Refine the contest rules...

[TellingMom]

A few suggested amends...

- Any tangible (physical item) prizes need to have a photo of the prize with OP's name and date on a piece of paper.

- OP's own staff, family, and/or employees have to be excluded from any contest they run.

- Contest that are decided by RNG, the process needs to be documented (live twitch video, etc).

I believe these additions would make sure contest are legal, and squelch any future issues like this... http://www.mc-market.org/threads/260313/

 

[MostlySnakes]

This feels like a fucking witch hunt

 

[TellingMom]

I'm glad someone at least opened the suggestion instead of continuing the trash that thread.
I agree with most of the suggestion but I do have a few comments.
- For your first point, in the case of Kylew, he was buying a brand new iPad and didn't have it on him. He was giving a tangible item but he didn't have it at the time. For this, the only thing could be done is show proof of funds.

Maybe it's a good idea to not have contest for items you don't actually have?

- Your second point is very debatable which the replies to this thread very clearly shows. Honestly, after a little bit of searching (not too much) but there are many more laws you have to follow before getting to giving a prize away to an employee. If we are being completely legal on this forum then we could probably go for hours pointing things out. But that's not the point of this thread. If the giveaway poster follows the 1st and 3rd point you stated then the 2nd post isn't needed. The law very clearly states that it has to be random (worded a little better than that though). I'm mentioning legalities because for some reason that was mentioned a few times.
If all giveaway users give proof they are able to give away the thing they are giving away and then Livestream the picking of the entry because you can always redo videos of GIFs until you pick the user you wanted.

I agree if 1 and 3 are followed to a tee, then suggestion 2 is less necessary. I also agree it needs to be live for the aforementioned reasons you gave.

This thread honestly shouldn't use the example of Kylew so much. Mentioning it occasionally is fine because that's where this suggestion primarily stemmed from. But as shown in this thread so far and the main thread regarding Kylew's giveaway the topic creates trash which causes threads to be locked.

What happened in the other thread is a good example why people are upset that there is no accountability for contest holders, and why it should be fixed. Honestly, the majority of the mentions in this thread are the accused, not the accusers.[DOUBLEPOST=1510206996][/DOUBLEPOST]

This feels like a fucking witch hunt

If you actually read the suggestions and the point of the thread, it's to fix the contest system, not to punish anyone from past incidents.

 

[Kram]

Maybe it's a good idea to not have contest for items you don't actually have?



I agree if 1 and 3 are followed to a tee, then suggestion 2 is less necessary. I also agree it needs to be live for the aforementioned reasons you gave.




What happened in the other thread is a good example why people are upset that there is no accountability for contest holders, and why it should be fixed. Honestly, the majority of the mentions in this thread are the accused, not the accusers.

I understand it's a good example and that's why I said mentioning it sometimes is alright but making this thread focused on Kylew is unnecessary and that looks like what it's leading to.
It's fine if you don't have the item at the time honestly. In my opinion, buying the item on the spot actually saves some money and makes sure the package is new and works amazing. When you already have it you had to buy it previously and that costs some money and you probably had to have it shipped to your house then the house of the giveaway winner. This causes the fee to be ever so slightly higher and if you buy it and ship it directly to the winner's house there is a less likely chance the item will be damaged or broken. And even if it is that's not entirely the giveaway host's fault and instead the company that's shipping the product.

 

[NarutoAlts]

Good Idea[DOUBLEPOST=1510331363][/DOUBLEPOST]Also This would improve a lot

 

[Riaz]

The iPad situation was obviously a scam, now to prevent this I fully agree with all parts of this suggestion.

And for the argument against the Staff/Close relations part; It's not bias, it's the exact opposite. It's preventing bias, and these should all be taken in place to avoid more illegall activities on this site. I mean a lot on this site is illegall, but it doesn't mean we cant take smaller measures to atleast do less illegall activities here and to overall improve the function of the site.

 

[Mick]

I agree that the giveaways forum does need a significant cleanup and needs to be reorganised/revamped. I'll move this to pending for future reference.

Thanks for the suggestion @Op.

 

[Mick]

I believe that what's being asked here is far too excessive and unnecessary to be implemented. Since this one very particular case I'm not aware of any other situations where something like this has happened (over four years ago now, wow!). It's a waste of staff time and resources, and will deter many from posting giveaways/contests which isn't ideal either.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion