I don't know if this is a well thought-out plan - but it's all my tired brain comes up with.
In the end the manager who has to do the job - our friend finkleroy - has to decide what can be done.

What about a new thread for every new update?
Rules for that new thread:

*For the first 24 hours no requests should be made, they'll be ignored.
(A better chance for all time-zones).

* Requests limited to only one game per user.

* Edited requests will be ignored.

* No nominations. ???

* The remaining keys will be added to the big list after some time / when a new update is coming up; and then the thread will be closed.

Why a new thread for a new update?

I think it's easier to keep track of the new requests.
They don't get lost in a post with several wishes, like
- 1 from the latest update,
- 3 ? from the normal list,
- 4 ? from the daggers.

You should fear the revenge of a forsaken bride ...

---
I say thank you to finkleroy and
Korotan for
Purrfect Date - Visual Novel/Dating Simulator

and RedRabbitRun for
fault - milestone one.

That sounds like an invitation for confusion, esp. given the way GOG's timestamps work and arguing over whether something did / didn't come before 24 hours were up, as people line up to divebomb their posts as soon as possible once it does hit 24 hours.

And then I requested game A, but someone else beat me by 3 milliseconds, so I'll have to wait 10 minutes to re-post and ask for Game B, lest my post edit-merge?

That sounds ...not fun to me.

Also, I'm not really sure it gains all that much in practical use even if it could work in orderly fashion, since if it posts when I'm at work, or it posts at 4 a.m. local time...24 hours later I'm still at work or it's 4 a.m. local time. I suppose it's possible it happens to fall at 7pm and I know to return precisely at 7pm the next night, but...

I'm not a fan. I wouldn't vote for a new thread each list either, personally.

Just some thoughts off the top of my head, dinner is waiting:
I don't like the idea of a new thread for every update, there are folks like me who only really look at favorited threads as the rest of the forum is meh.

Sometimes 1 game/week/user seems like a good idea, as it spreads things out over a while, and people have a better chance to "fight" for the keys, you have to plan "which one do I want most." OTOH, randomizing the time of day has been (I think, without paying too much attention) fair enough.
I *like the ability to request 3 at once, regardless of which list it goes on--this reduces the workload on my end and on the mod's end:
>they only have to update the spreadsheet per user 1x, I only have to keep track of my requests on a monthly basis and not on "how many times have I requested so far", I clutter the thread with comments which make it harder for others to read what has/hasn't been requested 1x/month (unless I choose to comment it more often, some months I haven't bothered at all as my backlog is large and I feel others would enjoy the games out there more than myself atm), and there is less possibility of slippage due to overlooking something.

I've been happy with the way things were, often I've missed a really good game which would be nice to have, sometimes I got one I really wanted.
I'd also say--for a few months at least--having the limit at 2/user from each "update" list (as opposed to the current 3/user/month) and leaving the current monthly cap alone.
shrugs
I think it is up to Finkleroy as to whether or not some keys should be retained for a month. If it doesn't make it easier to lose the keys, or the order which they arrive in, I'd be fine with a situation where:

"months 1-5 an average number of keys comes in, this is averaged out so Finkleroy knows about how many might be donated. Month 6 (unless it is December) 2x average keys comes in--spread the extra influx around a bit over two months, if the 7th month an above average number of keys comes in some of those get pushed back to month 8 as there is still the influx of keys held over from month 6, etc."

The reason I would exclude December from the averages is that some people are more generous and festive around Christmas-time and in this instance could specify if they want the key they give to go out as a Christmas present-y thing or if they don't care when it comes out.

But yeah, we aren't owed anything, and however Finkleroy decides to run it should be (I'd think) in a way that makes him most happy and doesn't overtax his health, energy, willingness etc or make him burn out and get tired of the job.

What if the OP in question is a request for 2 games, and some time later is edited is to remove a request and not add?

Welcome! I hope you enjoy it here!
If you are interested in social deduction games, I suggest hopping into the current Mafia/Werewolf-style game thread at https://www.gog.com/forum/general/pacifists_at_the_nra_signup_thread_for_a_forum_game_mafiawerewolf

I was thinking a good way to thin out the main keybank would be to up the number of non-daggered keys per month to 5, and separate that from the updates. I was thinking maybe 1 non-daggered key from each new update per user, but then a lot of the keys people really want might be left, so they might go crazy and ask for too many of them when they're added to the main list, so I thought of maybe letting people have a second go at each update at a random time after it's been out for a while and before I add it to the main list. That way nobody would know when it's going to happen, but the most wanted games would be thinned a bit more before everything's added to the main list and everyone can request up to 5. Thoughts?

In my opinion "1 non-daggered key from each new update per user" is the best solution for current situation. In this case more people could play games they really want.

