Future of the MyGaming Community Steam group

Jan

Jan

Grand Poobah
It seems I may have left posting this thread too late, but let's see if we can try to make the best of a bad situation.

For those unfamiliar with the situation, I'm going to ask that you find out the details elsewhere (or PM me for my take). I'd rather not summarise it here, as I don't want my summary becoming the topic of debate instead of us discussing the solution.

I have been in contact with [MENTION=7921]dampi256[/MENTION], who explained his side of the story to me.

It is also available for anyone to read elsewhere on these hallowed pages.

He also said to me that in his opinion, the issue has been resolved and he has moved on.

Unfortunately, we can't just leave it at that anymore.

Putting aside - for the moment - all the emotional stuff I'd like to discuss, there are a few questions the community needs to answer about how (or even whether) the Steam gift community should proceed.

  1. Who will be adding and (more importantly) removing members from the group?
  2. Should we ask for nominations for new officers to assist in this? If so, how many officers should be added?
  3. Should the rules be amended to allow for members such as dampi256?
Keep in mind that the MyGaming Community Steam group's original stated function was not to replace the existing MyGaming.co.za community on Steam, but to complement it.

It was a way for longstanding members to create Steamgifts competitions and limit entries to other longstanding members of MyGaming. The reason for this was in part because gifts meant for MyGaming members were being snapped up by outsiders and foreigners.

When Steam launched reviews the group explored a secondary role of writing reviews for games, and new officers were added (only officers can post reviews). If this is something you would like to be part of, please mention that in your suggestions of options on how we should proceed.

I put the above questions to the existing officers of the Steam group, and got very similar responses. Thank you to everyone who took the time to respond, and please accept my apologies for not reacting on them (i.e. posting this thread) sooner.

  • Dampi was not singled out (this was confirmed by fresh complaints which hit the forum this week from members who clearly were inactive).
  • Without Eugene and Wyvern to implement the rules the community launched with, someone needs to step up to do so. (It would also be great to have both of them back, as well as everyone else who has left the group because of this situation.)
  • A few of the officers said they would be willing to help, but some also added that voting for people to do so might be a good idea.
  • Regarding the rules: most officers who responded felt that the current rules requiring folks to have 20 posts in the past two months anywhere else on the forum was an acceptable minimum requirement.
All of the above taken into consideration, there are a few options that I think the current members of the Steam community should vote on.

Before creating polls, however, I would like to open it up for folks to suggest additional options.

Here's what I think should be on the first poll:

  1. Proceed with the current rules.
  2. Proceed with the current rules, but include wording that members should be given a specified number of days of advance warning before being removed from the group.
  3. Change the rules to include posts and/or creating give-aways in the Steam giveaway thread towards members' minimum activity quota.
For the second poll:

  1. Ask one or more of the existing group officers to ensure the minimum activity rules are adhered to.
  2. Nominate and vote for additional officers to ensure the rules are followed.
If you think additional options should be added to these polls, please suggest it in this thread.

I may structure the vote as a single poll with six options (or more, depending on suggestions), rather than separate polls.

Before I will consider the poll(s) representative, over 50% of existing members of the Steam group (i.e. 31 people) have to vote.

If you feel that people who left or were kicked from the group should also be afforded a chance to vote, please say so in the thread, but be aware that this will increase the size of the "quorum".

Should there not be enough voters, I won't discount the results of the vote, but it may just not carry as much weight as a more representative poll would.

tl;dr: Would you like to see changes to the MyGaming Steamgifts group rules? Would you like to nominate and vote for new officers? Weigh in below so we can vote and move on.
 
I think it's really unfortunate that people who are not active outside the community group are kicking up a fuss because they got kicked. Everyone was aware of the rules and nobody can be excused for not adhering to them, especially because the group is first and foremost there for active community members.

I think a warning PM for members about to be kicked is very reasonable. I also think the rules need to clearly stipulate that you will be kicked if your activity level is consistently low. Obviously it's not possible for people to always post on the forums as much as they'd like, because real life and other obligations do sometimes get in the way. But if you're never posting outside the thread then you need to understand why you're being kicked. I didn't participate in the giveaways thread so to me Dampi is a complete stranger. That goes against what the community GAs are trying to do.

