basis as he has no track record of ever doing so, hence the suspicions and the user being able to get free keys in, return, will do nothing on his part.

As I said above no argument on being suspicious, I am too, but jumping down his throat just doesn't sit well with me. you could have said something a million different ways but you chose to directly attack his credibility without leaving the slightest window of doubt. Mood Music. That's inexcusable for me.

And time for the most important point. Let's not forget what this thread actually is!

"Orphan key = A key you're uncertain whether or not got activated, or a gift / key you can't create as steamgifts giveaway"

Uncertain if it's gonna work. Uncertain. So it's a key most people will not risk using in a giveaway in case it doesn't actually work and will have to buy it just for that. And that is what makes the whole argument shaky.

That came out a bit long. Bear with me xD