Two-Way Blacklists

I agree with a week max would be much better, but a 1 day min is a bit harsh if you misclicked and had them blacklisted all of 3 seconds.

+1

Basically most of the giveaways are a few days tops, so a week blacklist delay would ensure that nobody unblacklists somebody else only to quickly join that giveaway and keep him blacklisted.

Making it a week long would also be a good indicator saying "if you want to ensure that people that blacklisted you won't enter your giveaway, made it last for a week or less".

Personally I vote for a static week of delay, not randomized one up to 1 day. But that's me, you should definitely listen to other people too.

Another idea, maybe make blacklist delay depending on blacklist length?

I agree with a week max would be much better, but a 1 day min is a bit harsh if you misclicked and had them blacklisted all of 3 seconds.

You could e.g. calculate number of seconds that passed since blacklisting until now, and use it as number of minutes of delay, with max delay lasting a week like I suggested initially.

This way if I accidentally blacklisted X for 10 seconds, I'd get delay of only 10 minutes, solving temporary issues while still enforcing a week of delay for "normal" intended blacklists.

That week max is still a good idea though, just dynamic "up to 1 week" and not static one :3.

Basically we need some minimum length - for example 3 days, so we know how long we can make giveaways ensuring that nobody who blacklisted us can enter them (while at the same time solving mistakes).

1 week would probably be appreciated by people who do long running giveaways, so I'd say it's worth a shot.

To tell truth, I would be fine with even going as far as making "keep someone for a year in blacklist, delay would go for a month" rule.

No proportions about that, just "keep him for 364 days, still one week delay, one day more to make it a year, delay jump to a month".

Unless people micromanaging their blacklists to make sure they'll never get the month-delay would be too much of a server strain?

Yes.

A week seems fair to me. A day is a bit too short in my opinion.

I think one week would be more appropiate maximum because of the event / forum-givaways as well.

I like your new feature very much and I would also prefer 1 week so the chances on a quick un-black list and a quick entry in most of the SG giveaways\events\trains is small.

I'm all in favor of extending it to a week, one day still seems to me like plenty of time to enter the giveaway and then blacklist the user again.

Definitely a week.

Yes, please!

happy cakeday

Yes, I agree.

Take into account that setting a minimum punish misclicks (whitelist button is next to blacklist button...)
EDIT: Oh you mean a minimum for the maximum? Yes, 1 day is too low.

That's an interesting thought as well. That way you'd have to know in advance if a user is going to make a GA you want to enter if you want to unblacklist for that.

In my case, I totally would not mind. If I ever really really feel like someone should not participate in my GA, I will blacklist that person... Though, as I said, I never had that feeling so far, and hopefully I never will.

If the maximum delay is extended to 1 week, that wouldn't be much an issue.
Otherwise, making the blacklistee virtually invisible to the blacklister doesn't give the blacklister much chance to reconsider their blacklist later.

Edit: although, let's not forget the way it used to work until now: blacklisters could just enter anything they wanted. So that's a nice step forward already even with just a 1 day delay: now if a winner has the GA creator in their BL, the GA creator will know the winner is fooling the system and didn't just enter by accident / without noticing he had the creator on BL.

I edited my post, trying to make myself clearer. Again, NOT as a punishment, not to make them feel bad or anything... See my third paragraph, which describes one possible situation I am thinking of.

Other situation: "A" blacklists "B" because "A" thinks "B" is a leecher. Next week, "B" posts 10 AAA giveaways. "A" sees that, and changes his mind, unblacklisting "B". "A" wins "Half-Life 3" from "B", they start to play MP together, fall in love, get married, have 2 kids, one of them becomes president. Ok, maybe "Half-Life 3" was a stretch, but the rest of the story is totally plausible.... :D :D :D

As it is, the situation in the previous paragraph will never happen... Fair enough, I am thinking of exceptions more than the usual BL reasons, but... anyway, the 2-way thing is probably a good change, in most cases.

Cheers!

Do you think constantly publically shaming someone for simply blacklisting you from hypothetical giveaways you probably wouldn't even win will make me remove you? 🤔 You just make my heart race once a week and ruin my day, trying to guilttrip someone into doing something is seriously messed up. If you think that being blacklist justifies the way you treated me for months, constantly posting on every single one of my comment even after I told you that it's not okay for my mental health is seriously messed up. I told you once to stop it, I won't say it again. You can't even be bothered to play 10% of your wins, why do you think you deserve more games in such a way that justifies harassing people for it?

Technically he did, just with another face.

If they have you blacklisted they can't enter your whitelist.

This feature from this script.