Quote Originally Posted by James View Post
Hi everyone, thanks for the feedback. Let me address the concerns.

This isn't the only way that competitions will be done in future. It will be a new type of competition that we do regularly.

The prize offered for this competition instance is relatively small (a game) because we are still piloting the system and want to figure out if there are any problems before launching something on a larger scale.

I find it bemusing that when people are chosen randomly, there are complaints that the winner doesn't participate much on the forum. When we try a competition that rewards those who participate, then people complain that it isn't fair.

Now our community has competitions that cater to both sides of the argument.

Within the framework of this give away, it's entirely fair. The person who is most active on the forum within a given time frame gets a prize. Being a contributing member on the forum adds value to the forum community.

As many have come to trust our method of community management and moderation, trust that there will be (as indicated in the rules) a strict policy on spamming to boost points generated. It will be pretty obvious when this is taking place, and users can assist the moderation team as always, by making use of the "report post" button.

MyGaming gives away a mixture of prizes that are sponsored by companies, and that we pay for ourselves. It's always indicated which is which. It's a mutually beneficial understanding with sponsors. The companies that provide prizes want to get exposure for their products, and they understand that we want to nurture a community. Through prizes we can both accomplish those goals.

We review products (at our own expense for paying journalists so that objectivity remains) and then give away the review product to the community instead of keeping it among the editorial team. This is because we are committed to giving back to the community where we can, and don't want the spoils all to ourselves.

I hope that answers some of the concerns raised. Please continue to provide feedback and I will respond ASAP.
I think the main concern is, that considering activity as a qualifier, is going to limit it to those folks who spend most of their time in the TK thread - and let's be honest here, that is by far the most active section of the site. And will really only benefit those who spend all their time in there.

Which, while I understand that you're trying to encourage activity on the site, doesn't really mean that activity is going to be what one might consider quality activity.

Of course, I don't know what factors you will be taking into account in total, but I think that's the perception that most of us have right now. Whichever way you go, there will probably always be complaints, because it's impossible to please everyone. I do agree that it's probably necessary to think up a better system than the one previously used, because people will pop on, vote in the poll, and disappear until the next comp rolls along (provided they had their 20 posts already), which was hardly ideal, and resulted in unknowns continually winning.

The original system was a bit of a pain to manage, but setting the bar at a certain level of activity per week (or whatever the comp duration is) was probably the fairest system. Having the activity system in place makes it easier - say, set a target of 10 points (20 points, whatever works) in place, and whoever reaches that target within the competition window, qualifies. If spam happens, then filter the offenders out of the comp.