[wellager]

As long as members have a shot at getting the same prizes, it should be allowed.

[Omur]

What caused me to make this thread is that OP originally had the contest end date is when it hit 100 replies. OP later edits it to 500 (or 300 if no one is responding) with no overt reasoning for doing so. So I'd thought I'd ask a general question about it.

He just ended it. lol .___. Guess you can close this now.

[‌‌Tommy]

He just ended it. lol .___. Guess you can close this now.

That contest isn't the only one that's changed there end date recently.

[‌‌Tommy]

This is wrong and they should be punished for this.

I agree. If people are allowed to extend the end date of a contest then you'll see allot of people that can't fulfil a contest abusing that to avoid getting punished.

&
Then people will forgot about the contest being hosted because it was extended for so long.

['Snorlax]

This should not be allowed. What stops people from going from 100 to 2000?
It should not be allowed. I generally think that those contests are low quality, because it forces people to post on it to reach a certain amount.

[Grin]

Wouldn't you think there would be different circumstances where different exceptions would be allowed.

---

This is wrong and they should be punished for this.

You're saying this because it's your pre-conception and evaluations have yet to be made.

[SkullTraill]

He just ended it. lol .___. Guess you can close this now.

Do your lips hurt from kissing so much ass?

Wouldn't you think there would be different circumstances where different exceptions would be allowed.

---

You're saying this because it's your pre-conception and evaluations have yet to be made.

No.

[webdev77]

Personally I think that nothing should be changed because I could make users where my signature and then indefinitely keep extending it so that I get tons of free advertising without ever ending a contest. I could quietly junk the thread and nobody would know the difference after a few weeks of inactivity on the thread.

[Viral Dragon]

OP:

No. It's not allowed. It's immoral, unethical and unfair. Extend the date? Maybe ONCE, and that'd be about it. Changing the posting
requirements, wearing requirements or XX requirements is no though. For a various amount of reasons at that. I can't even begin to
give you a list it's that long.

If you run into financial trouble, that's on you. You should have set the money aside or something, given it to a middle man, anything
really. Once you start a contest it is on YOU, to finish it and relinquish XX you've held a contest for. Otherwise, you'd be nothing more
than the common scam artist. That said, I'll leave this open for now. Though..I thought about closing it and just letting Omni reply when
he felt like it. ._.

-Viral.

[Tutelary]

Agreed.

In most cases members make up excuses in order to extend their contest, for example financial troubles.

And the majority of the members lie just so they can have a hot thread (more reply's).

This should not be allowed, you are responsible for fulfilling a contest, therefore you should of been prepared.

That's what I'm afraid of happening already. Rather than deal with a fake contest, just 'extend' the contest for a month or two.

[webdev77]

I was interested in this little phenomenon going on and I saw at least two members change contest terms today. In addition, people have started posting links to their marketplace threads saying that people must post on their sales thread to enter the contest. I think that's a load of bullshit and should be considered cross posting and/or posting a buy/sell/trade thread outside the marketplace.

Just my little input on this.

[Mohatu]

The fact of the matter is that since the implementation of the account closure threat, members have found other ways to profit from "contests". It used to be easy, some low life would post "winner has been notified" and that's it, while no one ever won. Now, I see contests with terms such as "$10 to one lucky winner for wearing my signature for two weeks AND after I make 10 sales of $20!". So, $10 for loads of advertising and a definite $190 profit? Great contest.

Even then, people's friends seem to be oh so lucky in those contests.

I doubt most of the contests are made for the actual good of the community. It's either for their own monetary or reputational benefit.

[Tutelary]

The fact of the matter is that since the implementation of the account closure threat, members have found other ways to profit from "contests". It used to be easy, some low life would post "winner has been notified" and that's it, while no one ever won. Now, I see contests with terms such as "$10 to one lucky winner for wearing my signature for two weeks AND after I make 10 sales of $20!". So, $10 for loads of advertising and a definite $190 profit? Great contest.

Even then, people's friends seem to be oh so lucky in those contests.

I doubt most of the contests are made for the actual good of the community. It's either for their own monetary or reputational benefit.

Mmm. Though those issues can effectively be squashed by a new rule, which is not allowed to be suggested. What I'm attempting to ask is clarification on this policy. If it's allowed, then I can't complain that the user extended the date and switched the RTW (Replies 'till win) from 300 to 500.

[webdev77]

I think it'd be nice to finally get some clarification on this. Hopefully the verdict is that contest terms cannot be changed once posted.

[Desiderius]

No, fake contests can get you banned; Omni has said this before.