It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Ice_Mage: And more importantly, the entire order is the gift.
Oh, I didn't know that. I thought that every copy gets a separate code. It'll be the first time I buy something as a gift and my first (although small) donation. And I want that game for myself too.
Post edited February 01, 2023 by CarChris
avatar
Ice_Mage:
Thank You very much! Your explanation is very precise and with accurate links. Knowledge and effort :)
Post edited February 01, 2023 by KillingMoon
avatar
blueauran: Combat always has to have two sides willing to engage in it...as soon as EITHER side decides it is out of the question, then there can be zero battle. These rules are fairly true. Reasons being why most refuse to be the one to cease any battle is they are afraid of "losing" yet when two people engage in violence of any sort and one side becomes hurt the one who is still standing thinks they are the winner...Still most of us understand the basics...when violence is enacted both sides lose. Best when both sides reconcile, yet again this takes courage. I am quite sure though that such things are possible. It can even be a good practice run sometimes because often-times it is a lot EASIER to do these things over the net than face to face...good training. My recommendation for the currently banned is to remember some of these basics, it is likely YOU should make the first move to apologize SIMPLY because you are in an easier position to do so. All you have to do is avoid the urge to strike back every time you THINK (beLIEve) someone attacks you (or if they are actually attacking you). Sure it can be hard, yet think about that practice run...you are going to come up with situations in life that are a LOT more serious than this one, where you can be dealing with life or death situations. Knowing WHEN to defend yourself (or loved ones), and when to be pacifist can be key to that survival. Way more important than something involving a few free games! I wish you well though (myconv), and surely I wish Lone Scout & the Free give-away they run the same!
avatar
slickrcbd: I'm sorry, but what? This just comes out of nowhere and seems to have little to do with the topic.
Not to mention apologizing for that Zero Tolerance bullshit in schools where if you are ambushed, pushed into a corner, and 5 guys are trying to beat the crap out of you with nowhere to run and nowhere to hide you are still held equally accountable for "CHOOSING to fight" as the guys who ambushed you. "It takes two to fight, if one person refuses to fight there will be no fight" is dangerously naive.
People sure love to argue and fight...what I stated stands pure...call it random or attack it in any other way that you wish. I have to place you where you belong tho for now...on block, and of coarse both mute and ignore as well. I hope in the future you can learn to be more civil to people. Perhaps if you are LACKING in knowledge about anything, try asking questions instead of what you seem to be used to, making assumptions. I REFUSE violence of any sort, either FROM myself or from others...I used to be a street fighter with around 100 scraps, and a boxer with around 45...so I know the mentality quite well, and choose ANOTHER over it :)

Seems the GOG forums is missing one of the MOST KEY and important buttons that almost every other forum has so far in this day and age...a block button, so of coarse MUTE in addition like youtube has is beyond the question until that first one pops...well I can still thoroughly ignore, guess that has to be my one GOTO in this situation. It's ok.
Post edited February 11, 2023 by CaresBlair
avatar
CaresBlair: I used to be a street fighter with around 100 scraps, and a boxer with around 45
If this is true, then you must now that in the very first lesson trainees learn NOT to ask for a fight or otherwise avoid engaging in one. So you needn't answer to slickrbd. You could forget the whole thing (as I'm sure he did after 11 days. I surely forgot what I had for lunch 2 days ago).
Also, no. Not all people love to argue and fight (as the above lesson tells in itself).
Furthermore, one little argument isn't a valid reason to block someone. You could block him if one continuously attacks you. And I haven't noticed such behavior from slickrbd's part.

Happy gaming!
Post edited February 11, 2023 by CarChris
high rated
*** Looking for new management ***


Having managed this giveaway for a time has been a really pleasant experience, but I think the moment to retire and pass the torch to a new volunteer is near.
I'm really grateful for all your help and support, but there have been several times when unexpected RL events have tightened my schedule, and scratching the little time needed to manage this thread has not always been easy for me.
I expect to be quite busy again in one or two months, so I'd like to end this edition and have the monthly giveaway moved to a new thread before that happens.

Does it mean that this giveaway edition is over?
Don't panic! Not at all. The giveaway is still running and it will not stop for the moment. You can continue donating and requesting games as usual. I intend to keep it running until the very moment a new one starts.
All available keys, data and spreadsheets will be passed from this one to the next.
I'll be glad to help the new manager with anything.

