What's new
By:
Filters
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Trade/Giveaway Guidelines update! ~please read

  • Thread starter adnedarn
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The first time #10 is even mentioned to me by administration will be the end of my giving anything away to the community at large. Whose stuff am I giving away?
 
Last edited:
Why is that? We've given you all the tools you need to give your stuff away to whatever group of people you want to. If you want a specific post count, require they've not received any other giveaways is so many days, require they've done their own giveaways... whatever. Heck, you can even disallow specific people from participating in your threads as a whole (giveaways and other posts you start on this forum) by simply adding them to your ignore list (Click on their name, click view profile, click add to ignore list). All we are asking is that you are specific so people know if they qualify or not, if they don't meet the criteria you've put in place- then they don't qualify.
 
adnedarn said:
Why is that? We've given you all the tools you need to give your stuff away to whatever group of people you want to. If you want a specific post count, require they've not received any other giveaways is so many days, require they've done their own giveaways... whatever. Heck, you can even disallow specific people from participating in your threads as a whole (giveaways and other posts you start on this forum) by simply adding them to your ignore list (Click on their name, click view profile, click add to ignore list). All we are asking is that you are specific so people know if they qualify or not, if they don't meet the criteria you've put in place- then they don't qualify.
Click to expand...

This definitely merits further discussion, but before I engage in it a stipulation is required Andrew. Are you willing to stipulate that this new rule is in direct response to my requirement of not being able to think of a reason to not give my stuff to people before considering them qualified? It's always good for all parties in such matters to know where they stand, and for each party to know the other is aware of both positions.
 
I think the issue is that when people post using "Giveaway for Active Members" they arent using stipulations so lurkers/new members are entering the giveaway. At least thats how I see it.
 
No, the rule was not in direct response to your statement. With the creation of the "give away for active members" it has become a nessasary statement since some have used that, and not given any requirements.
Like this one www.terraforums.com/forums/carnivo...45-nepenthes-dubia-jamban-rooted-cutting.html
I was thinking about your statement from the chat box this am as I've been working and I think we might be on two different trains. These limitations of participation don't mean you have to pick the recipient from the list that is formed. Once the entry time ends you are free to pick who gets the giveaway using whatever method you want. The restrictions of participating are to help you get a list of only who you want to consider, which is why it should be clear on who can sign up.

Does that clear up our intentions and fit what you're looking for?
Thanks!
Andrew
 
I'm going to take a moment to explain how I approach giveaways now, after several years of dealing with frustration and discouragement in this realm. I'm going to be very blunt for the sake of transparency and honesty. If you are worried that I'm going to offend your tender sensibilities, then you'd best stop reading right now. I have no intention of justifying my choices.... Just saying.

I like the fact that there is now a For Active Members Only listing option, since I don't care to give away plant material I have worked hard to produce and care for to someone whose only participation here is to sign up for free stuff. Those people are automatically excluded when I do a drawing for plants/seeds. I regard those people as "gimme gimmes", since the majority of this contingent contributes nothing to our community. If I think someone is incapable of caring for a valued plant, they are ineligible. If I just don't like someone - they aren't going to get the plant/seeds/whatever. I get to decide who I think is worth investing in.

That said, I will gladly narrow down the parameters that define who qualifies if that is deemed meaningful in the eyes of admin. Anyone who qualifies can sign up, but by no stretch of the imagination does that mean all who sign up are actually in the running for the gift. As John would no doubt point out - it's my plant material to give away - I get to make choices about how I want to parse the list of potential recipients in ways I find meaningful to me.

Perhaps - as I've chosen to do - John could simply plug in to a giveaway formula admin approves of, and continue making the choices he's comfortable with in silence :)
 
Since Whim has gone public with his approach I feel that it is only fair that I join him. I too have been using his method for my own give aways. No fuss, no hurt feelings, those folks are just quietly excluded in private.
 
