At 12/18/11 06:52 PM, Coop wrote: Nowadays, it probably stings the pride a lot more than it would have in the late 90s or early 21st Century.

I would have said the same about this, although having through icon duties, looked through 150-odd flashes from 2001 or so and I have to say that there were a lot of submissions back then (just of those that I recently viewed) that I don't think would have survived past the 100 votes milestone of the judgement period nowadays. I think the improvement in software for production of flashes, possibly including some other factors, has meant that the overall quality's gone up.

A large difference seems to be that those flashes back then were likely to have passed because a lot of people simply enjoyed them, regardless of poor production quality or such. Nowadays most votes seem to be based on the polish of the menus (or in a few cases, the preloaders) and quality of the author's description in addition to people voting blindly based simply on the fact that they get the impression that flash will pass or be blammed solely on those previously mentioned variables.

I'll stop myself now before I end up digressing, going off on a tangent and beginning to rant about the same things that I have ranted about countless times in the past.

At 12/18/11 07:26 PM, Little-Rena wrote: You know what would be nice to prevent blind voting of 5 or 0? Mandatory reviewing for one of those votes, that way someone has to say why they voted 5 or 0 and maybe also show how they voted in the review, so if they voted 0 and reviewed 10, it would show up. And if someone reviewed without voting, this could be displayed as N/A which can be used where data isn't avalible if it isn't for going to past submissions.

The problem with that is that some people would copy / paste standard reviews to get past the detection.

At 12/18/11 07:34 PM, EmmDubya wrote:

At 12/18/11 06:52 PM, Coop wrote: Nowadays, it probably stings the pride a lot more than it would have in the late 90s or early 21st Century.

I would have said the same about this, although having through icon duties, looked through 150-odd flashes from 2001 or so and I have to say that there were a lot of submissions back then (just of those that I recently viewed) that I don't think would have survived past the 100 votes milestone of the judgement period nowadays.

Now while I agree that standards have gone up, the userbase has become more tolerant of shit. Back in the day, would cookie cutter games have made it? We are more of an underground site than that, I would have said and as a result, I'd prefer to be seen as one still, adhering to the same standards

At 12/19/11 04:30 AM, Coop wrote: The problem with that is that some people would copy / paste standard reviews to get past the detection.

Even if some people do, that means that some people won't which would still be an improvement on the current situation and if someone posts a review that doesn't reflect the flash, then it would be deleted and a review ban could be given, which would prevent them from voting 0 or 5 on anything until the ban is lifted.

At 12/19/11 04:45 AM, Little-Rena wrote: Even if some people do, that means that some people won't which would still be an improvement on the current situation and if someone posts a review that doesn't reflect the flash, then it would be deleted and a review ban could be given, which would prevent them from voting 0 or 5 on anything until the ban is lifted.

It's a good idea I just don't really see it working. It would decrease the amount of B/P a user could get in a day because it woiuld make the voting process a lot more long winded if we had to review every flash. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fair voter, I'm just not the biggest/best reviewer. I'm just not good at writting my opinions doen. So people like me would suffer from this change.

At 12/19/11 05:38 AM, Decky wrote: It's a good idea I just don't really see it working. It would decrease the amount of B/P a user could get in a day because it woiuld make the voting process a lot more long winded if we had to review every flash. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fair voter, I'm just not the biggest/best reviewer. I'm just not good at writting my opinions doen. So people like me would suffer from this change.

Reviews don't have to be long but if you are voting 0, I really think you should say why you are voting 0, same with voting 5. Even if it's only a few sentances, earlier I said my first flash had been blammed but people at the time left helpful reviews, which is lacking these days. Underdog now is less likely to be an underated flash but more the Review Crew runner up because it's rare that a low scoring flash will reach 30 positive reviews.

My problem with reviewing every flash I vote on would be that when making reviews I feel compelled to comment on just about everything I notice and generally each of my reviews takes a good twenty minutes or so. If you look at my most recent few, every one of them took even longer than that. If I were to review every flash I vote blam or protect on, although it definitely would raise my quantity and such, but overall the quality of reviews would plummet as I'm doing so many of them rather than focussing on making those that I do count. If I spend so much time on each one, then my blam and protecting rate would drop (meaning my low votes on bad quality flashes would disappear) in addition to how much time I can spend creating icons and browsing the BBS.

At 12/19/11 04:30 AM, Coop wrote: The problem with that is that some people would copy / paste standard reviews to get past the detection.

Isn't copy-pasting reviews (along with posting tons of equally generic crappy ones) considered abusive anyway?

Then again, people would just move onto the 4 and 1 buttons, most likely, so I don't see how much something like this would actually solve.

(O hai EGB. :3)

At 12/19/11 08:18 AM, EmmDubya wrote: My problem with reviewing every flash I vote on would be that when making reviews I feel compelled to comment on just about everything I notice and generally each of my reviews takes a good twenty minutes or so. If you look at my most recent few, every one of them took even longer than that. If I were to review every flash I vote blam or protect on, although it definitely would raise my quantity and such, but overall the quality of reviews would plummet

What EmmDubya said. If this were to happen, it'd take too much time that probably by the time I've finished writing the flash will have passed by people giving crap reviews.

