I, for one, stalk to the level of begging.

What? Another restraining order? Aw, man...

LOL
I'm not quite silly enough to try that.

Not a sustainable model? Wow, I can only imagine how bad things would be around the world if all charities felt this way and just closed up shop. There would be no blood for accident victims, no food for the starving, no clothing for the poor, untold numbers of animals would suffer, etc... I guess we should all be thankfully that there are a LOT of people in this world who don't feel this way.

Charities are 100% sustainable, as long as there are people willing to give. They only become unsustainable if people stop giving, which is exactly what would happen if everyone shared your beliefs. Of course, there are always going to be people that take advantage of charity but those people are the minority and their actions should never overshadow the overall good that charities do and that includes the free games given away on GOG. I guarantee there are FAR more people that are legitimately being helped by such giveaways than are taking advantage and the ones that are taking advantage....well, karma is a bitch.

I have also received some "begging" pms in the past from other users (not from Branjo). I never bother to answer such requests, but i think that begging for free games in pm is quite annoying. We have a gifting thread here for a reason. We don't need people pming random users for games or posting a "can i haz free gaems plox" request in every thread. If you really want a game and can't buy it for whatever reason, just ask for it in the gifting thread, but don't fill the threads with begging posts or annoy people with pms. That's unnecessary and will just get people annoyed. Our community is very generous, but unfortunately it attacts some beggars. There are some users who just make an account jjust to abuse such generosity (like wakalo), but this doesn't seem to be the case with Branjo.

I've ran a giveaway once and received 3 begging messages from people requesting the game before the end of the giveaway. That's kind of annoying. When people do giveaways, they do it out of good will, but then come some "beggars" who feel entitled to have free stuff and start demanding free games like they had the right to receive them.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Branjo is a bad guy. He really seems to be a nice guy, but hey, everyone makes mistakes right? I don't see what's wrong with pointing out annoying things that he (or anyone else) shouldn't do anymore.

His conduct was far from being appropriate. That's what the OP had pointed out. No one is trying to shame him (well, at least from the posts i have read so far the discussion seems to be pretty civil).

His requests were not cool at all, especially the pm targeted at Iuglum. Branjo was impolite with him, to say the least. Implying that Iuglum wanted to do a giveaway to increase his rep was pretty rude in my opinion. I certainly wouldn't like people questioning my intentions on running a giveaway because that doesn't matter to anyone else but myself.

It's very sad.

There's a reason I don't do giveaways anymore, and it's not because I don't love the honest core on GOG. As hedwards said, just say no to them. However unfortunately, just like spam, it's a cheap option and will continue.

Perhaps it's time we just stopped the giveaways?

That could actually be a good idea then all the people that were here for just keys would stop coming and all that's left would be a nice community but then again I do not think there's an actual way to stop everyone from doing giveaways I think some will still persist on doing so.

No way, I love doing my GAs. :p

I've got no opinion on Branjowhatsit either way. But as a matter of general principal if you leave scraps out then you're going to attract in rats. And this forum leaves out a lot of scraps. So I'm amazed at the general lack of rats here. Other sites get plagued by them with far less generosity.

It seems to me that this never needed to be a situation. Whatshisface could simply have been ignored.

I think (just the same as segregating the forums) by stopping the GAs we strangle one of the really nice (actually bloody brilliant and more selfless) things about GOG that does make it stand as one of the best places on the net - but that doesnt mean we cannot be more stringent / vigilant in our implementation of them.
The only kind of GA segregation I would support is that of a new topic for them (much the same as "news" or "questions", but that they are not publically visible, and new members have to pass the same "spam test" they have to for posting links (rep of 7 I belive?!) before they can enter. At least by then new members will have a chance to participate and understand what the community is like / how it is / how it works.
Of course, even then I wonder if it would be for the best, or would it simply open a new can of sausages?!

You know what, begging happens everywhere.

I agree with both sides on this by the way. It's in poor taste to try to circumvent un-wanted keys regardless of way or reason. There's a gifting thread, steam games thread, classifieds, the ninja thread, and of course the giveaway. If you're interested in a game, okay, give everyone else in the world the same fair shot at it. Also keep in mind that at the end of the day it's all plain digital content, a series of 1's and 0's in action. It's a privileged item and not a necessity, and hard times or no the easy solution is to cut back on frivolity, and certainly consider there are more than enough options for the average person to collect games on the cheap otherwise, such as the free indie bundles, giveaways, ninja threads, and so forth if you haven't even a few Abe Lincoln's to put into an indie bundle collection.

