Agree 100%. I'm pretty sure we had a situation before on the older (Steam key) giveaway here, where a certain member was buying up cheap $0.50 Steam keys then donating a dozen or so to "purchase eligibility fast-tracking" here, to "flip" $0.50 donations for $20-$30 game requests and was never seen outside of the giveaway threads.

I get people "may not have the time to post", but that's really the whole point of "active participation rule" in the first place - it kills off the ability of other scammers to create 20x fake accounts, and use them to "flip" cheap key donations -> expensive "fast tracked" game requests with little effort vs the unrealistic effort it would take to fake being 20x different actively participating people (NB: that's not to be taken as an insinuation that anyone above is / wants to do that, but eligibility rules is precisely why we haven't seen people doing that).

I think this can be safely left up to BenKii on a case-by-case basis. Hard rules mean more possibility for someone to try and exploit them (as happened with the key-flipping example from the previous giveaway, where - I think - the host felt too bound by the rules as written to see the undesirability of the larger picture). In general, I agree that "buying in" is unwanted - yet I also feel that BenKii made the right call when he made an exception for MegaBurn two weeks ago.

I agree with you. If we let this to happen, the rule should be flexible to allow BenKiii to control that nobody exploits the giveaway

I'm not even looking at possible exploits. It's the plain fact that the Community Giveaway should promote and reward actual active community participation, that's it. As for the idea that loosening this rule may lead to more donations, meaning that some people who would donate in that case would no longer donate if they'd know that they can't get something for it in return without participation, you have to wonder about their actual end goal and whether those donations can even be called as such or are more like trading, in which case there are other threads for it, or there can be other giveaways with other rules.
Now in case of freebies there are exceptions made anyway, and situations where someone who happened to miss one makes a request may be treated differently on occasion even if the code in question isn't yet in the no eligibility requirements list, but for non-free keys or freebies with limited availability or higher demand, there should be no way around the actual participation requirement.

I was wondering if donating games to giveaways or to users wanting expiring codes would help to satisfy some of the "community engagement" requirement. I stated that I would be posting more, too.

You have all be so nice and welcoming that I'll be sure to post me. And, I'll be sure to donate lots of game.

What if I request a game today and it says Ineligible, can I request it again tomorrow or do I have to wait until next month?

As fas as I know, you can request it again but If you ddin''t meet the conditions to receive the game the day before, next day it is very possible that your request will be denied again for the same reason. That is if the reason is that for example, you are not participating in the forum.

If you request was denied because, there weren't more keys, and next day, there are keys, you can ask for it again

Waiting alone won’t change your eligibility, whether it’s a month or a year. What truly matters is becoming part of the community. That means contributing meaningfully and engaging with others outside of just the giveaways. If you want to join the Community Giveaway, start by becoming part of the community itself. :)

For starters, you just joined this month, so I don't see how you could become eligible until at least a few more months have passed, and that's as long as you'll actually be active on the forums outside of giveaway threads (or asking about them...) during that time, and repeatedly asking before then is just likely to annoy and probably delay things further.
Otherwise, it's as maestroruffy said, you can ask, but the answer is next to impossible to change so quickly.

So, you didn't make an account on GOG to buy games, or even redeem Prime games. You just made an account here to jump straight into the Community Giveaway.

Guess I'm more cynical than the average goglodyte if I'm the only one who finds this a tad suspicious ^^


edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSyiZ61BspU

Huh, not even a glance at the catalog then...

Here's me kicking in the door, "FBI open up" meme style... ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c46_iL2QqOE )


REFERENCE:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post11082
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post11084

DIRECT QUOTE: and Let me lay some criticism where it's due...
No hard feelings! But I'm not going to sugar coat here...


BenKii ( for historical purposes: that's current nickname of current giveaway administrator at time of posting this ), if you thought even for just a SECOND, that this "WON'T be misused", you are somewhat of a naive, perhaps way too innocent, FOOL...
Sorry, but really, this is a naive way of thinking...

