As do I. : ) Especially, with emphasis placed upon the preference for tighter qualification criteria.

I have communicated with a fair number of Community Giveaway participants, and some have quite a bit to say (privately), regrettably, I very rarely see these very same individuals contributing their input within GOG forum threads. However, it is certainly possible that they simply confine themselves to the relatively few game-specific forum sections (with new posts) which I do not periodically peruse.

With that said, this is merely feedback, and, obviously, with full sincerity, we must defer to the judgement of the honorable BenKii.

Edit: emphasis on --> emphasis placed upon

I do expect, that option to take starred games in first-come manner will be used very rarely. About 5 times a year, or so. It is a really tiny fraction of all offered starred games through that period of time. The wast majority of starred games will still be distributed on a random basis.

The option is meant for users, who never enter the draws. So they are not excluded from distribution of the starred games.

I do not see, how it could possibly harm anyone, if we put this feature to a test. If it won't work well, we can always return to the current system.

You've really made no coherent argument about why the current system is lacking other than stating a principled disdain for the impartiality and fairness of random chance. You've then bristled at every post that did not agree with your opinion. That's all good, forums are for exactly this type of discourse.

As with many things in life, your "facts" obviously differ from others'. Others have posted the same thing I saw time after time before the starred-game process - a desirable game was posted and gone literally before you could blink. Over and over. The person running the giveaway decided that was unfair and came up with an improvement. And if you're questioning the methodology of the current version of the process out in the open, the reason it got changed to how it is now is certainly not "out of scope" unless you just don't like it, which, again, is plain for all to see.

Benkii gives freely of his time to run this giveaway, which hopefully everyone appreciates. There's no reasonable issue needing to be addressed here, no problem in search of a solution. I for one hope he leaves it as it is, but in the end that's up to him.

I get you, and I'm often all in for supporting experimentation with new ideas and see how they turn out. But the way I see it, this one seems to introduce more complexity and more issues than the one is trying to solve, and caters only to an apparent small niche of users. I don't mean to bash on any suggestion so I hope my comments don't come off as such, but I feel that the simplest way to fix this problem would be to participate in the draw (especially if the idea is aimed at games that have yet to gather any participants) or ask for regular non-starred games. I understand this isn't a plausible nor a perfect solution for some, but the two systems are already on the table: one for those who are quicker and more frequent visitors, and another that gives equal chances to every participant. Introducing a wild card in the latter that could break those chances nullifies the whole purpose of the category, doesn't it? Maybe I'm wrong, but as far as I can imagine it, I feel this could be more detrimental than genuinely helpful.
Just my take though. Let's see what the majority has to say.

Get rid of starred games, make standard cooldown 3 or maybe even 4 months instead:)

A very good characterization of the current system, indicating its advantages, IMHO.

I understand your position and find it reasonable. But I do not think, that chances of participants to random draws could possibly be affected.

The starred category was introduced so solve a well-known problem. People used to ask for the most popular games right after those appeared on the list.

Two alternative solutions have been suggested: random distribution and longer cool-downs. The former has been put to a test, and gained popularity only in time. The latter has never been tested until recently.

Increasing cool-down for standard keys to 2 months resulted in popular games ( like Alpha Protocol ) staying on the list much longer. With a sufficient cool-down, starred games will be available for everyone just the same.
In my opinion, the main advantage of first-come system is certainty. If you ask for the game, you will certainly receive it.

First of all: please stop replying to posts line by line. It's really annoying and I'm probably not the only one who skips such posts completely. Just quote the post you're replying to and put a single coherent reply below it. Thank you.

I believe starred games exist because the donor expects many people to want them. The lottery system offers more people a chance at a highly coveted code. Without the lottery, those codes would mostly end up in the accounts of people who have the most time and favors people who live in the same time zone as BenKii. I say leave it to the donors to decide if the lottery should stay.

Non-starred games were often being scooped up at the start of a month by people eager to get first pick for their monthly game and at the end of the month by people wanting at least something as their monthly pick. I think the move to change non-starred games to a 2 month coooldown is a good solution. (I've seen people with accounts barely over a year old with more than 500 games and that's more than I have on my own antediluvian account. How do they have time to play even a fraction of them?)

--edit--
corrected a typo

Just stepping by to say that i'm in support of the current ruleset and wouldn't think any changes needed right now.

Also pretty sure the some of the stuff that being discussed right now (like single people or only two people entering for a starred game or such) is kind a special situation right now anyway because we had such a huge amount of keys coming in from Docs fightlclub leftovers and this effect will eventually fade out anyway and then the current increased cooldown rules for Standard games and the current rules for Starred games will make perfect sense again. Also i feel like this current setup is a good solution without being overly complicated (both for Benkii and people taking part in the giveaway)

Good summary. I agree completely.

That. Though I wouldn't necessarily call it an advantage, but a standout feature of the CG vs. other GAs.
However, on top of certainty, it also brings responsibility. Obviously, for those capable and willing to feel it, so we're not talking of those (trying to) cheat the system or maximize the games obtained. But those should be weeded out / banned when it's realized what they're doing anyway, hopefully. And the responsible people with community spirit would see a request as something they're fully responsible for. In a draw it's random chance, throw your name in the hat for the heck of it, randomness decides, if you win you win, it's out of your hands. But when you make a request, you take that game from anyone else who may want it. It's a responsibility that should make users who care about the community think twice and make requests when they can justify it, to themselves first of all.

I agree. Initially I've written "choice and certainty", meaning exactly that, but could not find good words to explain it. Thanks.

I am still reading everyone's suggestions in this thread and taking note of them. However, I believe the current system is working just fine but made a small change to the Amazon tier of games. Read below.

Important Announcement:
Due to recent news about Amazon Luna, it is highly likely that future GOG keys on the Amazon service may no longer continue. But rather than dissolve the Amazon tier once we use up all the keys, I've rebranded it to the "Amaz-ing Good Old Games" tier. Basically it functions as before, keys in this tier are 1 month cooldown but instead of limiting it to only Amazon keys, I've allowed cheaper lesser known GOG titles that would have otherwise been overlooked in the Standard tier to go here. Hopefully this encourages folks to request these keys knowing that it's only a 1 month cooldown to try out an old goodie or an obscure indie title.

I guess it's a good idea, maybe also adding all standard key that haven't been requested for like 6 month in the Amaz-ing good old keys too

It's adjustable. I do something similar to the Starred keys if no one enters for them after a certain period of time.