By the way EmmDubya, I think you should join the Review Request Club.

At 12/20/11 02:36 AM, Gimmick wrote: What EmmDubya said. If this were to happen, it'd take too much time that probably by the time I've finished writing the flash will have passed by people giving crap reviews.

It wou;dn't apply to 1 through 4 though, only 0 and 5, it wouldn't be every flash but I still don't see the problem, flash get passed me after I've sat through them or played them on a busy day, so it makes little diffrence.

The only time I personally struggle to review a flash is if it doesn't leave any impression with me, but a true 0 or 5 will leave an impression. It would mean that flash that may normally be 5'd without watching, would be substituted for a 4 or lower, increasing the chance of it being blammed.

Yeah, I know it's not a great solution but in my opinion, it's better than the one some people suggest, which is to raise the threshold up from 1.60

At 12/20/11 02:36 AM, Gimmick wrote: By the way EmmDubya, I think you should join the Review Request Club.

It's a great club, and I was a past member of it, but my problem with it at the moment is that there's very few flashes that people wish to have reviewed on it, just audio. The day before yesterday when doing a few reviews I stopped by the thread and found one of the games I reviewed through it, but if I recall correctly that was the only flash on the most recent page. I intend to keep swinging by in order to end up reviewing flashes that people want reviews for, rather than just comments, but becoming a fully fledged member doesn't appeal to me too much.

At 12/20/11 03:25 AM, Little-Rena wrote: It wouldn't apply to 1 through 4 though, only 0 and 5, it wouldn't be every flash but I still don't see the problem, flash get passed me after I've sat through them or played them on a busy day, so it makes little diffrence.

Fixed
By that logic 1 would be the new 0 and 4 would be the new 5. -_-

Yeah, I know it's not a great solution but in my opinion, it's better than the one some people suggest, which is to raise the threshold up from 1.60

Personally, I think this was and is a good idea. It discourages artists who have little / no talent with no chance of improvement to stop making crappy flash and will also deter spam crews since most spam flash have a score of around 1.x anyways.

Then again, the latter (spam) are already being blammed nowadays so I sense a positive change in the future as well. (Just some months ago, spam flash were being saved with scores of 1.88 or so, but nowadays they're being blammed and their score at 'death' is around 1.5 something)

"I DID NOT MAKE THIS! I AM JUST UPLOADING IT!"

• 

  Total Madness SC

  by somespammer224

  Hey Guys, A NEW SCENE CREATOR

  Game

  31,667 Views

  (Ages 17+)

Well, since they didn't make it, I'd call that stolen also nice name.

They have since edited the discription, hmm.

At 12/21/11 06:32 PM, Little-Rena wrote: "I DID NOT MAKE THIS! I AM JUST UPLOADING IT!"
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/58 6333
Well, since they didn't make it, I'd call that stolen also nice name.

Although they almost definitely didn't make it, I remember being told in the past that flagging a flash as stolen when the only proof is the author's description means that it's likely to simply be ignored or have the flags cleared by the administrators. I cannot remember exactly whom said it, or based on what, but it's definitely something that I have been told at some point in the past.

I want to watch it and to check around for an original, however I'm having difficulties loading flash pages at the moment, the play button and everything underneath it on the page are quite simply not displaying for me, which is unfortunate. At least it gives me less distractions from finishing something else I've been doing this evening.

At 12/21/11 08:04 PM, EmmDubya wrote: I want to watch it and to check around for an original, however I'm having difficulties loading flash pages at the moment, the play button and everything underneath it on the page are quite simply not displaying for me, which is unfortunate.

I'm having the same problem with flash and the portal. Eitherway, it looks like the flash has been swaped out along with the comments.

At 12/21/11 08:04 PM, EmmDubya wrote: I want to watch it and to check around for an original, however I'm having difficulties loading flash pages at the moment, the play button and everything underneath it on the page are quite simply not displaying for me, which is unfortunate. At least it gives me less distractions from finishing something else I've been doing this evening.

So I am not the only one with that problem, I thought it is my computer who acts strangely. However, my work as icon moderator is pretty useful, since I find flashes with unsuitable content like slideshows , or flashes that are simply broken and can report them to get them deleted. My work there also helps the work of our group to keep the portal clean.

You need to slow down on the icon making, you shoudl really share out some of the artists you find with the rest of the icon mods and delegate the work, else the rest of us have nothing to do.

The Review Request Club is a great club I left 3 years ago because I was putting to much pressure on myself which is shame, I felt it was a great learning place where my reviews improved a lot. Been reading Tom Fulp's post about the bill SOPA rather bad stuff. Anyway only 4 days till Xmas don't mean to keep asking, but is there no Xmas theme this year?

At 12/21/11 09:05 PM, phantomlassuk wrote: Anyway only 4 days till Xmas don't mean to keep asking, but is there no Xmas theme this year?