I also think there needs to be a clause that in no uncertain words says that by participating you understand and accept the rules and will not kick up a fuss when you're found to be in contravention of the rules. The application of rules needs to be black and white. Either you're following the rules or you're not. No subjective interpretation based on external criteria. That's the most fair application of a set of rules. You can post an appeals PM, but otherwise you will only be reconsidered when your posting activity aligns more with the rules of the giveaway group.

I've got heaps more to say on the emotional part of this and I'll probably end up getting 3 infractions if I say what I really want to the member responsible for all this drama, but let's leave that for another space. This thread probably isn't the place for that.
 
Last edited:
  1. Who will be adding and (more importantly) removing members from the group?
  2. Should we ask for nominations for new officers to assist in this? If so, how many officers should be added?
  3. Should the rules be amended to allow for members such as dampi256?
Keep in mind that the MyGaming Community Steam group's original stated function was not to replace the existing MyGaming.co.za community on Steam, but to complement it.
Click to expand...

I believe that there should be "Membership" Officers to ensure that the group stays current and these should be the only people adding or removing people on the group.
I believe that a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 active and willing participants should be the group officers. Personally I would love to see Eugene and Wyvern stay on, but they need help.
I'm not in favor of a huge rule change, however I would suggest we look at possibly rewording the rules and make sure these are enforced on a regular basis.

Here's what I think should be on the first poll:

  1. Proceed with the current rules.
  2. Proceed with the current rules, but include wording that members should be given a specified number of days of advance warning before being removed from the group.
  3. Change the rules to include posts and/or creating give-aways in the Steam giveaway thread towards members' minimum activity quota.
Click to expand...

I suggest we proceed with the current rules, but include wording that members should be given a specified number of days of advance warning before being removed from the group. This does not need to be made public, however it does need to be handled on a one-on-one basis.

  1. Ask one or more of the existing group officers to ensure the minimum activity rules are adhered to.
  2. Nominate and vote for additional officers to ensure the rules are followed.
If you think additional options should be added to these polls, please suggest it in this thread.
Click to expand...

All of the above, as mentioned I think Eugene & company needs help and the rules must be enforced. Failure to lay down the "law" will cause its own problems.
 
Thanks for this Jan.

My sentiments have pretty much been said already by [MENTION=18030]phalen[/MENTION] and [MENTION=4467]Graal[/MENTION].

I however am a bit more of a heartless person (according to my ex) and would go as far as saying that no warnings should be given. Each person is aware of the rules and regulations upon entering the agreement that is by joining the group. Infractions to the rule should deem an immediate kick/ban from the group. No questions asked!

I think there should be at least 2 moderators to the group, but no more than 3 and this should be put up to a vote by the community. Giveaways should not be considered activity, as this should come down to forum contributions. I believe that the group should be by invite only, and that the user should have a forum account that is older than 6 months (maybe three at minimum). Maybe even go as far as voting on accepting the user into the group by means of a 30% community avg in order to be accepted.
 
It is just sad that the actions from 1 Narrowminded Misguided Forum member (not even the one who was removed) has caused the MASS EXODUS and ALIENATION of all the longstanding and Most Contributive Forum users (He is willing to Damage the whole steamgifts group for the sake of fighting and defending for someone who never asked to be fought for in the first place).

I Personally felt like removing him from the steamgifts group (Due to his Agressive actions and disrespect for the officers of the group) but i will leave that decision up to the other other Officers and Jan as that would have probably opened another can of worms.
 
There are two groups. One for people aren't that active and then the one in question, the one for Valuable Community Contributors.

I believe we should stay with the current rules. I also don't think it's necessary to warn people. If they need a warning then they aren't a Valuable Community Contributor.

