B1tF1ghter: And as always - zero reaction to legit feedback - only "criticism bad" spiel...
Braggadar: Very well then.
Your post was difficult to read, not only for its content but for its lack of structure.
Well well well... I'm sorry to dissappoint you, I am not a book author ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Braggadar: You cherry-picked the worst possible outcome of BenKii's idea
I pointed out a possibility.
Is it bad?
Or would you like to keep living in a delusion of "this what I described being IMPOSSIBLE"?
You know, it's really not a great idea to put equal sign between "unlikely" and "impossible". But alas...
Braggadar: behaviour of users here not currently on show in the GA now
You must have not been paying attention as some people already HAVE:
1. Tried to "buy their way" into being accepted into the giveaway ( with varrying results depending on giveaway edition )
2. Tried shaming others for number of keys donated. Some even with passive aggressive "suggestions" of "insufficent donations, while taking things".
You may faint ignorance, but both things DID already happen.
Braggadar: the activities of donors and donees hardly being hidden from sight nor difficult to collate
Prior to THIS LIST there was NO list that would tally people with nickname and "numbers of keys donated". There was only "donators list" ( nicknames only, no numbers ).
You may PRETEND like going through couple hundred pages of the forum is an "easy task" so "anyone can ALREADY tally this", but:
1. This is a lie
2. This doesn't include keys donated, but not yet activated. As well as keys donated, and then expired.
I would like to also point out that the original wording of the original idea made it sound like "spreadsheet of all keys donated ever, TOTAL" and not a "reset per month". Just so that we are on the same page.
Basically a "permanent hall of shame", and not a "monthly shaming contest with same winner ( almost? ) every month".
Braggadar: Said prediction was based on very little real evidence that a text leaderboard with no other benefits but ego-stroking would lead to attracting attention-starved rich people to spend like wildfire in order to "win the race".
Bold of you to claim there are no books describing sociopaths and narcissist doing more or less this exact thing in non-game-giveaway scenario.
The " "prediction" " was based on:
- humanity's long and more-or-less well-recorded history of behaviours
- millions of posts online, showing vile behaviours, behaviours of "no consequences because this is ONLINE" ( noone can slap you through the screen ), and countless others
There's plenty of "evidence" of what hummans are
CAPABLE of. You are just choosing to turn your head away and whistling around, pretending "this SURELY won't happen TO US".
And it's not a prediction.
I don't know what WILL happen.
I am pointing out what CAN happen.
And when you pitch the idea, you should always consider all pros and cons - sometimes POSSIBLE cons are enough to discard an idea.
For all intents and purposes it would seem BenKii only ever considered the pros of this idea, and several members of the community are peddling alternate reality echochamber in which "low-likelihood" == "impossible".
One should never, NEVER, assume that "everyone will behave orderly".
Your plan should NEVER set "baseline" at "perfectly disciplined squeaky clean citizens".
This is a surefire way to get to "find out" part.
Braggadar: You failed to explain how having big-spending egomaniacs flooding the giveaway with thousands of keys is a bad thing
for the majority of the community. Because it's a part that doesn't need explaining. You REALLY are trying to PRETEND like this is some sort of stereotypical exaggerated "tipping scale with 2 spots", when it's really not.
Obviously more donated keys are a benefit, a pro, that goes w/o saying.
But the cons will not magically dissappear, because it's not a scale.
Braggadar: You deliberately overreach when conflating the issue into the realm of "doxxing" previous names of accounts, something which is for the most part rectified by simply telling the host to remove or change their name on the leaderboard.
"Sir! Please remove my non-public information after you have
ALREADY doxxed it for the world to see".
Ah yes... of course...
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/mobile/000/022/138/highresrollsafe.jpg Braggadar: You make generalisations on the wants, likes and dislikes of community members. ie Not everyone gives a damn whether or not a leaderboard is used, either a donor one nor even a donee one.
You know - it's really
funny how you accuse me of generalisation, and then you do the exact same thing.
I never said "everyone will have the same opinion as me". It is
MY opinion.
You are free to have yours.
But then YOU strongly suggest in-between lines that "if not everyone will care, then it doesn't matter", whereas it's really not how this works.