Ok, so this change is intended to prevent potential misunderstandings, correct? I will grant you that potential misunderstandings are a real problem. But they pale in comparison to actual misunderstandings, wouldn't you agree? So using an actual example of a real misunderstanding, we currently have a giveaway in progress in which the donor required a specific # of posts to qualify. One person with approximately 1/10 the required number signed up. What are you going to do to address this actual misunderstanding? It certainly represents a bigger problem than a misunderstanding that hasn't happened. Of course you're not going to do anything, and rightly so. It's the job of the person doing the giveaway to police such things. Why isn't it my job to police those who misunderstand my qualifications? How does someone misunderstanding my vague requirements negatively affect you or the community any more than someone misunderstanding crystal clear qualifications? The burden should be on the donor in both cases. It seems clear that you're attempting to solve a problem that isn't yours to solve.
 
  • #10
Are you referencing the same post I did above? I believe those with not enough posts posted in the thread before I asked him to specify his requirements and he updated the post with the post requirement. The two posts above yours are what we would expect people to do, for plants they care where they go and why the sub categories were made. Will some not follow the requirements? Yeah I bet so... But clear guidelines should help get the best list for you to choose from. If you wish to not post guidelines and pick who gets your plant from a complete list of any members then post under give away. When posting in giveaway for active users you need to give some type of clear guidelines starting point.
Hope that helps.
Andrew
 
  • #11
adnedarn said:
Are you referencing the same post I did above? I believe those with not enough posts posted in the thread before I asked him to specify his requirements and he updated the post with the post requirement. The two posts above yours are what we would expect people to do, for plants they care where they go and why the sub categories were made. Will some not follow the requirements? Yeah I bet so... But clear guidelines should help get the best list for you to choose from. If you wish to not post guidelines and pick who gets your plant from a complete list of any members then post under give away. When posting in giveaway for active users you need to give some type of clear guidelines starting point.
Hope that helps.
Andrew
Click to expand...

Although the use of the method of screening used by Paul and Judy is not something I would argue against, I do find it somewhat disturbing that it is codified as forum policy. Incentivizing the secrecy inherent in the method, and disincentivizing open honesty doesn't strike me as being in the good of the community.
 
  • #12
SubRosa said:
So using an actual example of a real misunderstanding, we currently have a giveaway in progress in which the donor required a specific # of posts to qualify. One person with approximately 1/10 the required number signed up.
Click to expand...

If someone attempts to sign up for a giveaway of mine, and they clearly do not understand (or didn't read) the conditions, they aren't going to get the material I am gifting. Immediate disqualification. Also, folks who don't understand how to copy and paste a numbered list are also immediately disqualified! :-O
 
  • #13
I'm not entirely sure where I stand with this issue. On one hand as has been stated it is my stuff which I worked and spent my time to care for and propagate. I want to reserve the right to determine who is eligible to receive whatever I choose to give away.

I agree that simply saying an "active" member is a bit vague but then again my personal definition of such can be the same. I don't enjoy enforcing a minimum post count as it is a poor reflection of one's actual participation level. Anyone with a keyboard and Internet connection can make pointless posts that do nothing to contribute to the community. This has been shown here as well as several other forums I've been an active member of.

I don't think that my post count is anything special for 2 years on the forum and would in fact disqualify me from participating in some giveaways. As a new grower it is sometimes difficult to contribute positively to the forum. There's always asking questions but it is encouraged to learn what you can first. Apart from that without experience it's difficult to contribute to many of the threads here. I don't believe that that should instantly disqualify some people from entering though. A new grower to me should qualify for certain giveaways regardless of their ability to participate. If an effort is being made I would still consider them.

Now leaving out post count we are left with very little to use as a guideline for who we choose to qualify and disqualify. Join date is another number made available to us but suffers all the same problems as post count. Apart from that I could keep a public list of names that don't qualify for my giveaways. That is a bit crude though don't you think?