It is my opinion that Eugene and Wyvern did an excellent job and that it's a shame that tempers flared up. It's like I said in the other thread: Everyone thought they were doing the right thing and in a way they were. However, and it is a big HOWEVER. The rules were decided upon in the beginning for a reason.

To get angry about enforcing the rules is understandable. It happens every day in all kinds of areas of life. They way it was done was probably not the best but I understand the reaction completely. But the rules are the rules and they make sense. The other group is there for those who aren't active.

I originally told Jan otherwise but I'm willing to help Eugene and Wyvern if they are willing to stay on. Eugene spent so much time updating the thread and enforcing the rules that it's something that I don't see other people doing that well. Wyvern is having a bit of hard luck at the moment. If everyone can just give her some support at the moment that would be really great and maybe she will stay on.
 
As quite a new member who is regularly on this forum and trying to contribute, it wasn't nice seeing all of this conflict on almost every part of the forum.

It seems that there are grey ares sometimes when it comes to rules and certain members. unfortunately rules are rules and placed there for a certain reason in the first place.

I just believe that if a situation like this does occur, and people are unhappy or want to know why this decision was made then they can message an admin directly. Handling it privately and not Hi jacking the whole forum to make their own point heard. I really believe that new members can get the wrong idea about this community and forum if all they see is conflict and people being nasty to each other!
 
Flex said:
As quite a new member who is regularly on this forum and trying to contribute, it wasn't nice seeing all of this conflict on almost every part of the forum.

It seems that there are grey ares sometimes when it comes to rules and certain members. unfortunately rules are rules and placed there for a certain reason in the first place.

I just believe that if a situation like this does occur, and people are unhappy or want to know why this decision was made then they can message an admin directly. Handling it privately and not Hi jacking the whole forum to make their own point heard. I really believe that new members can get the wrong idea about this community and forum if all they see is conflict and people being nasty to each other!
Click to expand...

It's not a unique thing to MyG, I have been a forum administrator for another South African forum for close on 7 years now. I can tell you that infighting, backstabbing and crap happens everywhere. Whenever rules are applied there tends to be some animosity and claws come out. Hell, some of the admins of that specific forum also get death threats for applying certain forum rules. I think Jan is handling this admirably and we as MyG can only grow out of this entire saga. If that means some rules get tightened up it will be a good thing. Nobody will ever be 100% happy, even if rules were fairly applied and sometimes you just need a thick skin to get through it.
 
PsychoFish said:
It's not a unique thing to MyG, I have been a forum administrator for another South African forum for close on 7 years now. I can tell you that infighting, backstabbing and crap happens everywhere. Whenever rules are applied there tends to be some animosity and claws come out. Hell, some of the admins of that specific forum also get death threats for applying certain forum rules. I think Jan is handling this admirably and we as MyG can only grow out of this entire saga. If that means some rules get tightened up it will be a good thing. Nobody will ever be 100% happy, even if rules were fairly applied and sometimes you just need a thick skin to get through it.
Click to expand...

Jup exactly, you can't always keep every1 happy!
 
Dohc-WP said:
It is just sad that the actions from 1 Narrowminded Misguided Forum member (not even the one who was removed) has caused the MASS EXODUS and ALIENATION of all the longstanding and Most Contributive Forum users (He is willing to Damage the whole steamgifts group for the sake of fighting and defending for someone who never asked to be fought for in the first place).

I Personally felt like removing him from the steamgifts group (Due to his Agressive actions and disrespect for the officers of the group) but i will leave that decision up to the other other Officers and Jan as that would have probably opened another can of worms.
Click to expand...

could not have said it better myself!! absolutely spot on! i find it absolutely absurd that one single member was able/allowed to utterly decimate an awesome thread/group :(
 
I have been avoiding this whole topic since the start as personally I think all this drama is just a waste of everyone's time and energy. I have looked at the group history and all the people that Eugene removed, and I think he was being 100% fair in his decision to remove these members. A lot of the people that were removed are very old members of this forum, but they have been inactive on the forum for some time and no longer qualified for the criteria of the group as stated in the rules.

