Future of the MyGaming Community Steam group

[Jan]

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.

[Graal]

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.

[PsychoFish]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[BeoTeK]

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.

[Dohc-WP]

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.

[Solitude]

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.

[Flex]

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!

[PsychoFish]

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!

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.

[Flex]

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.

Jup exactly, you can't always keep every1 happy!

[StaggerLee]

[MENTION=289]Jan[/MENTION]

When will this stuff be finalised? In other words, how long do we have to respond?