I totally agree with this, and sometimes I feel that we forget this

Apologies for some of my words earlier, I just looked at the pics in post 1015. While I still disagree with people skimming people's posts from months back in such a manner to determine eligibility for giveaways, I can see why op banned them. That aside, I will still continue my own giveaway to allow some a second chance and spread more games when able.

Wholly agree 100% especially to the last bit. Not everyone is a saint though, and almost everyone harbors or says something that is being dark to some degree. So should every person be exempt from giveaways because they said something a month ago elsewhere online? Regardless it is up to a giveaway's op to determine rules, I was mainly (despite my getting overly and needlessly emotional earlier) trying to provide an alternative where some of those exempt from this giveaway can perhaps get a game now and again. Apologies to anyone if I cause any upset, cheers.

I missed the excitement of the followup, how unfortunate. A blue has made the position clear so I'll refrain from commenting any further, and just leave it at that - to second the remarks stated in post #1035. If you would like a civil conversation elsewhere, my door is always open to you ( (ø,ø) or anyone ).

As for Se7en_Bullets... his eligibility was doomed to be revoked. His position is no longer tenable. I attempted (perhaps in poor taste) to grant him a shot at redemption, and he blew it. I told you not to, silly boy.

Thanks. The word suave is in (at least) the romance languages with varying connotations (French, Spanish, Italian, and naturally Portuguese) and wormed its way into English too. It seems to have helped out in that regard from time to time.

So you said some no no words and the local mall cops pulled up on their scooters like paul blart? Sorry to hear m8.

That clip....such a keeper. Thanks for linking it and bringing back memories :)

Jed made it clear enough in post #1033. To maintain relevancy and civility, as per the code of conduct, or be penalised and take your business elsewhere. If I don't like the moderation of the forum, I can say my no-no words elsewhere :P.
If the decision has been made that echos the sentiments found at the end of post #1001 ("Therefore, misconduct on any other forum should be considered as violation of giveaway rules.") then so be it. It's not my giveaway to demand otherwise. I already voiced the potential concerns regarding that approach.

You're welcome. For a reason unknown to me that film has a permanent residence in my brain...

Maybe too many everlasting gobstoppers? Anyways, gonna leave it there lest the sound of scooters return our way ;)

I have only had one, and one is enough for anybody.

But giveaways are 'the more the merrier', so good thing we have more now eh? Good luck and continued growth and prosperity to all giveaways, and future enjoyment of all giftees!

Are there any giveaways that accept game code donations as "posts" or "social engagement"? I have codes that I will donate to a giveaway. It would be nice if I could request a code every once in a while.

I plan to post more comments on GOG but life is busy. Isn't it? I'm still finding my way through the forums.

Thanks in advance.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/ninja_giveaway_20 - you could post codes, but no payback

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/gogs_general_trading_thread - code exchange

Both Spells & Secrets and Deus Ex Mankind Divided keys have been retroactively updated and expired
Sadly this includes my code for Deus Ex Mankind Divided :/ - Was there some announcement I missed?
For the time being... INDUSTRIA keys are still listing as 2034 - but I would not take a chance and redeem it asap.
I propose being minded about INDUSTRIA keys - so they should proabably go to Daggered in said giveaway If you happen to come accross one
(and don't wish to redeem it yourself or use the Ninja / The Expiring... thread).
- Any Other keys from Amazon Prime that have an extra long expiration dates that can go iffy at any time?

Regarding the post above me - I think the original poster (to whom the poster above me replied),
asked if he can "gain" eligibility for said giveawy through donating codes instead of community participation.
I know the rules say otherwize, but I assume(?) such is mainly due to bad history - when the code donations came from "untrusted sources", to say the least, and we do not want to set grounds to enable such behaviour,
However... I do think there could be made exceptions.
For instance, a generous gifter - one that BenKii is well aware of him/her being such,
whose codes have been redeemed before several times with no reported problems,
should potentialy get a pass for "community" qualification every now and then, This should be obviously entirely up to the decision of BenKii - and perhaps even eliit clearly for the known gifter - that this request should not be approved - but can be if one decides to spend his/her "chance" on this particular request - and gain this request if s/he does agree to not request "qualification required" keys again until qualified by "community" standings / or by dionating more keys, and then gain another eligibilty chance post these keysa get redemed.
What do you think?
I think having such a rule - with discreation it won't guruntee eligibility, can expand the list of donors.

Yes, I posted about it on the main CG thread.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_community_giveaway_6th_edition/post9909

One of the donators of Deus Ex: Mankind Divided contacted GOG support and they reissued him a new key with a short 1 week expiration date. If you contact support yourself, you should be able to do the same thing for your key.

I'm solidly with Cavalary with this one. The whole point of the community GA is to encourage and reward community engagement. Buying in by donation can lead to bad eggs edging in and turning it to their advantage. It's happened before with the now-defunct Steam iteration where someone turned up, dumped cheap product into the hands of the host and then proceeded to request higher-value (higher cost) content immediately. Basically they traded up by leveraging the donor eligibility clause.

Not saying it's guaranteed to happen again, but once bitten twice shy in my opinion.

In my humble opinion, I do not dislike this idea. I understand the concerns about people "buying" eligibility. But at the end, BenKii would be the person who decide if this fellow is doing it to make a better community or to take advantage of the system. Not all the people can read, post, reply in the forums but they can contribute to the community in other ways. For me, giving games for the community giveaways is another way to make the community better.

P.S. I edited to post because of a mistake I made :-) I have try to keep the idea I wanted to say