At 1/20/11 01:13 AM, Turkeybean wrote:

At 1/20/11 12:55 AM, LittleWashu wrote: But that is what happens when people try to fly with the eagles when they are really scraping with the chickens.

I still don't see why Rage's thread needed to be shut down. There were more than enough users utilizing that thread for its intended purpose, cleaning up Newgrounds.

When the review mods were continually bombarded with hundreds upon hundreds of reviews being flagged that blatantly weren't abusive in the pile of the reviews with the most flags. They realised that something had to be done and even though the guilty were being punished, they just bawwed all over the forums about losing their precious whistle levels.

Yes, I agree that there was still some shred of good in that thread, but it deserved to die, let all of Newgrounds be overrun with the cancer of the whistle whores.

At 1/20/11 07:21 AM, LittleWashu wrote: But we can't cling to the past and we must move forward. So now all we can do is flag abusive reviews on our own and if you are serious about it send a PM to a review mod to bring the abusive reviews to their attention.

If you've got a deity or gold whistle, it will automatically come to our attention in due course. No need to bring it to our attention, unless it's a really bad case of a serial review spammer or something.

At 1/20/11 01:05 PM, Jolly wrote: Why not make posting reviews that aren't abusive a bannable offense? I think that should be done.

I'll put a mod spin on this. For example, you post a link and say "3rd from the bottom is abusive". People scroll down and don't bother reading the review, they just flag it. If the review mod is quick to this, the review is removed and someone else comes along, flagging the review that is now 3rd from the bottom, which wasn't abusive. The review mod has more work to do and gets pissed. We're back to square one, while the poster in the first place hasn't done anything wrong, though now them might be liable for a ban.

Then Rage's thread could be re-opened. Of course, occasionally, exceptions would be made if the review could easily be mistaken for abusive review, but otherwise you would get banned from the BBS for a few days.

No, Rage's Gift is never going to be reopened. It's just not needed any more.

Or maybe the people that blindly flag the reviews, then complain about it, could be banned from the BBS?

I believe they were.

At 1/20/11 01:19 PM, Ronald-McDonald-LoL wrote: While Rage's thread will never be reopened, I do think something needs to be done about the review system. It's one of my biggest pet peeves. I used to write spammy one-liner reviews, but I changed.

I hate those shitty reviews as well, but what can you do? Tom says that he wants helpful reviews to stay and those that say "OMG, I LUV THIS!!!", rated 10 will stay, as they heap praise on the ego of the author, while "OMG I H8 THIS, DIE IN A FIRE!!!", rated anything will get you banned. Where's the justice?

At 1/20/11 01:45 PM, Sheizenhammer wrote:

At 1/20/11 01:32 PM, Jolly wrote: Why was that removed, anyways?

It wasn't as flexible as the current system, ironically. People were forced to give things scores for aspects the submission didn't have, i.e. giving a violence / humour score for a game that wasn't meant to be funny / violent would basically force people to downvote it for no good reason.

Not really, they just scored it 10 10 10 10 10 10 for an average of 10. I tried to be efficient with those, but it never worked.

At 1/20/11 06:19 PM, Rabid-Animals wrote:

At 1/20/11 03:37 PM, LittleWashu wrote: First there is now a time limit on reviews before you have to leave them alone.

I'm pretty positive that's not true.

Not that I'm aware of. Sure, there's a time limit on how long it should be between a review being submitted and when you can ban the writer, but I've never seen anything about a time limit on flash reviews being called abusive.

At 1/20/11 08:11 PM, Jolly wrote:

At 1/20/11 08:07 PM, idiot-buster wrote: Yes it's true, I believe if its older then 2 years to just leave it alone. Don't quote me on the how old, since it's been years that rage's thread was locked.

Why? I don't think age should matter, because it's still an abusive review.

If you find abusive reviews from back in the day, flag them. We will still work through them.

