GameServers.com Server

[WhoDatNation]

I have a 18 Slot CS:S Server. Would STEAMGAMERS like to take that as a donation? It cost $26.02. Its good for 3 Months, and I might pay for it to go a little longer... Thanks for your time...

[Jake]

I am fairly certain that we would not accept the server as a donation. We would not really have much use for a 3 month server IMO.

[mapper]

Yes this has been suggested before but steamgamers doesnt accept donations of this kind.

[WhoDatNation]

Well, I'd keep paying for it lol... but, oh well... someone will want it haha... ima still hang around though, already donated $20... just need to hang out with some [sG]s

[Zaraki]

A very generous suggestion WhoDatNation, but i'm sure that the Steamgamers community wouldn't be eager to trust people with rcon access just because they gave them a server and whatsoever. That doesn't mean your a bad guy, it just means that Steamgamers is keeping the risks at a total minimum.

 

And i'm sure that's the whole idea of the donations.. We get money for the servers, you get ingame credits and a supporter tag and etc to show how grateful we are.

 

But this doesn't mean you need to give alot of money, since getting admin or any rank is not received by those resources (not suggesting that you do this, i'm just pointing it out)

 

 

 

Good evening!

[Spartan]

We've tried using donated servers, and it's unlikely to be accepted for these reasons:

 

- Most servers that are paid for by another person and not SG have a 'risk' attached to them. IE, you stop the payment and we are forced to pay for the remaining time or let it go. You decide to ban everyone for fun and we are left with the bad reputation, etc.

 

- Most gifted servers are gifted because the user wants that server to get players. The server essentially piggybacks off of SG to gain a userbase. If the server fails however, it's just another empty server with the SG tag on. It is also unlikely the server owner wants the server changed to something else, as they bought it with the intention of it being the mod they wanted originally.

 

- Because another user has paid for the service, they feel they are obligated to have rcon access and access to the server, to administrate and modify it in any way they deem fit, and give input to future decisions towards the server. This is not an entirely bad thing, but it lacks security and biases members to their own server, making it unfair and a rather unnecessary venture.

 

- Most SG servers are ran through the same dedicated box with the exception of Minecraft and Arma. Any servers outside this are to be paid for by SG still, or under a trusted member. Because they are outside of SG's wallet and 'domain', we essentially have little control over it.

 

- Single servers are normally ran through different methods. We prefer to use a dedicated server or a VDS. Servers that are rented are likely to be managed (the GSP has access and not the client themselves) or access requires more effort. This is just inefficient and again, unnecessary.

 

 

Minecraft is ran by Nishok and you may wonder how that is sort of independant with supporters, admins, and money. Truth is the Minecraft server was funded by me (I don't know how much money Nishok has left towards that) and the way admining and supporter systems work on there is completely different to the source engine obviously. That is why it is managed differently and separately (since it also takes up a lot of RAM).

 

The Arma 3 server is owned by Dimitry, and he currently pays for it. Due to the nature of the mod being in beta, he has access to it and I don't know who else. I allowed him to use SG advertisement if he wished for it to be an SG server. If it's violating SG rules or doing something suspicious, the server will get removed from SG officially.

 

Hope this helps.