Eh, call me simple but that seems way too over-complicated to me. Right now you get 10% of the cost of every giveaway created. If it seems like there are too many entries on each giveaway, the solution is VERY simple. Change it to 5%. or 3%. Etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
That would be inefficient in the long term if the site grows to huge amounts of users. constantly changing the percentage to 5%, 3%, 1%, 0.25%, 0.0374% to match the constantly fluctuating number of users. My method would effectively calculate the amount of points given to each user based on 3 simple variable factors. Keeping the site balanced with a high volume of users.
what's complicated? It would be basically changing 1 line of code from
Points=steam price/10to...
Points=(U/G)/(G/P)and setting the variables of no. of users, no. of giveaways and keeping the steam price variable as it was from the original method.
Comment has been collapsed.
One very important thing you have to realize about the current lack of growth on the website is the fact new invites actually are being barred from generation and that is leading to the current stagnation.
Other than that it looks like a very sound setup. I honestly do not have the brain power to work out how everything is effected... Any chance you could create a google spreadsheet or some similar table showing number of points earned per user for a $20 game at verious degrees of user total and giveaway totals? Would make it easier for me to digest right now, and might make it easier for other people who are not math inclined to understand.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your main reason for creating this function for points per giveaway is to open the site up to the public, however the current point system is not the #1 reason the site isn't going public. In fact, I would go as far as to say that a site such as this should NEVER go open to the public. I could be wrong on that, but hear me out.
You solved your problem decently, but the issue is you are asking the wrong question. The question isn't how do we solve point generation and therefore giveaway entry, the question is, "Why can't we open this site to the public?"
In my mind there is one problem that stands above any others. Currently, the site has no automated methods in place for proving legitimacy of giveaways, and related, has no giveaway reporting system. This leads to gaming of the system, which due to invite restrictions and tracking who sent those invites can currently be controlled. If the site is to go public, this would become a much more real problem and points could simply be generated endlessly by fake giveaways, and at the same time these giveaways would be stealing points from users.
But this isn't even considering technical limitations such as server resources and bandwidth costs. It is quite possible that the site is not capable of handling such a large number of users, and there is no formula to fix that, only money.
Comment has been collapsed.
My main reason was to calculate the average number of entries per giveaway if the site was opened to the public.
I don't know what can be accomplished with Steams API, the 'Login through Steam' thing, but possibly if it is allowed by the API, to track the users available items to gift. If the user does not have the game to gift then they cannot follow through with the 'create a giveaway' form. Also servers and bandwidth could easily be paid for with a tiny Google AdSense somewhere on the page.
Comment has been collapsed.
The site is already open to public. Everyone can invite everyone else and those can invite people no one knows at all, how more public can it get?
Comment has been collapsed.
By removing 'invites only' every person who visits the website has the ability to sign up.
Also according to alexa.com, steamgifts is the 31,918th highest traffic website in the USA with only 8000 users. There would be a huge spike in the amount of users if you did not require an invite.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure, but there is a very easy way to keep the giveaways legitimate. Ban every user who creates a fake giveaway. Obviously this would be pretty insane if the site was suddenly open to the public, but given a steady buildup of users (via invites), this can be handled. The bad apples are weeded out, and everyone gets a chance to participate. Since you must have a steam account with games on it to join the site, its a pretty decent way to keep banned users from coming back again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, that's what math is good for. Throwing it overboard the second you don't need it anymore. I feel you there =P
Comment has been collapsed.
I approve. I don't know what I'm looking at, but OMFG MOAR POINTZ! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
You overlooked one thing..more users =! more giveaways.
We have same amount of users, why is there less giveaway?