I'd say the thought of 1 Update game per week (up to a max of 2?) would be better than at a random time, because then people could know "ok, I asked on Monday at 11AM, I'll wait until next monday 11AM" rather than constantly checking for what is essentially an early-revealed update, but that's just me.


I think it was Tracks: the Toy Train Tracks Set Simulator Game but Bler already requested it in 343
Also, will the spreadsheet of how many games each person has requested (and how many of each type) be available for all to view?

I'd like to ask for The Bard's Tale. Thanks.

Also, is there currently, or do you expect there to be a limit on the number of daggered games (within reason) that one can get?

Yeah I agree, keep this as simple as possible, I stick with Finkleroy 1st idea (which was the best imho):

limit of 1 non-daggered game from each new update, and 5 per month from the regular list

This keeps the things easier and closer to the current system and don't worry Finkle: the following month with 5 titles available the people will start to requests all the possible game they can. The list will slim down, don't worry!

After 3-4 months we can see how it is going and put some correction on the run

I think If the rule will be 1 per user, the rule is/will be clear: if someone requests 2 games - the requests I think will be not valid. And if you edit to remove, is not valid anyway. Just wait in line and make another new request with only one title
Otherwise will sound like to keep the spot and then choose then with calm

Putting this to a ridicolous extreme condition: I could request 30 titles, marking the spot edit and remove with calm 29 titles

I think the best way is to keep things as easy as possible for FinkleRoy to maintain:-

- Adding a load more calculations like "no requests during the first 24hrs" is going to be a nightmare to calculate the timestamp per request per person, especially when, eg, Australia is +19hrs ahead of Hawaii, and increases FinkleRoy's workload. Randomizing the update time seems more fair with only a fraction of the workload.

- Personally I'm happy with dropping requests per month from 3 back to 2. As others have said for certain games that end up on the list unrequested for months that FinkleRoy is trying to get rid of, simply move them onto the daggered list. The latter should reduce "user request limit checking" for many games that will also reduce FinkleRoy's workload.

- 1 max request per week / 3-5 per month also seems fair if updates are weekly rather than monthly.

- Be careful with locking out "edited requests" on the blind assumptions and accusations that someone must be "reserving a space", "choosing at leisure" or "playing the system". I've made a request before then edited the post (without changing the game requested) simply because there was a typo in it that I wanted to make clearer / easier to read.

- Keep the "no new account + active forum engagement" rules. Obviously there's a vested interest in lurkers creating 10x new accounts to grab 10x new AAA games then reselling the keys on G2A. Same goes with requesting keys for "friends that don't post to the forum". Even if the intention is valid, it's too easily abused.

- Should daggered games have a "common sense" limit? Eg, if someone requested all 120 non-daggered games at once due to "no limit", that seems to be legal even under current rules, though I wouldn't think that would be particularly fair at all.

- I think we should stick to one thread. Having 52x new threads per year for the same giveaway (assuming weekly updates) would probably just clutter the forum. It's also much easier and more convenient to "favorite" the two main GOG / Non-GOG threads and have them appear as easily visible "stickies" than hunt down new threads.

- How about when you do an update, also politely mention in your "Hey there's a new update" post perhaps in bold and underline that asks users about to make a request to scroll up and check to see if the game they've requested hasn't already gone by someone. I do this by default and it could possibly reduce duplicate requests that would also reduce Finkleroy's workload.

We are talking about 1 simple request with just 1 title, who cares about typo? just leave it...

If i request:
May I have Samurai Showdown?
and I type
May I ask for Samrui Showdwn?

It's unsterstandable anyway (and I think many of use copy/paste from the spreadsheet)
and in case of doubt Finkle is not stupid and can ask the user if that's correct
If you are warned about the rule better leave the typo..

or simply wait and create a new post... and in the end even if you miss a game.. patience, nobody dies and no money is lost... there are plenty great free games here
as I always said: nothing is due and nobody has "rights" on it

I never said anything about "due" or "rights". I'm simply commenting that falsely accusing people of being "scammers" or whatever simply for fixing typos or realising that a request is a duplicate and wanting to remove it within say a minute or two of posting to ease Finkleroy's workload or perhaps even making a request then realising that game is already owned, does not set a particularly positive tone for the board... Sure you can make an addendum post which may only appear halfway down the page but if requests are fulfilled oldest to newest, it's still possible that a key will be sent to someone before that addendum is read, which then adds more to Finkleroy's workload to deal with, etc, and my entire post was about reducing that admin workload, not fostering witchhunts against forum members with solid rep and honest track records simply for wanting to correct genuine mistakes.

Granted.
Currently it's technically unlimited, but you should try to limit your requests to around 5 or so per month. I'll come up with a number and set it in stone as we figure out the new rules.