In the end it will always be my discretion that determines who qualifies, whether silently or not. I like to leave vague guidelines to allow those who wish to enter to stop and think for themselves whether they really qualify or not. This saves me some work down the line. I don't know every name on the forum and it can be a task to glance through everyone's posts.

This new rule prevents me from doing so though. I'm forced to either supply a post count minimum thus excluding possible valid entries or to simply open the giveaway to everyone and quietly throw names in the trash.
 
  • #14
SubRosa said:
Although the use of the method of screening used by Paul and Judy is not something I would argue against, I do find it somewhat disturbing that it is codified as forum policy. Incentivizing the secrecy inherent in the method, and disincentivizing open honesty doesn't strike me as being in the good of the community.
Click to expand...

Well John, I would like to point out that its not a secret anymore! -

It is my opinion, after several years of participation in this particular quadrant of the CP hobbyists community - that this is an un-tameable animal, and in response to that perception I have instituted protocols to help "manage the unmanageable". While I agree that "disincentivizing open honestly" isn't necessarily good for the community, Sometimes the least disruptive, most constructive thing is to nod and smile and simply carry on with what you were doing, even if transparency has to take a back seat.
 
  • #15
Greg the option for just a "give away" with no requirements is still absolutely available! There are plenty of people that just want to give stuff away to who ever, I think I've even seen Paul use the normal give away for something and the one for active users on other goodies.
Andrew
 
  • #17
adnedarn said:
Greg the option for just a "give away" with no requirements is still absolutely available! There are plenty of people that just want to give stuff away to who ever, I think I've even seen Paul use the normal give away for something and the one for active users on other goodies.
Andrew
Click to expand...

I suppose. I was excited when the active giveaway option was added. Unfortunately given the new rule and my opinions on who should qualify as an active member I suppose it is practically useless to me. There are very few things that allow us to set guidelines besides post count and opinion. I was under the impression that the majority of people who endeavor to care for these plants are intelligent enough to understand what active means as long as they read it. Apparently people were having an issue with this?
 
  • #18
Whimgrinder said:
If someone attempts to sign up for a giveaway of mine, and they clearly do not understand (or didn't read) the conditions, they aren't going to get the material I am gifting. Immediate disqualification. Also, folks who don't understand how to copy and paste a numbered list are also immediately disqualified! :-O
Click to expand...

Like when I'm managing and someone submits an application for employment and it contains misspellings....
 
  • #19
Rule #10 was super easy to understand, clear, and necessary. Good update!
 
  • #20
Greg, we thought it would be fairly self explanatory... But see the post I mentioned earlier in this thread. http://www.terraforums.com/forums/carnivorous-plant-trading-post/139945-nepenthes-dubia-jamban-rooted-cutting.html He did not post any requirements and just relied on "for active users" to know if they qualify, these are the first 5 to sign up for it.

First post: joined august 2015 and has 34 posts ~7 in give aways
second post: has been here since Nov 2014 and has 42 posts ~13 in give aways
third post: J.Gennaro joined May 2015 and has 7 posts ~3 in give aways
fourth post: viking, joined October 2015 and has 5 posts ~4 in give aways
fifth post: plant#1 Joined April 2015 and has 29 posts ~9 in give away

Now, I only glanced so these may not be exactly accurate, and are the other posts amazingly informational and participatory? I don't know, I didn't look. But I don't think if those were MY stats, I would exactly consider myself as an "active member". And that's why we felt the need to add on that people wishing to use "Give Away For Active Members" should specify some type of requirement.

Remember, that YOU get to pick the requirements, we wanted to leave that up to you, we did discuss making up our own "what makes you "active", but deiced not to. Since as some point out, they may not want to go by post count, or time on the forum. You get to put in your own requirements, for your giveaway so make it whatever you think makes the eligible for your giveaway. Or post it as a normal Give Away and let it go to whoever! =)

Andrew
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top