There is no guarantee more new users would mean more giveaways
Everything else constant, more users = more points generated = more people competing for giveaways = more non-winners
Comment has been collapsed.
i would even say, more people = less giveaways.
i'm not sure if i'll ever make a giveaway for 1000000 people to have a chance
i would prefer to have a slim chance of someone i know getting my giveaway.
and that means, most will go private.
this community should not grow fast!
i would suggest making invite giveaways. something like invite 50 random people a week. and anyone may enter those invite giveaways and try his luck.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here is a quick spreadsheet I made for some reason. Other than the effect that even in a worse case scenario it gives out more points now as a percentage of price than the current system it seems like the math behind it could work, just needs some tweeking.
Ignore the second page, I was using it to fiddle with variables in an attempt to find a way to reduce the point value... I'm not sure how you could do that with the current variables though.
Edit 2. Just realized your equation boils down to (U P)/G Which means the only thing keeping points earned in check would be an increase in the number of giveaways.. Maybe something along the lines of U/(PG) would work better? It seems I've found my brain to work on this math
Edit3: U/(PG) really doesn't work either I think.. Best I have gotten is an equation that is something like (U/ SQRT(U/1000))/(PG)... I think there needs to be a fourth variable to make this easier, because this has just become one of those insane logical puzzles my brain can not let go.
Comment has been collapsed.
I understand my equation works better in higher volumes of users. However 7000-20000 users and only 20-60 giveaways seems highly unlikely. I personally used 2.3077% of the number of users for the number of giveaways the users create, 6500:150 = 1000000:23077; I believe that this is a fairly accurate and believable estimation of the number of giveaways in operation in relation to the number of users.
I think that for 20000 users a more accurate estimation of the giveaways would be 462 (2.3077%). Which equals 1.87 points given to each user per giveaway (worth $20), giving users 52.71 points to spend across 462 giveaways per day (if using my estimated 2.3077% constant).That is just 114 entries per giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
yep, since no invites now the points have dropped way down.
Comment has been collapsed.
been thinking about this and honestly if the ratio of giveaways to people were constant, then yes, giveaways would have thousands of people entering, but there should be that many more giveaways to have a chance of winning. so maybe it would be better to just find a way to combine giveaways of the same game... like now, if you give away multiple copies, you do it in the same giveaway, not make multiple ones (at least that's what you're supposed to do). of course the bigger problem is that the ratio wouldn't stay the same. if the site went public though, there'd be a better chance to get game companies to do giveaways on the site... i doubt they'd care now with only a few thousand users. if only there was a way to attract all the people that life giving stuff a lot XD
Comment has been collapsed.
For my calculations I made the ratio of users to people constant only to give me some values to calculate with. Despite this, my values show from 1 million people only 2.3% (23077) would have to put up one giveaway. I think that this is a believable estimation.
Also, using my method definitely does not mean thousands of people would be entering giveaways; solving this was the main purpose of the thread in the first place LOL.
Comment has been collapsed.
Only the fake giveaways that are caught before completion gives back your points. Ones that you wait a week and receive jack do not even return your points. So I say "What if Points were only given AFTER a Giveaway has been Marked as Received" is a good idea.
Comment has been collapsed.
(U/G)/(G/P)=(UP)/G² which makes the number of the giveaways minimizing the points we all receive. The forums argued on making the gift-giver more rewarded and the giveaways more frequent but your formula hugely diminish the points received when there is more giveaway. Your method creates for a game of 10 $, most popular amount : 794510/72²=15,3 points, creating an inflation. On the other hand if the giveaways were something like 200 at the moment we'd have 1,9 for the same game and users which creates a huge scarcity.
So this idea is not good.
Comment has been collapsed.
in the last 15 hours the number of give aways has risen from 68 to 72, that's 4 giveaways. if receiving 15.3 points for a $10 game using my method and going by the current statistics (7945 users, 72 giveaways), 4*15.3=61.2. only 61.2 points would have been gained by every user. I don't believe a slight inflation at low amounts of users would be a problem when dealing with large amounts of users of the website.
This idea is good :D.
Comment has been collapsed.
I believe my point stands. With 15,3 points per a game of $10 everyone will enter every giveaway and lower the chances for everyone. With 1,9 points per a game of $10 you can't enter any giveaway thus crippling the system.
Either cases are bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
per hour? no.
there was +4 new giveaways in 15 hours, each worth 15.3 points. 4*15.3 = 61.2 points for that 15 hours (only allowing 3 20 point entries per user).
More users = more giveaways created
= less points received per giveaway to balance the system and keep chances of winning the same for the users.
my method makes
8000 users and 72 giveaways, with +4 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 15.3 given to each user for each of the 4 new giveaways = 61.2 pointsmultiply the variables ([U]sers and [G]iveaways) by 100 to get a larger scale picture...
800,000 users and 7200 giveaways with +400 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 0.15 given to each user for each of the 400 new giveaways = 60 pointsIT DOES WORK, NICELY
Comment has been collapsed.
More users != more giveaways created. Users number grows faster than giveaway number. More user less point lowers the chances more than just more users. We need some method provoking more giveaways, not the contrary by giving people less points for more giveaway and creating a brake on giveaways. If we have more users we need more giveaways, if we have more giveaways we need more point, and if we need more point we need some additions to this economy. Some way to produce points by ourselves would be good.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fair enough, more users != more giveaways created. Despite this, my method keeps the amount of points somebody receives relative to the amount of giveaways there are, NO MATTER HOW MANY USERS/GIVEAWAYS THERE ARE. There could be 100,000 users and 100 giveaways, or 100,000 users and 10,000 giveaways. My method always boils down to controlling the amount of entries per giveaway resulting in equal opportunities for every user.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the point system is fine how it is for the amount of members we have - I had to skip entering several giveaways over the weekend so I could save up enough to enter The Witcher 2. Increasing the number of users (i.e. going public) shouldn't require a change as the amount of giveaways opening should balance out depending on how many members we have. The reason we WERE able to enter almost every giveaway a few weeks back was because of the Summer Sale and the amount of gifts exploded (especially low value gifts which were awarding 1 point each), the case should be different now - at least I've noticed the points-pinch.
An idea further up this thread about awarding points after a prize is marked as received is a great idea, by the way.
Comment has been collapsed.
The current method is definately better for the current low amount (8000) users. However my method is considerably superior when dealing with high populations of users and controlling the amount of entries per giveaway.
my method makes...
8000 users and 72 giveaways, with +4 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 15.3 given to each user for each of the 4 new giveaways = 61.2 points = 3 20p giveaways to enter.multiply the variables ([U]sers and [G]iveaways) by 100 to get a larger scale picture...
800,000 users and 7200 giveaways with +400 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 0.15 given to each user for each of the 400 new giveaways = 60 points = 3 20p giveaways to enter.The current method (SteamPrice/10) makes...
8000 users and 72 giveaways with +4 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 2 given to each user for each of the 4 new giveaways = 8 points = 0 20p giveaways to entermultiply the variables ([U]sers and [G]iveaways) by 100 to get a larger scale picture...
800,000 users and 7200 giveaways with +400 new giveaways across 15 hours.
points = 2 given to each user for each of the 400 new giveaways = 800 points = 40 20p giveaways to enterimagine these users having to slave through hundreds of pages entering 40 different giveaways, each with thousands and thousands of entries. With my method they can enter 3 giveaways with a drastically higher likelihood of winning. I hope I have conveyed my message well enough as I cannot be bothered to comment any more on this thread LOL :D
Comment has been collapsed.
You've explained it fine, but my point was that if I am having to skip entries now so I can save up to enter a biggie like Witcher 2, an increase in the amount of giveaways doesn't mean I'll be able to enter all of them either... I'll just be able to enter more, but the percentage I can enter should be the same.
You've exploded enough heads in this thread to know that it will only cause a wave of new forum threads from confused users whining that their "points are being calculated incorrectly". I stress again, I understand your formula - maybe half of the people here do as well - but it's the other half that you risk committing mathecide upon.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now, with the current number of people and giveaway's created, it works just fine, but in his idea, the site is public, meaning TONS of People will be joining, Lets say 20,000+, and Lets assume only 10% of the people Giveaway Games, the other 90% of the people only enter games, So, Everyone already on the site, Plus the New People will be getting even more points for the more giveaways, but also still entering them. Most giveaways would have 1,000's of People in them, at LEAST, instead of the Current Few Hundred, which it is still pretty hard to win, you will even have a less of a chance to win.
His idea however, the more people that join with more giveaway's created would overall lower the amount of points everyone gets, making it so it will be harder to enter a giveaway, but if its harder for you, its harder for everyone, meaning then less people would be able to enter it, keeping it where there would still only be 100's of people in them, and people still have an alright chance to win.
Comment has been collapsed.
you are good at maths and your formula seems to work with only one drawback. you've made a wrong assumption.
you've assumed number of giveaways depends on number of people lineary ( Y = k*X ) while while in my opinion the dependency is logarithmical ( Y = ln(X) )
you can't prove yor assumption, i can't prove mine. so try calculating, what happens if my assumption is correct.
Comment has been collapsed.
from an earlier post:
Fair enough, the number of giveaways does not depend on the number of users. Despite this, my method keeps the amount of points somebody receives relative to the amount of giveaways there are, NO MATTER HOW MANY USERS/GIVEAWAYS THERE ARE. There could be 100,000 users and 100 giveaways, or 100,000 users and 10,000 giveaways. My method always boils down to controlling the amount of entries per giveaway resulting in equal opportunities for every user.
EDIT: LOL I'm not good at maths, although I am fluent in AS3 :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Your math seems all fine and dandy, as do your intentions to make SteamGifts public. However, you seem to be forgetting one important aspect of why SteamGifts isn't public as of yet, one that has been brought up before and apparently ignored.
What's so important, you might ask? How far certain people are willing to go to get an advantage over others. If SteamGifts goes "public" and invites are no longer necessary, then what is to stop people from signing up multiple accounts in droves and simply using them as point farms? It may seem a bit excessive to some, but there are people out there willing to go to this extent to give them a better advantage over others.
Is this possible now? Yes. But it can be dealt with by mods. If it goes public the mods simply wont have the manpower to police the site and the whole point of Steamgifts will become corrupted as this problem begins to grow, as well as people gaming the system in other ways. At least if it's invite only the mods have a way to look at suspicious activity and track it down, and keep things relatively manageable.
Granted that's just my opinion. I may be wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
That problem is already resolved, multiple steamgifts accounts means multiple steam accounts to log into steamgifts. To connect to steamgifts the steam account has to have something like $30 worth of games already purchased. I doubt people will create multiple steam accounts and spend $30 on each one just to have a better chance at winning a $10 game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Producing Steam accounts with $30 worth of games in them doesn't take $30, it doesn't even take much time.
These are just three simple examples that I can think in a couple of minutes. You can create dozens of Steam accounts with $30 worth of games in them with so much ease. That measure only delays the exploiters a few minutes.
On the other hand, keeping the site invite only and holding people responsible for their invites would make it more secure. Though people that freely generate invites and post them on random forums to gather more people indiscriminately may disagree, they don't realize leaving your house door open wasn't really what they meant with the saying "the more the merrier".
Comment has been collapsed.
that's very true. i have already suggested to make the entrance minimum cost a lot higher than $30... $300 maybe:) but registration was closed after all..:)
it would be interesting to check, how many accounts are registered right now with only a humble bundle...:)
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the assumptions for the calculations are wrong. Presuming that 10% of a huge influx would be a good number to determine what portion of new users would contribute is based entirely on mathematics, and not at all on human behavior. There's quantitatively more "greedy" than there are "benevolent". If 1 out of 100 people are benevolent, with the rest being greedy, then logic may dictate that 100 our of 10000 would be benevolent. However, with chance thrown in, I think the number of "benevolent" to "greedy" would actually diminish. ie, 1 out of a 100 would be good, but let in a million, and you'd end up with 10 contributers and 999,990 selfish pricks. =P
Every other attempt in our history as a species to predict human behavior with math has proven disastrous.