On the other hand, those pm's, bad taste yes. Forceful, no. Most will say begging, and it wasn't done with the absolute best of courtesy, but otherwise it was a mistaken moment of judgement. Think about our community in general, a collection of internationals from around the world that have managed to not destroy one another yet, between separate cultures, separate ideology and opinion. When we suspected people were taking advantage of the ninja thread, we rose up and said we won't stand for it, we will find a way that makes this more fair for all of us. When users were stealing and taking advantage in the classifieds, we rose up and said we won't stand for it, we will find a way that makes it safer for all of us.

What stops us from saying that there's a better way to handle this than to publicly lynch one member for a lapse in judgement in something as erroneous as asking for a game?

I agree with you on the first two paragraphs pretty much entirely mate! :)
I dont think however it was Elvin's intent to lynch Branjo, but point out the problem on a broader scale - and that the mentioning of Branjos name was a lapse in judgement on their part. I suppose then they could both be considered equal on that, however, there is a broader problem of this ilk around GOG (as I said in my post earlier I've had others approach me for the sme and know some gifters have also suffered - aside from other similar problems as well).

Thanks for the post though QC - first two bits really struck a chord with me!

This is exactly what you don't want to do. Why would you let such people ruin one of the great aspects of this website? If you really wanted to stop the begging you could simply make asking for keys against the rules and that you get one warning and then your gone, and that includes sending PM's. There are other ways of handling it as well but actually ceasing to have giveaways....well, again, imo that is the exactly what you don't want to do. Again, there will always be people that take advantage of charity. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do about that, but why would you let that change what is unquestionable one of the best video game communities on the internet?

Well, I did say "perhaps". The debate is open.

May I ask - As someone that joined in 2011, but has a rep of 2, I assume you've not been in many giveaways? This is based on the common requirement that you post in them, and as such acquire rep.

I'm just curious (and this is not meant to be in any way aggressive) about why you're here making this point now? Not a challenge, just wondering?

Perhaps you misconstrue my meaning in some ways.

I do not advocate that resources stop being allocated to AID fellow men (in fact, I think the primary purpose of human labor should be to fulfill our more basic needs sustainably).

All that I'd advocate is that we do not rely on a model where people donate to causes on a whim to provide important services (crowd sourcing games is fine, but using the same model to feed the poor... not so much!).

Right now, it feels like many companies donate to charities when they need some PR and people do the same when they want to feel good about themselves. Furthermore, many charities rely on an immediate emotional reaction to solicit donations (ie, look at the starving puppy!) rather than a careful analysis of where resources would be best allocated.

Are there some success stories with charities? Sure, but you also hear plenty of stories where such and such a charity cannot provide it's services anymore due to a shortage of donations (or just mismanagement). You read about it all the time.

I think that rather than rely on the whim of people, important services should rely on studies to find more pressing needs and whenever possible, the fulfillment of such services should be run like a business with as little external dependencies as humanly possible (to ensure greater stability) and where maximizing profits is not the main purpose, but rather providing it's service as cheaply as possible while remaining sustainable.

How many failed charities that provided important services would still be operating today under such a model?

One success story under such a model here is Hydro Quebec, our electricity provider. It's crown corporation which charges it's users for services rendered, but the charges are extremely reasonable because the primary purpose of the corporation is not to grow or make investors rich, but rather to provide electricity. And there is no risk of the company failing due to a lack of donations, because it runs sustainably on it's own, charging it's users a minimal fee for services rendered.

I realize that in some cases, charities can't be ran that way (charities like WWF don't really have end users that they can charge for services rendered though I do think they are picking up the slack for governments not doing their job), but I think we do miss many opportunities where the service a charity provides could operate in this manner.

My opinion is that I would love that every giveaway were in someway contest driven (it's a kind of middle ground opinion between the two of yours). But I won't hold against giversaway to not have that much time to spend into organizing, choosing, messaging, giving ... In my opinion the act and the time spent in giving is worth more than the game(s) itself.

Edit : ok the thread is "officially" derailled.