I once seconded an user, this user didn't have enough forum activity recently, but always chat with him, and even help me with some problems, is a legit user so I back him up. I think the rules of the giveaway is to avoid games go to people that are not part of GOG or users that are there just for the free games.

Seems to me like the rules ain't working my dude/tte. If it's curb people just getting things for free, which for the record was already knwon, then this an example of a failure.

You must be joking...

First of all, neither you nor Doc have any say in the application of rules and any "magical bypassess" to them ( cough double standards cough ).
Neither you, nor Doc, is the administrator of current edition of the giveaway.

What kind of logic is this anyway?
Yes, Doc IS a reputable member of this giveaway - at that - he has donated OBSCENE amount of keys, costing a small fortune...
But that doesn't mean he can just "snap a finger and legitimize a rules bypass"...
If we EVER go down this path - if we allow people to basically "you donate enough and you became board member" - what direction do you think the giveaway would go?
What would stop somebody like that to nominate "seemingly random" people, but in reality eg friends, family, and whatnot, or generally "people of interest to them", and "automatically pass the nomination check", JUST BECAUSE "they are reputable" ?
WHAT FOR is the administrator in this giveaway?
What for, if somebody could just throw a bag of money and just have a say, magically?
Isn't that, like, textbook case of corrutpion?

" But Doc said... "
This is such a ridiculous logic...
Smh.

Should we be deeply thankful to Doc0075 for his many and highly expensive contributions across the years?
YES, that would generally be sane thing to do.

Should Doc magically have any "special privilages" just because he threw obscene amount of money around?
NO
And I think, I'm not sure ( and Doc, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong ), but I THINK Doc would actually feel INSULTED at the suggestion that he, who has spent a lot of money, has authority to decide over the giveaway he has no administrative oversight off of, JUST BECASUE he spent a lot of money.

Even just suggesting that "Doc nominated somebody, so the nomination must be honored BECASUE Doc has been throwing cash at us for long enough[/i] is just an INSANE twist of reality.

And while at it, 2 weeks have passed since this:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post5079
This was on 2024, June 25.

and now suddenly the account is eligible somehow?!
HOW?

Isn't THIS
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post5437
mis-application of the rules??
o__O

The account info says " Registered: Jun 2024 ".
The account in question isn't even 1 month old...

How old exactly is "old enough" anyway?????





Gee, nepotism...
Interesting...





tagging:

No intention to engage with the user above anymore, but since others also brought up the rules, let's see what they say (emphasis mine):

"#1. If you donate a key to this giveaway, you're leaving who gets it fully up to my discretion and the rules of this giveaway. If you'd like to pick and choose who gets what yourself, you'll have to open up a giveaway of your own.

#2. Only reputable members are accepted. By "reputable", I mean having an active and positive presence in the community. Who I deem reputable is at my discretion. As a general guideline, you must have a non-recent registration and have been actively participating in the community recently and for at least a month or so. Activity that consists mostly of giveaway entries or low effort posts like short posts on some of the forum games doesn't meet the eligibility requirements. I will be the judge on whether you are reputable enough or not. Once you are eligible, you do not stay eligible for life. I will check your recent activity every time you ask for a game to see if you are still eligible."

So the admin of the giveaway gets to decide, that comes before the mention of the rules. The rules are guidelines, but exceptions can be made either way.
If you're a donor and disagree with that, you can make your own giveaway and no longer donate to that one. If you're a potential recipient and disagree, well, you can express the disagreement, politely, and your arguments will probably be taken into account, but in the end if the decision doesn't go your way, all you can do is take it or leave it. (And I should know, see how much I've been ranting against the "starred" category.) On the other hand, while of course the final say remains the admin's, to me it seems only normal for the opinion of a major donor to hold quite a lot of weight.

Of course, all of this is just my opinion.

That a giveaway host exercises his/her rights to grant or deny things according their own wishes, as stated in the explanatory notes? That a simple private conversation between the host and the donor of the key might allow or deny a game request made?

*shrug* it's pushing it to call that corruption in my book.