Comment has been collapsed.
24 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Luis34345012
1,533 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Whoosh
83 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by GarlicToast
901 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by InSpec
2,041 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by FranckCastle
160 Comments - Last post 11 hours ago by arbutusridge
40 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by OilBud
665 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by JMM72
46 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by s4k1s
2,450 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by Elder53Moloch
19 Comments - Last post 53 minutes ago by Almostn33t
18 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by ngoclong19
100 Comments - Last post 58 minutes ago by Vigant
67 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ghostgg10
I was debating with a friend on how the points system of this website would function if it were open to the public instead of being invite only.
The major problem that arose was the fact that he believed there would be too many users and that there would be 20,000+ entries for every giveaway, resulting in very low chances of winning. This thread disproves this theory and shows how to control this issue with a simple equation.
Example:
So for a $20 game, with a total of 6500 steamgifts users, and 150 current giveaways, would give every user of the site 5.78 points for a giveaway worth $20.
On a larger scale and going by the same example ratio of users:giveaways (6500:150)...
So for a $20 game, with a total of 1million steamgifts users, and 23,077 current giveaways (6500:150 = 1000000:23077), would give every user of the site 0.04 points (rounded to 2dp) for a giveaway worth $20.
Also, at 6500 users with around 150 constant giveaways, I was receiving between 50 and 80 points (avg=65) per day.
so for ease lets say every game is worth $20 or 2 points (using the current 'SteamPrice/10' method)...
so with that we can calculate the average number of points per day if there were 1million steamgifts users and if my new method of calculating points received is applied instead of the current SteamPrice/10 method...
4923 giveaways per day at 1million users. Times this by the number of points recieved for a $20 game with 1million users...
4923*0.04 = 196.92
196.92 daily points per user to spend across 24,077 giveaways.
So that would make every user able to enter 9 20point giveaways per day out of 24077 giveaways
resulting in (9*1000000)/24077 = 373.800723
That's a calculated spread of just 373 entries by users per giveaway at 1million users using my method of calculating points received per giveaway created. Resulting in a very stable and similar amount of entries to the amount of people entering currently per giveaway.
Finally for further clarification, here is another example using 2.5 million users and saying every game is $20 for ease...
0.02 points per giveaway created...
12307 giveaways created per day...
each person recieving 246.14 points to spend across 52293 giveaways per day...
thats the ability to enter 12 of these 52293 $20 giveaways per day...
2.5million users would add up to 573 entries per giveaway across 52293 giveaways. NOT 20,000+ entries per giveaway.
I believe that this would be a far superior method of calculating points and would not affect peoples chances of winning by much. It would also allow for the website to go public instead of invite only, attracting many more users and preventing it from dying as it is currently at 8000 users and just 68 giveaways. EDIT: new invites are being barred from generation atm and that is leading to the current stagnation in users and giveaways.
EDIT: below is a very simple description of what I was trying to achieve by a guy in the comments:
Now, with the current number of people and giveaway's created, it works just fine, but in his idea, the site is public, meaning TONS of People will be joining, Lets say 20,000+, and Lets assume only 10% (most likely less than 3%) of the people giveaway games, the other 90+% of the people only enter games, So, Everyone already on the site, Plus the New People will be getting even more points for the more giveaways, but also still entering them. Most giveaways would have 10,000's of People in them, instead of the Current Few Hundred, which it is still pretty hard to win, you will even have a less of a chance to win (1 in 10000+ chance of winning).
His idea however, the more people that join with more giveaway's created would overall lower the amount of points everyone gets, making it so it will be [slightly] harder to enter a giveaway, but if its harder for you, its harder for everyone, meaning then less people would be able to enter it, keeping it where there would still only be 100's of people in them, and people still have an alright chance to win.
Comment has been collapsed.