I think it's a great idea to replace the starred category with a longer cooldown. It should be much more effective at making people only request games they really want.
The proposed 3 month cooldown also seems fine. You can always reduce or increase it at a later time if needed.

Would you be noting the date for each recipient, so the cooldown is 3 months exactly? Or would you keep the monthly refresh, so people could theoretically request a game at the end of a month, and then request a new one at the beginning of a month 2 months later? Or were you thinking of one game in the 1st quarter of a year, one in the 2nd, one in the 3rd, and one in the 4th?
Not a fan of the last one, as it would still make some people use up their request on whatever at the end of a quarter if it's refreshed the next day anyway.


For those who are worried that the "good" games will still get taken quickly, there's a good chance that the next time a "good" game shows up the one who got the last one is still locked out. There's also a huge difference in what different people think of as good games, and when requests are more limited some might start thinking that maybe it's not such a good game for them after all.
And for those who are worried about if they should request a game because something better might turn up later, then that's not a game you 'really' want anyway, is it?

This is also a good idea for making people prioritize games they really want, but it seems like it might be a lot of work to manage. Things like people losing/regaining eligibility might complicate things further.
Not to mention having to explain the system to new users of the community giveaway, some of whom can't even figure out that they can only request games from the list on their own.

It will require exactly the same amount of work as the newly proposed one as both systems would require tracking users for the year.

I actually like your buying/bidding idea the most, if it could be done properly and without too much work for the host. It would make people prioritize the games they really want, and it would get rid of first come, first served.
However, it will require a bit more work than just tracking who's on cooldown.
You'd have to set a certain amount of time for each game and keep track of that, since bidding can't stay open forever. And if people are given too few points to spend, there would be too many instances of people bidding the same amount. But with too many points to spend people could potentially end up with more games than with todays rules. So you'd probably have to have a monthly/bimonthly etc. limit anyway, and then you'd have to keep track of both cooldowns, points, and countdown for each game.

The problem is not the limits. The problem is the lack of donors. No new rules are needed. The old rules worked well. We just need every member of the community to help in this topic as much as possible, and not just wait for new games.

In the new BenKii's proposition he will still need to track people much often and in the same period of time like in my system.

As I saw many times, BenKii (after updating the list) allows users to post for a longer period of time. That time does not need to be set in stone, next BenKii's post would be enough as the mark of end, just like in current rule connected to the announcement of new month.

With the same amount of points from a few users the game goes to the first one.

Set 12 points/year as the maximum (like in my example) to prevent that.

We could just need some test period. :)

So true. This is true. +1

Makes things as simple as you can. One game every two months? No problem, the list of users giftees changed every two months. No points, nothing strange that do work.

Starred category is a good idea and is not mutually exclusive with a cooldown or so many per year instead of per month etc.

Your suggestions almost necessitate a starred category. If the amount of games gotten is less than there will be more struggle over the expensive well liked games.

What would be good is if we allowed at least a limited amount of Steam etc. games. Then there would be less struggle over fewer games because alot more games. People get lots of extra Steam games from varies sources, alot of which include games people can't use because they already have it or don't want

I think there is (was?) non-GOG version of community giveaway but I've never tracked it as I'm not interested in any non-GOG games.

The problem with Steam keys is that there is a lot of junk. One way to filter would be to only allow games that are also on gog, but I don't know, I guess gog will want to sell their own games to make a profit.

BenKii's running the GOG GA. We've already discussed this here in the thread: if you want the Steam (non-GOG) giveaway, then you can dig into your own time and set it up and ask for donations.

GM #BenKii, how will you mitigate the discouragement of donations for games that are not the most wanted and those having an expiration date? Personally, I'm happy when my donations fly and unhappy when they rot. Doom 3 is an excellent game, but I'm not sure people would easily request it for their quarterly pick. A few minutes ago I preferred to drop it in the ninja thread.

That doesn't make any sense at all. With a longer cooldown there will be more people locked out from requesting games.
Are you saying you would hold off on requesting games until the most expensive ones turn up? If so, that's just fine, because it will mean more games for everyone else.
Not everyone thinks the most expensive games = the most desirable games.

See rule #6 here: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post1

BenKii marks donated keys nearing the expiry date with a dagger, which don't count toward giveaway limits. If you had donated your Doom 3 key and it went daggered I'm sure it would be snapped up pretty quickly then. If it didn't, then it's a case of no-one really wanting the game at all (for whatever reason).

Posting open or solvable codes in the ninja thread has zero protections from being taken outside of the forum community, so it's not really a community donation as such.