My posts alone are already proving my point:
some people DO care. Even tho many may perhaps NOT care.
You can't just say "majority of people don't care, therefore it's a non-issue".
Braggadar: This is coming from a user which would be very low on the donor list and very high on the donee one.
You really ARE petty.
Let me repeat myself like a broken record:
this
isn't about
ME.
It's about the whole idea being wrong. Stop TRYING to spin this around "ME problem", as it is NOT one.
Braggadar: You failed to realise that people calling others out, belittling them and picking on them based on the leaderboard data would possibly result in the aggressors themselves being banned from the giveaway.
Your assessment is incorrect. CCTV cameras don't stop crimes. They only register them.
Banning someone won't reverse any possible emotional damage already done to some individual being called out and personally attacked.
Braggadar: You say the host has the right to do whatever they wish, but don't accept when BenKii doesn't run it by the community first on an arbitrary thread he didn't create. In other words you don't respect the rights of the host.
This is such a dense take...
You seem to be in some grand delusion of:
"Admin can do whatever he wants, therefore admin cannot be criticised", and "criticism equates to lack of respect".
I can respect BenKii's decisions, AND I can simultaneously criticise them.
Those 2 things are not mutually exclusive.
Braggadar: Every claim of non-insult preceding the word BUT is considered to most people a thinly-veiled
lie. Your lack of respect towards BenKii was further proven by the repeated use of the word FOOL. You want responses to be civil, yet lack the ability to speak tactfully yourself.
Mighty hypocritical of you mister "don't give a damn".
And if the word "fool" sparks such an outrage - you people seriously have nothing better to do with your lives...
Yeah - sure - TRY and spin this machine some more, after all the word "FOOL" is the most important - NO - the ONLY important part of the relevant msg!
Have you met MURPH yet or is it not enough spins yet? :P
Braggadar: Your personal grudge against BenKii is clearly affecting your judgement on this matter.
Wow. You really went out of your way here to make s**t up! xD
I don't know what fantasy top hat you pulled THIS rabbit from. What else is in there? Are you also going to look into a crystal ball and tell me how I currently look like?
Dude... It's HILLARIOUS... You tell me, you claim, I have a "grudge against BenKii", based on zero evidence, where's evidence mister "where's evidence, I got you now! haHAAAA!" ?? :P
CRITICISM does not auto-equate to "grudge".
I
don't have a grudge against BenKii, and I find this accusation totally
hillarious...
This has
nothing to do with
me NOR with
BenKii.
I am criticising the IDEA. It's really bland and dissappointing how many people here have this "frat culture" attitude of:
"you are getting things for FREE ( eagle screech for comedic effect ), don't you DARE speak out against our lord and saviour giveaway administrator. dUUeh!".
Dude, if a different giveaway administrator would pitch this idea, I would criticise it all the same. If I would donate 1000 keys myself, I would ALSO criticise this idea!
Because this has NOTHING to do with me, or the giveaway admin, and EVERYTHING to do with the IDEA.
The idea is simply incredibly short-sighted. And
evidently an echochamber of "people who fail to see the problem" has already formed and is functioning well...
Stiffkittin: without the overuse of text formatting
Oh no! How dare you use the bbcode the forum CMS gives you for your disposal! GAH!
**hillarity ensues**
xD
Stiffkittin: Making imperative statements—particularly at the end of a lengthy diatribe—statements that lack the expectation of refusal can be and are absolutely described as demands. This goes double when the whole thing is written in Bold text.
Gee! Thanks for the tip mister "English language EXPERT from New Zealand" /s
( I repeated it a whole lot of times over the years, INCLUDING in this thread, that Eng is NOT my 1st lang, and I DO make mistakes sometimes, but I'm not expecting you to comprehend it at this point, after all you just want to nickel and dime me on words while ignoring the whole core point )
Cavalary: Like I said above, make donation recognition (for lack of a better term) be separate from leaderboard presence, and specifically ask at least the first time once the leaderboard is active, unless the donor specifies their preference on their own.
Yeah the thing is... the OG idea WASN'T an "opt in". It was CLEARLY worded as opt-OUT...
OPT-IN instead of OUT, would fix MANY problems ( not all tho ) with this ( shortsighted and naive ) idea.