Finally, I'd like to thank everyone that has contributed to this thread. Every donation, contribution or suggestion has been really useful. And thanks for your understanding.
You're all the best!
That is a very sad news. You are a really good giveaway manager.
Thanks for all your great deeds to help GOGmunity!
The time has come to review giveaway rules and suggest some changes for a new iteration:

1. We don't need restrictions, which serve no purpose.

1.1. Allow requesting multiple keys in single post, as long as only one of them is non-daggered. Current restriction has only led to frustration and ended up being frequently circumvented by nomination-abuse.

2. Rules should certainly apply to everyone and in every case.

2.1. Forbid nominating users for games, which they have requested violating the rules ( e.g. in edited or merged post ).

2.2. State clearly, when non-eligible users can ask for expiring keys ( e.g. one week before expiration date ).

3. When multiple games are offered as a single list-entry, user should specify exactly, what is being requested ( e.g. the first game in the series, or the entire series ) to prevent misunderstanding.
avatar
Lone_Scout: Having managed this giveaway for a time has been a really pleasant experience, but I think the moment to retire
Thanks for maintaining the community giveaway, good luck.)
Post edited March 14, 2023 by AlexTerranova
avatar
AlexTerranova: 1. We don't need restrictions, which serve no purpose.
Could you clarify some such restrictions?

Edit: Oh, I guess you mean only the 1.1 one.
Post edited March 14, 2023 by CarChris
avatar
CarChris: I guess you mean only the 1.1 one.
Yes, it's the only one in current version of the rules.
The currently forbidden users will be permitted to return to the new giveaway? I don't know what other forbidden members had done wrong, but in my opinion "myconv" it would be good if he was allowed to return.
avatar
AlexTerranova: The time has come to review giveaway rules and suggest some changes for a new iteration:

1.1. Allow requesting multiple keys in single post, as long as only one of them is non-daggered. Current restriction has only led to frustration and ended up being frequently circumvented by nomination-abuse.
For stuff like "I'd like x (non-daggered) game and perhaps y daggered game", I'd be willing to cut some slack. However, from what I remember the one request per post rule was brought in because some people were posting large wishlists of up to a dozen games in preferential order ("I'd like x and if that game has gone then I'd like y and if that game has gone..."). Aside from many viewing this as 'jumping the queue' I don't think people realise just how much extra workload this added on the maintainer who was having to do up to a dozen or more checks for some people's posts vs only one-check-per-post for most others. So I can see why Lone_Scout brought the rule in for maintainability reasons (one request per post = as each request is processed, "I've processed up to post #xx" is easier to keep track of in case the giveaway maintainer gets interrupted mid-thread).
avatar
AB2012: the one request per post rule was brought in because some people were posting large wishlists of up to a dozen games in preferential order
Requesting multiple games at once and posting options in preferential order are completely different things. Allowing former does not automatically allow the latter, they should be regulated by different rules.
high rated
avatar
CarChris: The currently forbidden users will be permitted to return to the new giveaway? I don't know what other forbidden members had done wrong, but in my opinion "myconv" it would be good if he was allowed to return.
I disagree. Aside from most of them being key resellers / scammers caught using sock-puppet accounts, myconv was banned for an increasingly toxic response after people rejected his "We should be allowed to block others from requesting games they really want because I don't know if I'm interested in the game or not and need a few days to decide" suggestion which seemed to stem from him not wanting to use the forum regularly (he was warned at least once that he needed to participate more outside of giveaway threads to stay eligible) yet wanted the list given to him in advance (presumably because he wanted to continue only turning up once a month just for the giveways). Then the guy sent several of us some really weird one-liner PM's (after he was banned) for criticising his "most donated games are 'leftover junk'" attitude. Lone_Scout made the right call there...
avatar
Lone_Scout: *snip*
Your work with the Community GA is very much appreciated Lone_Scout!
First and foremost, thank you Lone_Scout for your work and dedication to the giveaway.

Second, I support the rule change to be able to request more than one game per post if the additional games are daggered.

Third, IMO banned people should stay banned. They are banned for a reason.

Last but not least, are there already any candidates who volunteered to take over?