At 1/20/11 11:59 PM, LittleWashu wrote: Last I heard it is less then six months maybe even shorter then that. This is because the Admins wanted the mods to focus on serving users who break the rules review bans. Also they figured that if the mods erased all the old reviews history would be lost.

I've not heard that and I've just searched our little mod forum for it and everything. Flag away and we'll deal with them as we see fit.

Stolen Flash Alert!

• 

  Watatata loop

  by <deleted>

  An anime loop

  Movie

  294 Views

  (Everyone)

It's obviously just a clip from an anime.

Description:
"Source is Tokyo Taxi, in case you're wondering ;). I'm new to the .swf format; if there are problems with the above up-load, don't hesitate to contact me ;)"

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

Stolen game.

I believe the original game's name is called 'Copter' he just changed the title.

At 1/21/11 05:39 PM, Tycrane wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/56 0047
Stolen game.

I believe the original game's name is called 'Copter' he just changed the title.

My reasoning for that flash (posted in NGPD)
"At the top it says "Copyright seethru.co.uk"

The title and description aren't written very well (Looks like they were written by an 8 year old)

Description:
"this is a good game leave a comment!"

He also says "This is a good game" which makes it even more suspicious. Usually the author wouldn't same something like that.

His email address is at: yahoo.com

Shouldn't it be at yahoo.co.uk?

Looking at his art.. It's quite terrible, and doesn't match the quality of the flash submission. In fact, I'm 99% sure one piece of his art is stolen. (Tineye chose now, of all times, to be down)

While making this post, he submitted another flash submission."

Here's the flash I referred to.

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

At 1/21/11 10:20 AM, Coop wrote:

At 1/20/11 01:13 AM, Turkeybean wrote:

At 1/20/11 12:55 AM, LittleWashu wrote: But that is what happens when people try to fly with the eagles when they are really scraping with the chickens.

I still don't see why Rage's thread needed to be shut down. There were more than enough users utilizing that thread for its intended purpose, cleaning up Newgrounds.

When the review mods were continually bombarded with hundreds upon hundreds of reviews being flagged that blatantly weren't abusive in the pile of the reviews with the most flags. They realised that something had to be done and even though the guilty were being punished, they just bawwed all over the forums about losing their precious whistle levels.

Yes, I agree that there was still some shred of good in that thread, but it deserved to die, let all of Newgrounds be overrun with the cancer of the whistle whores.

They I was a whistle whore at a time too. Though I doubt in my case I was one of the ones giving mods trouble like.

At 1/20/11 07:21 AM, LittleWashu wrote: But we can't cling to the past and we must move forward. So now all we can do is flag abusive reviews on our own and if you are serious about it send a PM to a review mod to bring the abusive reviews to their attention.

If you've got a deity or gold whistle, it will automatically come to our attention in due course. No need to bring it to our attention, unless it's a really bad case of a serial review spammer or something.

I see this is good to know. I will keep that fresh in mind.

At 1/20/11 06:19 PM, Rabid-Animals wrote:

At 1/20/11 03:37 PM, LittleWashu wrote: First there is now a time limit on reviews before you have to leave them alone.

I'm pretty positive that's not true.

Not that I'm aware of. Sure, there's a time limit on how long it should be between a review being submitted and when you can ban the writer, but I've never seen anything about a time limit on flash reviews being called abusive.

I have to ask if there isn't a time limit on reviews then I am wondering why when I would look through some whistle threads I would see review mods say they would take away whistle points if you flagged reviews that were past a certain date? It was because of this I almost completely stopped flagging abusive reviews since most of the reviews I would flag would be old ones people forgot.

At 1/20/11 11:59 PM, LittleWashu wrote: Last I heard it is less then six months maybe even shorter then that. This is because the Admins wanted the mods to focus on serving users who break the rules review bans. Also they figured that if the mods erased all the old reviews history would be lost.

I've not heard that and I've just searched our little mod forum for it and everything. Flag away and we'll deal with them as we see fit.

Thanks for this info.

Another submission by the same guy that submitted 2 stolen submissions yesterday.

