Same here, but I suppose it's inevitable. I imagine by now word's gotten around that GOG is ripe for the picking when sales are on.

Easy enough to just discreetly screen out anyone you don't think deserves to be in the giveaway. I often did that in mine: screened out obvious scammers/leechers as well as anyone not bothering to follow the minimal requirements I usually set. Never bothered pointing it out in the giveaway thread, just did it when I did the draw.

It's a shame though that it's pretty much mandatory to check this thread to see if newbies are scammers before giving away a game. But that's where we are now. I'm actually pretty much done with giveaways, except a couple big ones I have up my sleeve for the Christmas season. After that, I think I'll just concentrate on enjoying the forum members and playing my games.

how about using pm's to create private giveaways?

*draws blinds
- same as when someone offers a game and gives it away to the first PM - its been misused in the past.

Edit: and yes, the obvious short term solution is for people to donate / enter into the TBBBBOB instead of doing so many small giveaways - or club together and collaborate on some larger ones with a few basic effort requirements for participation.
Abesnt Friends went from about three pages of entries on average to less than one when when we made the extra participation manditory.

Care to elaborate on the concept? What exactly would that achieve?

leechers, lurkers and those with no forum presence winning more GAs.

Yup, it seems manual screening is the way to go. Which is why in my last giveaway I mentioned I reserve the right to refuse entry; this way I can ignore any scammer/cheater with a clear conscience.
If the giveaway requires some effort from the participant I'd give more leeway to new joiners and "good" leechers (i.e. people who mostly only participate in giveaways but at least thank the giver and are generally polite). If all the giveaway requires is "I'm in" I'd be more strict on forum participation rule.

That's not really the issue. People may do with their gifts as they wish. However, just like key-dropping, when some continue to practice it, the abusers keep coming and end up ruining the experience for everyone. That's why I wholly support Sachys and foxworks' initiative and condemn anyone who keeps dropping open keys. It helps to make the forum a more participative community.

The person who finally claimed the code just said "thank you".

I don't blame - I just suspect. And I wrote everything here with clear remark (at least two times, now three), that I have NO proof and ONLY suspicions. Everyone can judge for themselves.

As I said - strange behavior of vtopalov connected with striking coincidence turned on warning light in my head. And this light is still blinking. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps not.

This is lesson I've learned. In next giveaways I will be more restrictive and will check carefully each participant before giving anything.

Tell me about it, seen it too many times. But with all the code dropping and the 'say I'm in and random.org will decide" GAs can you really blame them for not wanting to make an effort?
I'm not dropping the participation requirement from any of my GAs/ public gifting, as I do think that it's the way to go.


Yep, that's my experience too. What's even more sad now, is that GOG Support doesn't even act anymore on reports of admitted scammers.


Have to agree. I thought it was sad to see all those naked codes for TW2 right after the Fall Sale ended - it devalued both the game and the community, but whenever someone tried to point out how detrimental that practice is they were met with indifference and sometimes even with contempt.

thats not what i suggested. if you want to give away a game and avoid the problems which arise with giveaways that are announced in a thread on the forum, you just pm every user that is worthy for your giveaway with a question like this:

"hi, i'd like to give away game x for platform y, do you like to participate (answer me through pm till date z, otherwise i take this as a no)?"

after date z you run your giveaway and inform everyone, who was in through pm, who won the giveaway and pm the winner. a giveaway complete without forum activity.

optional, you ask some or all users that you want in your giveaway to suggest other users for your giveaway (through pm).

wouldnt this solve the problems?
read everything above

I think there also is something to be said about making giveaways with a duration vs. those "first to PM me wins a code". The latter encourages people to "stalk" the forums by rewarding those who are refreshing it every few minutes or so.

I still consider myself very new to this forum, there aren't that many posts of mine yet (but I'm getting there). Giveaways through private messages would create some pretty closed circles of people who know each other. Often small discussion rise out of a blue in forum giveaways and it's interesting to read, comment on the topic without even entering the giveaway. We would lose a big part of those through PM Giveaways, don't you think?

There are a few more problems. If a friend of mine reffers me his newly registered friend, I might accept it. If that ''new friend'' asks me to add his friend(s) to the private message giveaway, one might not like it. So, difficult relationships arise.

And it might be just too messy with all those messages. In my case it would be chaotic as I have some strange memory problems (probably because I'm tired).

You will be less tired if you read less the forum and sleep more... :)

you're way to argue reminds me on the way lugum argued to achieve his goal.

What if... What if there was an option for the creator of topic/thread to exclude certain members? I imagine it like a button, called "Manage users" or "Exclude", placed near the "Reply" button. This "Exclude" opens a small window; there is a search field in which you write a nickname of the person you want to stay away; he/she is blocked and unable to post in your thread. What do you think?

But...it wouldn't prevent a newly registered members from entering. Only known scammers.

Good advice, I will use it soon :)
I don't know this person. Is what you mean a good or a bad thing?