At 11/4/06 05:09 PM, qygibo wrote: Abusive reviews get reported, a mod deletes them. What need does an author have to get into making their own petty responses, so that they can act just like the dick reviewers?

Because all the abusive reviewer is getting is a deleted review and a possible 15-day ban. The author feels the need to be offensive to abusive reviewer because if the author wants to show the abuser how it feels to be offended.

At 11/4/06 05:11 PM, qygibo wrote: Wanted to add something else:

You're basically advocating that an author respond to a troll, which if we all remember Troll 101, is NOT what you do to a troll. You don't feed them, you report them, and the mods take care of the rest.

Trolling means looking for a fight, the author responds offensively and the troll can't fight back because the author gets the last word, the author wins.
The abusive reviewers don't type offensively to look for a fight, they do it to hurt the author. So when the author returns the favor, it may teach the reviewer a lesson, so less abusive reviews would be generated.

At 11/4/06 03:25 PM, RenegadeGirl wrote: If a user send a pm to someone and that user who sends the message, is deleted, you should be able to read the message, even if the user is deleted.

I still signed up before you

At 11/4/06 06:10 PM, Patrick-Star wrote:

Because all the abusive reviewer is getting is a deleted review and a possible 15-day ban. The author feels the need to be offensive to abusive reviewer because if the author wants to show the abuser how it feels to be offended.

Yes, they're getting punished. And if they continue to do such offensive actions, they get further punishment. I fail to see the problem there. You act like the person should be forever banned. Since when is it the author's place to step in and contribute to the punishment? The mods are there for a reason.

Trolling means looking for a fight, the author responds offensively and the troll can't fight back because the author gets the last word, the author wins.
The abusive reviewers don't type offensively to look for a fight, they do it to hurt the author. So when the author returns the favor, it may teach the reviewer a lesson, so less abusive reviews would be generated.

What lesson does it teach, exactly? I have yet to see a troll who "learns a lesson" from an author deciding to make abusive reviews right back at the troll. Trolls don't learn lessons, they respond to force from the appropriate responders, in this case the mods who delete their reviews and continue to ban their accounts from making reviews.

This may seem a little hard on the comedy seekers:

All alts should be prohibited, period. The only exception to this should be to state that your account was hacked or something like that.

Alts (who generally fake being oblivious to knowing what an alt is) these days are just making spam topics while everyone else feels the urge to jump in and flame them Then 3 or 4 pages later, a mod finally shows up finally locking the thread and/or deleting it.

Therefore, anyone who uses an alt should have the alt deleted and the real user banned.

At 11/4/06 07:47 PM, qygibo wrote:

Yes, they're getting punished. And if they continue to do such offensive actions, they get further punishment. I fail to see the problem there. You act like the person should be forever banned. Since when is it the author's place to step in and contribute to the punishment? The mods are there for a reason.

I'm not saying they should be forever banned, I'm saying that they should receive a taste of their own medicine, along with a mod's punishment.

What lesson does it teach, exactly? I have yet to see a troll who "learns a lesson" from an author deciding to make abusive reviews right back at the troll. Trolls don't learn lessons, they respond to force from the appropriate responders, in this case the mods who delete their reviews and continue to ban their accounts from making reviews.

You didn't get my point, reviewers don't troll, they just hurt the author.

From wikipedia:

In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, most often in the form of posting inflammatory, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate messages

That fits what an abusive reviewer does. They want the negative responses and the attention, and the author gives it to them when the author responds to them. Giving trolls a taste of their own medicine doesn't work, because they don't respond to it. They respond to being cut off at the source, by being ignored by the general public and punished by those who are supposed to punish them.

At 11/5/06 01:16 AM, Patrick-Star wrote:

At 11/4/06 07:47 PM, qygibo wrote:

This is for posting ideas, not discussing them. liljim checks this thread regularly, it can be a pain for him to have to read through all this discussion to find the suggestions themselves. Besides, the idea has already been suggested and is in the 'Suggested ideas still under speculation/works in progress' section on the first page of this thread.

If you wish to continue your discussion on the idea, then use this thread.

At 11/4/06 03:25 PM, RenegadeGirl wrote: If a user send a pm to someone and that user who sends the message, is deleted, you should be able to read the message, even if the user is deleted.

Heh, are you talking about that SS PM?
It's no big deal, it links to a small book in the form of a PDF file and tells you ways to mess with NG and Wade :\

Is there any way to be able to roll over the title of a post and be able to view the first 100 characters or so of a particular opening post? Oftentimes I go to look at a thread that's interestingly titled, only to find out that the title doesn't match the actual thread content. I've seen this done at an old forum that I used to mod, so that is why I wonder if it couldn't be done here too.

New collection: Phoenix Wrong
There have been so many movies related to making fun of Phoenix Wright that there needs to be a collection about it.

I don't know if this has been suggested before. But, how about a "vacation mode" status one can put on their account. When you press it, it'll send some sort of message- either on your sig text- or if someone PM's you, the system will auto-reply to the sender a certain message that states that you are on a vacation (or away) for x amount of days.

Just think it'll help clear confusion for people who won't see any messages you have in your sig (because you wouldn't have posted any time recently) and try to PM to a person who's not there.

Does anyone else think that the Puzzle Games section is used to losely. Half of the games there are sim games or some kind of Adventure Game that has puzzles in it. I think they should turn Dating Sims Into "Sims" with dateing sims as a sub category.

I have a suggestion for a new idea for the BBS.

You know how, whenever you make a reply to a post and push the Submit button you get taken back to the top of that BBS post? Well, what if they embedded a Javascript or HTML scrip that, when you replied and pushed submit, you would be taken to the post that YOU made instead of at the top of the page? Just a suggestion.