People will 100% use this info in undesired ways...

I guarantee you SOMEONE will shame someone else, at some point, be it publicly, or in PMs...
If you think "not" - sorry to say, BenKii - but you don't know society enough...

Now people will be automatically s e g r e g a t e d into "good" and "better".
Who gave how much, who gave too little - if you think, even just for a moment, that this is NOT what's going to happen, you ARE a fool...
SOMEONE will do it, guaranteed!


There are so many unanswered questions about this...


What about those who broke the rules?
As in:
1. They donated key(s)
2. Their ke(s) got successfully activated
3. They broke rules and got perma banned

Will they be included on the leaderboards?


How about those who broke GOG rules, but they haven't been perma-banned from the giveaway?
( yes, there are such individuals, I'm sure at least few people reading this thread know who I'm talking about - including 1 non-administrator hypocrite who would defend that "logic" )


What about suspected accounts belonging to same 1 user?
There are some currently in both threads, and nothing done about it.


What about people who changed their nicknames?
Will they be name-DOXXED out of their every previous nickname?


"Coveted starred donations"...
Okay, what's the system then?
Some games have NOT been in this status, then ENTERED "starred" status, or vice versa ( example: Diablo keys ).
What's the logic here [i]boss?...


And do we only count keys ACTIVATED? Or all DONATED?
If someone donates an Amazon key, the key doesn't get activated, and then expires, what then?
And what if someone donates a key ( for the sake of a cleaner example: NON Amazon one ) - which means that person IS a donator - but then key then gets unused for YEARS?
( donated: 1, activated: 0 )


The list of "what about" could be very long, I could probably write for hours, while I am about to edge the char limit in this post ( note: I am writing this out of order... adding text in various segments as I go )


If you want to "encourage people into gifting more", this ain't it.
The very top of this list will be occupied by rich people who can >> AFFORD << "throwing money at the sun".

Not only that, let's make a hypothetical example here:
10 months from now, "a hypothetical public figure who likes 'vague' ( very clear for Europe ) gestures, and is clouded by bad ( and worsening ) PR" shows up, donates 10 thousand keys ( the example is hypothetical, numbers subject to change ) at once, basically "buys their way to top spot" where they would be gloating as the "king of peasants", forever "tainting" the leaderboard, basically giving a golden throne to a narcissistic maniac, to sit there and look down on people.
And the people would be looking at it Willem Dafoe style:
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/040/775/cover3.jpg
This is a hypothetical example, but it is nontheless POSSIBLE...
This may sound "unrealistic" to some... but sadly reality is often stranger than fiction, and is frequently very dissappointing... so...

You would be giving a platform to clout-chasing rich kids, to gloat in awe ( and self stink ).

This isn't a race to the top. It's a race to the bottom.
Everyone and their dog, and their grand-dog, and their grandpa on TikTok, who has been in this giveaway long enough, knows who the top donors are.

This isn't even a competition.
This is a pre-WON race.
One could say: pay to win.
Except some people can't...

It's all fun and games, until a person who "donated 1 key" gets publicly compared to a person who donated a 100...
What then?
Hmmm?
Are you going to defend each and every case?
Somehow, I doubt that...

The top of the list is going to be extreme minority of giveaway userbase, very few people, double digits, maybe even single digits number, who have donated absolute shitton of stuff over the years, and then there will a giant gap, then "tier of MODERATE donators", and then a giant leap to exorbitantly long list of people who donated 1 or few keys and that's it...

This isn't going to be a leaderboard, it's going to be a "hall of shame".



"You donated 1 key while this other guy donated 1000, ( Black Ops 6 prop hunt announcer voice ) well whatchu gonna do about it?"
NOTHING.
Nothing at all.
If I can't donate, for whatever reason, I don't donate. Being on a public SHAME BOARD isn't going to change that.

People in "tier 3" of the list, often can't donate.
For financial reasons, or any other ones.
Putting them on a public "jester board" isn't going to change that.


