Not that I’m aware of. Lol
1 Like
I was referring to @ohko giveaways and this new format of doing things. I’m sorry if it sounded misleading, I’ve won more giveaways than I can count. This new style of doing it just doesn’t seem to like me so far. Haha I will try again on Raffle 3 
PS Hope that doesn’t seem braggy, that wasn’t the intention.
3 Likes
Look at Mr. Winner showing off over here!
just messing with you, congrats on your wins! Maybe Lady Luck is on cooldown after overbuffing you.
4 Likes
Lady luck was just jealous of my skills
So she decided to Nerf me!
5 Likes
Obvious troll is obvious question mark 
@ohko, welcome to the Chrono.GG community and thank you ever so much for the contributions made since you joined. You’ve made one hell of a positive first impression here. Once again, I really want to thank you. Regardless of where people fall on the political spectrum or their overall disposition, be it mentally and emotionally, we all share a love for games.
Therefore I am fairly certain that you mean well, but out of curiosity was it absolutely necessary to public shame the people listed? Reaching out via public post and/or a private message in order to rectify a mistake or to get an answer clarified is totally fine, most especially while the raffle is active. Said post(s) can even vary widely in tone. Listing people who were disqualified and the reasons why, after the raffle has been completed though, seriously? I personally have gone on record stating that I have no shame, but the other people on that list may not be so easy-going. Given the prevalence of social anxiety in today’s society, if those were indeed first-time users new to the forum, some of those people could be absolutely mortified that they were called out like that. Really comes off as thoughtless and insensitive, in my opinion. Just to reiterate, I am taking minor issue with the disqualification declaration made after the raffle was over. This is not a message of outrage, nor is it virtue signalling. No pearls were clutched (or harmed). It is however, a call for sensitivity.
My thoughts on posting this is to give those “shamed” a chance to speak up and have their voices heard whether they chose to do so publicly, privately, or even not at all. I can empathize with the humiliation and I’m sorry that it happened. If I have exacerbated the situation further by drawing more attention to it, I humbly apologize.
Thank you again. With much appreciation and gratitude, best wishes… @ohko TTYL 
& 
2 Likes
2 Likes
@GeekInUndies you are the person I contacted the most before the end of the raffle. You liked each of my posts and now you’re here quoting each point-of-contact along the way, so you’re obviously aware of them. What frustrates me is this, taken from a PM between us -
In this PM thread you were using actual words to reply to me instead of likes or gifs. But when I asked you this direct question, your only “reply” was a like. I don’t know what that means, but it signals to me you were at least aware of my message 
For the record, I think it’s bad etiquette to quote a PM, but now you’re here making a stir, and publicly too. You think those points of contact are trolling you? And obviously at that?
Disqualification is not inherently shameful. For most, it’s a direct response to the Qualifier section in the original post. The reasons provided are objective as I don’t want members guessing why their entry was not included in the drawing. Providing those reasons publicly serves as an aid to reinforce the rules for others and help the nitpickers and naysayers know that I indeed carried out the “rules” set forth.
I wasn’t here saying “shame on you, you can’t get it right, you idiot” or “here’s a dunce cap for you since you can’t seem to read the instructions!” No, I was as attentive as I could be in helping people fix their entries. The helper fairy 
made many rounds but still some people couldn’t be helped and were disqualified. See (3) –
- to deprive of qualification or fitness; render unfit; incapacitate.
- to deprive of legal, official, or other rights or privileges; declare ineligible or unqualified.
- to deprive of the right to participate in or win a contest because of a violation of the rules.
There’s no shame here. Your post giving people an outlet to talk about their “shame” may make them feel shame where they otherwise could’ve simply acknowledged their objective disqualification. A race car driver doesn’t feel shame when his/her car doesn’t meet regulation and is disqualified. Maybe it’s an oversight or a mistake. The regulating bodies and spectators aren’t saying “shame on you,” they’re saying “you didn’t follow the rules.” 
Am I supposed to be rattled by all of these remarks on my mental disposition? 
I’m here to give some games away, and it seems like some of you are trying to make that rather difficult for me. I’m not here to troll my own raffle, people. What sense would that make? I put a considerable amount of time and effort into this and Raffle 1 was bittersweet because of a similar bad energy present after the drawing. I went through entry data four times for this round before posting the results. During that process, I found things that disqualified some entries that was not able to catch beforehand.
If your name appears on the list of disqualifications and you don’t understand why – read the six (6) or fewer words next to your name and the mystery will vanish. Any emotional response you have thereafter is your own responsibility. After all, it was you (and only you) that put your name on that list.
3 Likes
I think @GeekInUndies is saying HE is the troll, not you. I could be mis-reading.
Stay cool, Chronies, Imma go help some mentally-ill people now 
7 Likes
Maybe I should’ve posted a different poll asking members to choose the theme rather than the game for the next giveaway. Users could vote between:
- domino effect
- memes, not words
- entropy
- fortnite
2 Likes
Do I qualify? 
3 Likes
By the looks of it everyone here does lmao
4 Likes
@ohko
I think you took that a lil too personally.
@GeekInUndies
I disagree, it is not shaming. It lets them know that they need to pay closer attention next time. So long as ohko is respectable about it, I don’t think it’s a problem.
6 Likes
How do you figure?
It looks (to me) like @GeekInUndies is talking directly to me. If he is, why – sandwiched in the middle of many direct sentences toward me – is there a soft call to people’s varied political, mental, and emotional dispositions? And if not, what is the point of making such a general statement to all people when the rest of the context addresses me specifically?
It’s passive aggressive, even if the comment was made subconsciously
What this says (to me) is, “Welcome and thank you @ohko. Your political, emotional and mental disposition may vary from mine, but we at least we can agree we both love games. I’m certain you mean well, but …”
For what it’s worth, thanks for the welcome. I have to say I’m really happy to have met some incredibly nice people here. I simply don’t understand why people are making these kinds of remarks on my posts. If anyone can point out what I’ve done to offend others and open myself to this kind of comment, I’d greatly appreciate it.
3 Likes
The main idea in that sentence is “we all share a love for games.”. The rest appears to be meant as an all inclusive statement or saying “People may have differing opinions on things, but we are here because we love games”. You could argue it’s poorly worded, but I do not think there was any malice in the statement. I feel the underlying intention is “we like games, thank you for the giveaway”.
Of course only @GeekInUndies knows exactly what he meant to say.
I have a question for you, with no ill intent. How long have you been a part of Internet forums (including other forums)? I understand you had a bit of a rough start here.
2 Likes
Just came to wish the winners congratulations, and thank @ohko for the Giveaway, but seem to have stumbled inot a rather more serious post than it was at my last visit…
Might I respectfully suggest a nice deep breath from everyone involved, and offer a reminder that generally speaking people mean well, but unfortunately due to varied differences in lingustical habits, opinions, and understandings - wires are sometimes crossed. Perhaps staying positive, and not assuming any malicious intent until it is more definitively stated would be appropriate - on either end.
Just my two penneth, hope I’m not overstepping my boundaries
4 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
Please I am not in the mood for any of this. Everyone just 
2 Likes
sounds like you’re being biased in your moderation job if you’re letting your emotions control how you do it
1 Like
She’s just dealing with a lot of other stuff IRL. Bias isn’t really a part of it. Moderation tasks are often difficulty, unless one side is blatantly in violation of rules/propriety. (I think everyone will have biases, no matter how objective you try to be.)
Let’s just be nice to each other, or if not possible, at least courteous.
7 Likes