Would it sting less then if it's removed entirely from the list for a time of nomination? As long as it's possible and doesn't interfere with managing the whole giveaway, of course. I mean, it's just an idea.
That's an excellent idea. I'm going to start doing that. I'll leave the rule there in case someone sees the game that's been nominated before I'm able to remove it from the list.
Yep, that's how it should have really been all along imho. Granted, with zeo's policy of accepting requests as backup in case nominations are denied or ignored, couldn't really be done, but in all fairness once someone is nominated, that game isn't available anymore, and requests after a nomination are unfair both for any others who choose not to request after seeing the nomination and for the nominee, who may feel some pressure to refuse if someone else wants that game just then.
Concerning nominations, I understand they're there to get keys moving, but it always stings when the game you wanted for some time gets nominated as soon as it appears on the list (looking at you, Dying Light). It doesn't sting as much if someone requests it before you, but with nominations, I don't know.
Anyone else feel like that?
Not me. There was this discussion before, and it led to that tentative limit of nominations made. Admittedly, the rule allowing nominations was created back when the available games list was huge and the problem was to "get rid" of some faster, but even now, it's in the spirit of giving, and as long as you don't have someone making lists of nominations that really drain the pool, leading to one or two people essentially deciding who each game goes to, it's all fine. It's still a matter of someone who wants the game seeing it before you, just that they want it for someone else instead of themselves.