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

Original:

http://www.pcgame4fun.com/play-sonic-bow ling.html

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

And this certainly looks stolen too. Did he rip the logo off of some site and submit it?

At 1/22/11 11:50 AM, MudkipsMudkip wrote: The submssions are dead, good work.

Ummm...That's appreciated. I noticed you post in the Police Dept. too, but in here we'd be thankful if double posts, especially one liners, were cut down. Besides, that tip stands for any post in the BBS.

Stolen alert

It was stolen from freeonlinegames.com. It is even within the game itself. seriously what is with all these people and their sad attempts to steal flash?

At 1/22/11 12:12 PM, LittleWashu wrote: Stolen alert

It was stolen from freeonlinegames.com. It is even within the game itself. seriously what is with all these people and their sad attempts to steal flash?

An original link would be helpful. Even if it's not on the FoG website for some reason.

At 1/22/11 12:12 PM, LittleWashu wrote: Stolen alert

People have been ripping from Fog.com for some time now. In the last few days especially I have seen eight flashed stolen from there. Most of the submissions have been from users signing up the same day they submit the flash. It really is pathetic to think they will get away with it considering the pre-loader even says "another game from fog.com". It would be nice if our criminal element here would at least make it challenging.

I apologize for the double post, but we have another stolen from FOG.

At 1/22/11 12:33 PM, Turkeybean wrote: I apologize for the double post, but we have another stolen from FOG.

ORIGINAL. LINK.
It's not hard, people. Especially when it's this obvious where they're coming from. >:(

Did Mudkip get deleted?

One comment on my news post is gone, and his post here are as well.

At 1/22/11 02:07 PM, Jolly wrote: Did Mudkip get deleted?

One comment on my news post is gone, and his post here are as well.

As far as I can tell he has been deleted. That is really strange to see. Must have been a solid reason, all traces of Mudkip as suddenly gone. I guess Tom dosn't like double posts in the EGB.

The old account is gone, but there's a new Mudkip account that was made today. Live and learn, I guess.

Also, looks like the Sonic Bowling thief had his flashes deleted.

Mudkip = Dragostadintei,

Dragostadintei = Athos,

Athos = Retarded multiple flash thief, ban evader and forum pissant. Which you all know about already.

I can't be bothered to find that stupid "The more you know" picture. I'll just use psychology and tell you that you are now picturing it in your head. There you go. :P

At 1/22/11 03:11 PM, Sheizenhammer wrote: Mudkip = Dragostadintei,

Dragostadintei = Athos,

Athos = Retarded multiple flash thief, ban evader and forum pissant. Which you all know about already.

Stolen Flash.

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

At 1/22/11 04:17 PM, Jolly wrote:

At 1/22/11 03:11 PM, Sheizenhammer wrote: Mudkip = Dragostadintei,

Dragostadintei = Athos,

Athos = Retarded multiple flash thief, ban evader and forum pissant. Which you all know about already.

Stolen Flash.
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/56 0135

Well, it's probably best to not flag that, at the moment because I don't have a source and can't find one at the moment.

At 1/22/11 04:22 PM, JoIIySpace wrote: Well, it's probably best to not flag that, at the moment because I don't have a source and can't find one at the moment.

Oh, I do. :P

Our good friend is back:

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

What the fuck, is this a YouTube poop? I'm looking for a source, but need some help.

At 1/22/11 04:49 PM, Ronald-McDonald-LoL wrote: What the fuck, is this a YouTube poop? I'm looking for a source, but need some help.

There's something very similar here, but it's not exactly the same.

Another Choco break clone.

Why don't people at the very least change the graphics up a bit? At least this person, unlike most of the others, renamed the flash. Not a very creative name, but at least it wasn't called "Choco Break"

• 

  by <deleted>

  Under Judgment

  (Everyone)

Description:

"a game by me."

At 1/23/11 01:49 PM, Jolly wrote: Another Choco break clone.