In my opinion, the rules are fine as is and shouldn't need to be changed. It's sad to see the whole community falling apart because one person (somewhat admirably) tried to defend another person who was removed from the group due to inactivity outside the group. It's even sadder that the person in question seemingly completely understood (and accepted) why he was removed from the group and did not ask (or need) anybody to defend him. Rules are rules and shouldn't be bended to accomodate anyone who doesn't like or agree with them. If you don't agree with the rules then you shouldn't even be in the group.

It's really not that hard to contribute to the forum. I'm not the most socially active person, but I can always find something to post about and I think I have contributed a fair amount to this forum. Nobody has time to sit on the forum the whole day and post on every topic that interests them, but it really doesn't take much to stay active. I mean, I'm not even trying and I'm still in the top 50 activity group (just :p) for the Xbone comp, although I wouldn't mind winning it. As others have already stated the whole reason the second group was started was because people who weren't actively making a contribution to the forum were winning games meant as a reward for contributing members. There is a completely seperate group for people who just want to add some of the forum members to their steam friends and maybe play a game or two together. This group has no membership criteria and anyone can join, regardless of how active they are on the forum.

I think, in future, before someone gets kicked/removed from the group the officers should discuss it via PM and then also inform the member in question of their decision to remove him. This way the member can get an understanding of why he will be removed from the group and a period of time can be alloted to try and get his activity outside the GA thread up to an acceptable level to ensure that he stays in the group.

I commend Eugene and Wyvern for all the work they did with the group and it was really sad to see them (and some of the most contributing members of the group) leave because of all this unneccesary drama. The rules were enforced correctly and instead of causing a public spectacle the person who disagreed with the enforcing of the rules should have contacted Eugene (and/or the other officers) and Dampi via PM and discussed it with them privately. If the person could not agree with how the rules were being enforced and no understanding was reached between the involved parties, he should have just left the group of his own accord. As previously stated, rules are there for a reason and we cannot start a massive forum argument everytime someone gets removed from the group and someone doesn't agree with it. I agree with some of the other people that the person who basically caused this rift in the community should actually be removed from the group, but since he has not broken the rules I feel it would be unfair to do so. In the end I hope we can all put this drama behind us and I really hope Eugene and all the other members who left will eventually return and we can keep on doing awesome GA's for an awesome community.



Damn, that came out much longer than I thought it would :p

tl;dr Let's put all this useless drama behind us and continue the GA's. Rules are rules and should be enforced without someone losing their shit over it.
 
Last edited:
1. As long as those who are in charge help to keep the thread consistent and relevant.
2. Civility is in order (as it used to be - before the shenanigans).
3. Giveaways are done simply and preferably only those who really wish to enter should (bit of a tough call to make here).


*post subject to changes*
 
Wlad said:
I have been avoiding this whole topic since the start as personally I think all this drama is just a waste of everyone's time and energy. I have looked at the group history and all the people that Eugene removed, and I think he was being 100% fair in his decision to remove these members. A lot of the people that were removed are very old members of this forum, but they have been inactive on the forum for some time and no longer qualified for the criteria of the group as stated in the rules.

In my opinion, the rules are fine as is and shouldn't need to be changed. It's sad to see the whole community falling apart because one person (somewhat admirably) tried to defend another person who was removed from the group due to inactivity outside the group. It's even sadder that the person in question seemingly completely understood (and accepted) why he was removed from the group and did not ask (or need) anybody to defend him. Rules are rules and shouldn't be bended to accomodate anyone who doesn't like or agree with them. If you don't agree with the rules then you shouldn't even be in the group.

It's really not that hard to contribute to the forum. I'm not the most socially active person, but I can always find something to post about and I think I have contributed a fair amount to this forum. Nobody has time to sit on the forum the whole day and post on every topic that interests them, but it really doesn't take much to stay active. I mean, I'm not even trying and I'm still in the top 50 activity group (just :p) for the Xbone comp, although I wouldn't mind winning it. As others have already stated the whole reason the second group was started was because people who weren't actively making a contribution to the forum were winning games meant as a reward for contributing members. There is a completely seperate group for people who just want to add some of the forum members to their steam friends and maybe play a game or two together. This group has no mebership criteria and anyone can join, regardless of how active they are on the forum.