Furthermore, what's your beef here? This isn't something you paid for nor is it something you're entitled to. You either get gifted a game or you don't. Don't like it? Well you're of course welcome to rage about it, but it won't gain you anything except maybe a stomach ulcer... but that's a condition to be expected eating such a large case of sour grapes.

Before jumping to those dubious suspicions, I'd take the route of the new user who forces a foul making continuous requests when told he can't. Seriously, think about it

"doing a thorough vetting of Goglodytes is taking too much time for me"
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post4

Validate users, a starred section, a regular section, a daggered section, nominations, keys with expiration dates approaching, daggered requests overflow, keep post2 up to date, receive and deliver keys, a personal life, and BenKii still needing to repeat over and over again the decline instructions to some apparently clueless requests?
Express yours, but I could easily make a mistake by confusion if you would push continuous blunder requests under the excuse of ignorance.

I propose a rule forcing us to understand the rules better and clearly all the time, to be less supportive and condescending to blunder requests and stay alert to #BenKii's replies and announcements. Yes, including little high impact details like correctly interpreting his placeholders, making a single game request per post, announcing the new month, and anything else he needs to organize his own volunteer work without pleasing us first.

Do you notice how the route I propose doesn't insult the GM and donors with dubious suspicions and rather asks our complete disposal to help in a passive but equally important way?

Calm down everyone. The rules are clear and were not circumvented by anyone. Doc simply nominated someone for a game. Doc has the same rights here as anyone. Does not matter if that nomination had been done before.

As for the account in question of belonging to someone else, as long as there is no proof, the person will be eligible.

Just to clear things up, I never at any point told BenKii that My_Acc-My_Fortress is an active member of the community and that their requests should be honoured. It is entirely down to BenKii for that to happen and whatever he chooses to do should be respected given the amount of work he has taken on, trying to keep everyone happy.

Regarding Charodiy_UA, I didn't even know he had been banned from the forum but prior to that he was active and I often interacted with him. When I saw him nominated for a game but by a new user who was turned down, i simply nominated him in their stead. It was for a cheap game that wasn't generating much interest and didn't think it would be a problem.

Some of you really need to calm down, or at least stop and think before you start ranting at people on a gaming forum who are only trying to spread a little joy.

Nothing said so far really refutes my point that in the end if you get a nom from a powerful boi them you're set. Again its just sus going "wellll this person was banned but got in good with me and I didn't know" when you have other people saying that it was "obvious." Peak misdirection. Lol, lmao even. Maybe make a rule that says you have to have an open profile to participle like pretty much most big Steam giveaways.

A thousand times this!

The discussions in this thread (and in the forumin general) are getting weirder and weirder. Sometimes I have the impression that a lot of people are only here for arguing and stiring things up and can't stand it when other people are happy or just want to spread some joy.

I agree with both of you. We are lucky to have BenKii managing the community giveaway, and to have people that donate games,. Let's try to enjoy the community giveaway.

You might need to get the facts together before throwing out accusations.
Benki had handed out a temporary ban of three months. Those three months were over. So that person could be nominated again for games.
Nothing to do with any conspiracy about a „powerful boi“.

I'm thankful to BenKii for an incredible dedication to the mentioned thread and I'm also very thankful to Doc0075 for a level of generocity that you will be hard-pressed to find anywhere else on GOG.

I'm not glued to the thread, but I'm 100% sure neither would violate the trust of the GOG cummunity. Even if a 100 people nominate the same person, as long as one of those nominations is legit, I don't see what the problem is. And Doc is as legit as someone can get.

I really don't understand people who take so much effort to tear down something that has brought so much joy to so many people. Life is too short as it is, try to enjoy it and sorry, but misery does NOT love company lol.
.
P.S. I didn't mean to forget all the other generous people that have donated games as well, I have no doubt the community is grateful to them as well. :)
.

It does not matter who nominates a person. I decide who is eligible. Now if someone wants to nominate someone else, they also have to be eligible for the CG. My_Acc-My_Fortress was not eligible at the time for his nomination of Charodiy_UA so it was denied even though Charodiy himself is eligible. But Doc came in later with the nom for Charodiy and it was accepted. No conspiracy. Everything is still by the rule book.