Why don't people at the very least change the graphics up a bit? At least this person, unlike most of the others, renamed the flash. Not a very creative name, but at least it wasn't called "Choco Break"
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/56 0223
Description:
"a game by me."

What is even more sad is that people have seen this done so many times yet they still vote to protect it. I didn't get a chance to see it while it was UJ though otherwise it would have received a 0 and a flag.

I don't know if its still truth but in flagging reviews I thought it was like up to 3 months, because of it being up todate. I only think this from previous threads in the past I recall some moderators saying that but I may be wrong. But I tend to stick to newer reviews from like the front page. One of the links the author got deleted it is in today obituaries.

At 1/23/11 09:36 PM, phantomlassuk wrote: I don't know if its still truth but in flagging reviews I thought it was like up to 3 months, because of it being up todate. I only think this from previous threads in the past I recall some moderators saying that but I may be wrong.

And yet, here is a moderator of reviews saying that there is no time limit...

At 1/24/11 02:56 AM, Coop wrote:

At 1/23/11 09:36 PM, phantomlassuk wrote: I don't know if its still truth but in flagging reviews I thought it was like up to 3 months, because of it being up todate. I only think this from previous threads in the past I recall some moderators saying that but I may be wrong.

And yet, here is a moderator of reviews saying that there is no time limit...

Thanks for that info once again Coop. I may not have my old favorite thread anymore, but I am going see if I can give you review mods a work out.

At 1/22/11 12:29 PM, Turkeybean wrote:

At 1/22/11 12:12 PM, LittleWashu wrote: Stolen alert

People have been ripping from Fog.com for some time now. In the last few days especially I have seen eight flashed stolen from there. Most of the submissions have been from users signing up the same day they submit the flash. It really is pathetic to think they will get away with it considering the pre-loader even says "another game from fog.com". It would be nice if our criminal element here would at least make it challenging.

I'll copy and paste my post from before.

Now that I've learned how submitting games on multiple sites works the chances are these ARE NOT stolen most of the time. The point being, FOG buys/sponsors the game under a license that allows the original user to submit it themselves. The deal is that the person still gets the ad revenue and owner ship of the game, but FOG gets the attention to their site because of their own personal ad.

Other sponsorships involve FOG buying the game straight out meaning they would own every right to it including the right to submit. A lot of flash artists don't like this because they can't submit their submission anywhere else and have no more chances to win ad revenue from them.

There is a major website that game makers can join where people upload their games to. You then click this distribute button and starting with the A's it takes you to a website that you can upload your game to so you get more views.

I was working my way through this so I could make a few extra bucks here and there to notice that newgrounds was one of the game websites. The thing is, it almost encourages people to sign up right there and then and even to use an email that they don't want people to know about on all of the sites.

This means you might be getting level 1 accounts that just signed up that day submitting flashes that have been around for years with a fake email giving the impression that it's stolen when really it's just someone like me trying to get a few extra thousand views here and there.

Not to try and make our jobs harder or anything, but that really shows you have to be 120 percent sure that it's stolen and simply because it's on another site and it's a new user doesn't mean it is. In fact, I'm sure more times than not it's someone just finding the site for the first time and deciding to get a burst of ad revenue from their game.

http://flashgamedistribution.com/

Haha take that spam! Not on my watch.

Congratulations! You just destroyed someone else's hard work! This Flash has been blammed.

Thanks for voting, BenwaHakubi! Your experience points have already been deposited for today - thanks for doing the overtime!
Your experience gave you a voting power of 6.92 votes. Your blam and protection points gave you an additional 24% of your experience power, meaning that your total vote power was worth 8.58 votes!

Stolen?

• 

  Core Defender

  by Brandissimo

  Sweet Gallopin' Crap! The Blitz Bots are Attacking the Core

  Game

  5,572 Views

  (Ages 13+)

This looks stolen, but the closest thing I can find is this seemingly endless preloader:

http://www.nflrz.nflrush.com/play/game/c oredefender