I think, in future, before someone gets kicked/removed from the group the officers should discuss it via PM and then also inform the member in question of their decision to remove him. This way the member can get an understanding of why he will be removed from the group and a period of time can be alloted to try and get his activity outside the GA thread up to an acceptable level to ensure that he stays in the group.

I commend Eugene and Wyvern for all the work they did with the group and it was really sad to see them (and some of the most contributing members of the group) leave because of all this unneccesary drama. The rules were enforced correctly and instead of causing a public spectacle the person who disagreed with the enforcing of the rules should have contacted Eugene (and/or the other officers) and Dampi via PM and discussed it with them privately. If the person could not agree with how the rules were being enforced and no understanding was reached between the involved parties, he should have just left the group of his own accord. As previously stated, rules are there for a reason and we cannot start a massive forum argument everytime someone gets removed from the group and someone doesn't agree with it. I agree with some of the other people that the person who basically caused this rift in the community should actually be removed from the group, but since he has not broken the rules I feel it would be unfair to do so. In the end I hope we can all put this drama behind us and I really hope Eugene and all the other members who left will eventually return and we can keep on doing awesome GA's for an awesome community.



Damn, that came out much longer than I thought it would :p

tl;dr Let's put all this useless drama behind us and continue the GA's. Rules are rules and should be enforced without someone losing their shit over it.
Click to expand...

Wlad for president!
 
Hagan said:
1. As long as those who are in charge help to keep the thread consistent and relevant.
2. Civility is in order (as it used to be - before the shenanigans).
3. Giveaways are done simply and preferably only those who really wish to enter should (bit of a tough call to make here).


*post subject to changes*
Click to expand...

Elimination rounds of Rock , Paper Scissors seems to be the only way to go forward!
Here is a link to all of the rules from the World RPS Society: http://www.worldrps.com/gbasics.html

Please go and read up everyone so that no one gets hurt!
 
BeoTeK said:
Thanks for this Jan.

My sentiments have pretty much been said already by [MENTION=18030]phalen[/MENTION] and [MENTION=4467]Graal[/MENTION].

I however am a bit more of a heartless person (according to my ex) and would go as far as saying that no warnings should be given. Each person is aware of the rules and regulations upon entering the agreement that is by joining the group. Infractions to the rule should deem an immediate kick/ban from the group. No questions asked!
Click to expand...

Solitude said:
There are two groups. One for people aren't that active and then the one in question, the one for Valuable Community Contributors.

I believe we should stay with the current rules. I also don't think it's necessary to warn people. If they need a warning then they aren't a Valuable Community Contributor.
Click to expand...

I concur with this. If it takes you a week to notice that you've been kicked, well... :p Point proven.
 
Hey people, I think it might be a good idea to split this discussion between the two currently active threads. Let's reserve this thread for suggestions and feedback on how to run the group in future and use the other thread for the discussion of the emotional side of the discussion. We're all a little on edge and we'd like to run our mouths, but let's make it easier for Jan to sift through the actual feedback. :p
 
Another thing I'd like people to consider re: warning PMs is the extra admin that it generates. People like Eugene and Wyvern have full time jobs. Expecting them to send out warnings to people who don't participate is adding unnecessary extra work.

If you have to be warned then you're probably not a valuable part of the community and like Wyvern said, they don't have time to babysit people like they're 2 year olds. Maybe the onus for ensuring people comply with the rules shouldn't be moved over to the moderators like what is being suggested now, but should instead be left in the hands of the people. They need to ensure that they're complying with the rules on their own.
 
The_Imp_ZA said:
I concur with this. If it takes you a week to notice that you've been kicked, well... :p Point proven.
Click to expand...

I also feel that warnings are pointless, especially when you consider that anyone that has been kicked could quickly earn their way back into the group with minimal effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top