Is it an ok one?

MAKE USERS EARN THE RIGHT TO POST.

Reason I say this: the overall quality of BBS posting is going down faster than a snowman in the desert...

Any new user can shit out un-funny/already been done/spam topic 4 times per day.

I recommend making a system to force users to learn how to be good posters. In order to get to the current 4 topics per day, 30 replies per topic per 30 minutes, maybe have a scaling system:

System Layout:
* minimum 2 days of lurking before being able to post
* 0-499 posts: 1 new topic per day; 2 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*500-999 posts: 2 new topics per day; 3 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*1000+ posts: 4 new topics per day; 4 posts per topic per 30 minutes

<>
"That's not fair to new users" you say. Well, thats true, but the kind of posters we want on the BBS are those that can think before they post "loln00b" as a reply to a topic. Users that can put effort into making a new topic (like seeing if it's been done recently).

One right-off-the-bat advantage is that it limits the spamming capability of your everyday Troll or Alt account.

<>
I'd like to know what people think about this idea.

Plus, you all know that you wish something like this was in place...

At 11/16/06 03:08 PM, Peregrinus wrote: 4 replies per topic per 30 minutes

*Fixed

At 11/16/06 03:08 PM, Peregrinus wrote: MAKE USERS EARN THE RIGHT TO POST.

Well, I ran the idea past the general forums (link), and it seems that most people are against the idea.

Never mind then.

At 11/16/06 03:08 PM, Peregrinus wrote: I recommend making a system to force users to learn how to be good posters. In order to get to the current 4 topics per day, 30 replies per topic per 30 minutes, maybe have a scaling system:

System Layout:
* minimum 2 days of lurking before being able to post
* 0-499 posts: 1 new topic per day; 2 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*500-999 posts: 2 new topics per day; 3 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*1000+ posts: 4 new topics per day; 4 posts per topic per 30 minutes

Actually, that would be kind of cool to try out for new users. That idea sounds pretty interesting, and helpful for the new users.

Im not sure but a good idea could be an RSS Feed for Newgrounds,could be used for the daily top 5-10 and also for news

In reviews where it says:

"0/0 people found this review helpful. Did you? YES NO ABUSIVE"

Maybe it could be changed so that Abusive has a seperate category. So it would be sometihng like this:

"0/0 people found this review helpful. And 4 people found it Abusive. How about you?"

One just came to me. Maybe like your experience can be turned to Internet Cash so, if you have enough experience you can buy a secret or if you dont want to buy a secret you can pay off experience to PM Tom. Haha. It will prolly shorten down on whatever spam is sent to Tom?

At 11/16/06 03:08 PM, Peregrinus wrote: * minimum 2 days of lurking before being able to post

This I can agree to. Alot of users don't even realize newgrounds has forums within their first month at newgrounds anyway.

* 0-499 posts: 1 new topic per day; 2 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*500-999 posts: 2 new topics per day; 3 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*1000+ posts: 4 new topics per day; 4 posts per topic per 30 minutes

No user really needs to make more than 1 or 2 topics a day (BonusStage included).
In my opinion though the initial 4 replies per 30 minutes in 1 topic is pretty limiting, you shouldn't have to have 1000+ posts to do so. As low as 100+ posts seems more reasonable to me, I don't know.

It doesn’t really matter that much, no one ever reads this topic anyway.

Penis penis penis penis mangina.

At 11/18/06 12:33 AM, Jawa-Crossing wrote: Im not sure but a good idea could be an RSS Feed for Newgrounds,could be used for the daily top 5-10 and also for news

http://www.newgrounds.com/feeds/rss/dailytop5 .xml
http://www.newgrounds.com/feeds/rss/weeklytop 10.xml
http://www.newgrounds.com/feeds/rss/latestnew s.xml

....

Well you could fix that if u vote on last day about 10 movies u get next day experience for 1 movie it feels pretty weird. It says everywhere need to vote 5 and u vote 1 -.- i say fix it!

Preview Posts, who ever is reading this listen to me and make this possible.

sont know if someone said it already but what about

coauthers being able to respond to reviews

More ways for users to contribute. All we have now is Flash Art and Fan-net. We should also have a NG mag contribution and an Art portal. Also there should be more ways to earn experience. There has to be a way to get more people invovled and attract more audience. I know that we have the ratings, and the "mature section". The "mature section" flash somehow finds its way into collections. Newgrounds should retain being Newgrounds become more professsional, fix its advertising and lose its reputation of being a "bad site".

Why can't the search bar at the top of the NG header show audio portal results?

I don't know if there's anything that can be done for this. But, I always have hated it when you type a post, and for whatever reason after you hit "post-it" there is an error page (for example when you don't have your HTML tags closed), and you are forced to go back. But you can't just fix it and post it, because it has "Processing..." where "Post-it" is supposed to be. So, you have to copy and paste it into a new post.

Whatever, its not that big of a deal, and I'm sure you have more important things to do. But, it is just an ever so slight inconvinience. Maybe, if there were some sort of "Go back" button thta you would be able to just fix and post.

Like I said, doesn't matter. But...just pointing it out.

didnt see this anywhere i looked but.

Since many people create accounts then forget about them and leave them, its a waste of space and they take up usernames that regulars could want.

So why not make it so that if you do not log in after 120 days your account automatically gets deleted?

At 11/24/06 06:50 PM, AtomicTerrorist wrote: So why not make it so that if you do not log in after 120 days your account automatically gets deleted?

That wouldn't be very fair. I lost my internet connection for a couple of years, I wouldn't have been too thrilled if when I got it back I discovered my account had been deleted.

A fairer system for that method would be if the account wasn't activated after 120 days it gets deleted.