Members Interfering With Lotteries

@meiadeleite’s new instructions should prevent this.

@cliffside, I understand your aggravation at your lottery heading being marked “closed” by a TL3 without your consent. This has never been the policy of the moderators and admins, and was an isolated overreach on the part of a few TL3s, perhaps out of a misguided attempt to make the lottery section of the Forum more easily navigable.

That said, the Forum team consists of just a few individuals, and we are not able to fix everything in the Forum that needs fixing without the added attention and aid of TL3s who are able to do some simple editing where appropriate. Actually, we’ve found that most TL3s are reluctant to use the capabilities granted them, out of a fear of overstepping, so situations like this rarely occur.

At any rate, with @meiadeleite’s new, explicit instruction to TL3s, the type of interference that you experienced should not happen again. You are free, if you wish, to re-edit your lottery title back to its original state, and if it is again tampered with, you (and any other lottery hosts) are now armed with this new rule and can report the problem to a moderator. And if you decide to host any future lotteries (which I sincerely hope you will do), this kind of incident hopefully will not reoccur, or if it does it will be quickly rectified.


@maleko Thank you for your comments. Sorry for the delayed response. Based on what you and the others have said, I’m willing to give it another go with a new Lottery soon. I will monitor it as usual and if any issues that we’ve discussed, I will let the appropriate admins & moderators know. Let’s see what develops. Thank you again…


I don’t even understand what Discourse is really and I’m pretty good with social media. I mean, I guess we are using it now(?) but was there even a Discourse when Postcrossing started? Anyway, I’m still in my first year of Postcrossing and I would never dream of, or even think it was possible to, mess with someone else’s Lottery. I did learn some things from this post. “With great power, comes great responsibility” I hear. That should be heeded in this case. I’m with you cliffside.


@SteelTownGirl Thanks for your comments I hope this issue is now resolved. What irritated me was that this member is a Postcrossing member for all of 2 1/2 months. But as another member helpfully noted, in that time they can accrue “rights” with certain Forum activities because of the “Discourse” Trust Levels. I am a member here for 13 years; so what does that make me? But as someone else noted, just because you have the ability to do something doesn’t require you use that ability. Not so with this individual. Let’s see what develops…


I would like to correct you (even if it definitely doesn’t change anything), but they is a member since 2023, not since 2024.

No one can become a Regular/TL3 after 2,5 months.

1 Like

OK I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing that out. I do feel the principle of the matter is still valid.

1 Like

Yes, of course.

means to add the word “closed” to the headline of the thread. That’s all. Is that really worth so much upheaval?


It is not as simple as that. If you read the replies from Ana and @maleko, going forward those folks won’t be permitted to do that. Why? Because it is me or Postcrossing - not them - who determines when the lottery is closed.

1 Like

But does it make any sense to keep a lottery open, when it is de facto closed because the winner is already chosen?


Yes, it does make sense for several reasons. I provided one example a few days ago; perhaps you didn’t see it. Moreover, Postcrossing automatically closes lotteries within two months. I mentioned that too.

I saw it, but the reason that you gave doesn’t make sense to me, either, for the word “closed” in the headline just means, that the winner is drawn, so people, who are interested in taking part in that lottery, do not need to look into that tread. But you can still write in that thread and chose new winners and mark them with the @ plus their username and they’ll be notified.


OK. I’ve tried to explain my reasons…supported by the admins and moderators…but if you still feel that it doesn’t make sense to you, I cannot do or say nothing further.


Okay, I think we cannot get togeter. Let’s leave it at that.

1 Like

This reminds me of a time I had a post experimenting delivery times to a specific country removed after users kept flagging it unnecessarily based on some wild confusion of sanctions versus mail suspensions. Moderators did act with haste, but after a while the error was corrected anf in the end it worked out. You win some, you lose some. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

1 Like