Just about the only "encouragement" you can give, is to tier 2, who are on a brink of donating more.
Tier 1 will shovel their money around one way or another, maybe they will even start a small war to outbid themselves on "who's the boss" ( you bet! ).
Tier 3 will change nothing, do nothing, they will just sit there, for the world to see, for people to point fingers at them.
And for what purpose?

BenKii, if this is your "experimental way of encouraging people to donate more to the giveaway", it's a poor idea at best, way beyond terrible at worst.


It's basically saying:
"Hey, it's a community giveaway, with gifting spirit, it's OKAY if you don't donate yourself, BUT here's a passive aggressive spreadsheet comparing you to others, chalk-full of implied nuances".



Tbh, this should be an opt-in, not opt-out.
Making it an opt-out, you are making a whole lot of people not being able to react in time.

Not to even mention, some people may have ( temporarily or permanently ) left GOG - maybe they don't want to be tracked like this - but now they will be JUST because you made this an opt-out...


There was ZERO preemptive announcement - you gave less than 24 hours leadup for this...
It is evening in Europe right now, and some timezones are ALREADY May 1st... ( this post was posted 20250430 1752 UTC+00, for historical accuracy sake ).

You didn't ask for feedback in THIS thread.
You DIDN'T inform the public in this thread.
You just "dunked it" on us, and while this is certainly your right as the Administrator, tbh, this is a little tonedeaf and hastily done change deployment :S

It's akin pushing a commit to "production" server on Friday evening right before extended holidays and then 2 minutes later punching out and dancing your way out of the building...
Not exactly "clean protocol" over here... :S





Quite frankly, I am confused...
What is the goal here? Exactly?

Do we need more reasons to point fingers at each other?
To divide and segregate each other?
Is this what "spirit of giving" has come down to?...


This whole "system" has not a single "pro", but a very long unwinding and unaccounted for list of extra "features" that most people with functioning braincells would consider "undesired"...





Disclaimer:
This is all my own personal opinion. Noone has to agree with me. Keep the discussion civil!

I thought it would be fun.

Ok, where to start with your rant of a post. I left your disclaimer at the bottom in my reply as you say to "Keep the discussion civil" having repeatedly called BenKii a fool (or FOOL as you favoured Caps for that word).
Now in my book, and I guess most peoples book, being called a FOOL is pretty insulting and not the recognised definition of being civil.

BenKii came up with the idea of the leader board as a bit of harmless fun. For people who occasionally are able to donate a couple of games or maybe have some Amazon codes they don't need, it will be nice if they get some recognition.

I obviously donate by far the most - everyone knows this already so the leader board has no bearing on this situation. It is not rubbing anyone's nose in it and is in no way meant to pressure people to donate as many games as I do, which would be unrealistic for most folks.

You then go on to berate those who donate a lot of games as 'clout-chasing rich kids, to gloat in awe ( and self stink )' when the reality is that some people take pleasure from helping out others. If you have the means to do so, what is wrong with that?

I'm going to stop there. I don't normally reply to these type of posts but your tone and wording really rubbed me up the wrong way.
BenKii thought he was doing something that is just a bit of harmless fun and if you disagree with him, that is fine. Your post is not the way to go about it though.

Just so everyone knows, this has been done before in the list of taken keys spreadsheet from previous CG hosts. When I took over from Lone_Scout, I stopped updating that sheet since it took up too much time to do it. Recently though, I was PM'd by a donor who suggested the idea of a Leaderboard sheet and It got me to revisit the tracking again to see if I could make it a bit fun. There's no monetary value for donating tons of games so I can't see how this could be abused. If someone really wants to be on top of the board and donate a bunch of games, well, isn't that what we want? Lots of donations.

I haven't decided yet if I want to track month to month or just total donated starting from May 1st but I'm leaning toward month to month so every month there could potentially be a new leader.

Conversely, if everyone doesn't like this at all, I'll scrap it entirely and we'll continue the CG as usual.