My assumption is that with just a short time until the redesign comes they didn't feel it was necessary to put the modified version of this particular site theme up. It's not a perfect explanation, considering they have all of the assets for it already there from previous years, but that seems the closest thing to a logical explanation other than simply saying "they just didn't feel like it".

At 12/21/11 11:09 PM, EmmDubya wrote: My assumption is that with just a short time until the redesign comes they didn't feel it was necessary to put the modified version of this particular site theme.

People have been talking about the redesign like it will happen in the next week or two for as long as I can remember. I'm starting to wonder if it's still years off and indeed there is no reason for this sudden hype of the past couple of months. I hope not, it'd be nice to have some new level icons and features on this site.

Back to topic...

• Unsuitable Submission

  This submission contains age-rated material and requires an account to view.

A blatant stolen flash. It even says "SITELOCK | Only for stickpage.com" on the flash.

So without further ado...

http://www.stickpage.com/combofactorygam e.shtml

At 12/22/11 05:17 AM, Decky wrote: I'm starting to wonder if it's still years off and indeed there is no reason for this sudden hype of the past couple of months.

I think it can be assumed to at least happen in the first half of 2012. Yes, people thus far have been estimating that it'll happen earlier than it has, however it was announced at the end of last year and in that post he implied that 'change would be coming in 2011', and even now if it's been set back a bit I think it's bound to occur in the first half of the coming year.

At 12/22/11 08:28 AM, EmmDubya wrote:

At 12/22/11 05:17 AM, Decky wrote: I'm starting to wonder if it's still years off and indeed there is no reason for this sudden hype of the past couple of months.

I think it can be assumed to at least happen in the first half of 2012. Yes, people thus far have been estimating that it'll happen earlier than it has, however it was announced at the end of last year and in that post he implied that 'change would be coming in 2011', and even now if it's been set back a bit I think it's bound to occur in the first half of the coming year.

It'll get here and when it does, it'll be awesome. I've seen drafts, I know about things like this :D

Don't worry about it all being a joke, citizen, the redesign will be launched, when all is ready and not before!

At 12/22/11 08:28 AM, EmmDubya wrote: I think it can be assumed to at least happen in the first half of 2012. Yes, people thus far have been estimating that it'll happen earlier than it has, however it was announced at the end of last year and in that post he implied that 'change would be coming in 2011', and even now if it's been set back a bit I think it's bound to occur in the first half of the coming year.

Like I'm sure I've stated before I don't mind waiting a little longer for something that is awesome. Personally I think it'd be good to have a few more levels both in experience and ranks. Mainly becaue there are now a lot of people at the top rank and (I think) there are two users at the top experience level.

At 12/22/11 01:52 PM, Coop wrote: Don't worry about it all being a joke, citizen, the redesign will be launched, when all is ready and not before!

As somebody who knows a little bit more about it than the majority of us, would you be able to confirm whether it is the design with a lot of orange behind a wide grey central vertical including the main content that was supposedly 'leaked' is the true redesign? I remember seeing one that looked very nice, but certainly not easy on the eyes at all.

At 12/22/11 06:05 PM, IzzyDude wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/58 6411
I know this is stolen but I'm not sure from where, I feel like I've seen it on the site before. Can someone help me out?

It's here. Originally submitted by Fourstar a couple of years ago. I definitely recognized the thumbnail and loading screen, which is what tipped me off.

As it's been removed by the admins, there exists no other copy of it on Newgrounds itself. Here is a link to the game found on another website.

Also, seeing as I barely ever am active here, I would like to know what my current standing within the EGB is. Thank you for your help.

At 12/22/11 06:05 PM, IzzyDude wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/58 6411
I know this is stolen but I'm not sure from where, I feel like I've seen it on the site before. Can someone help me out?

That is sexual sensations 2 I believe which was made back when most of the users paided attention more to what went into the portal instead of blindly passing everything. If I would was in the portal at the time I would have blown the whistle on that.

The following pic is what I was feeling when I saw something like that pass without being flagged.

I miss the things to flag, they seem to come when I am asleep most of the time. Anyway, I looked on the EGB website, which should be promoted a little more maybe, and saw a Today (WIP) list, are the things manually entred or does it get them from Newgrounds? Not sure how it would get the grade though, uh.

Anyway, looks like the next report will be an improvement on my last one for me :p

Oh and I made my own take on Dress up pretty {noun}, it's not great but it amused me.

Well here's some bad news for you, according to the NG API I used on it, there where only 99 views when it passed, this means 101 people voted without even seeing the preloader.

Why on earth would you upload a game which has Christmas 2010 when it's 2011, lol. Eitherway, it'd be nice if all these generic games stopped being uploaded and passing, some of them do amuse me a little but those dress up games got boring and some of the other ones are dull.

Maybe instead of 2 submissions a day, new accounts should be limited to 6 submissions a week, which is less than 1 a day, then with an award, like newspost frontpage ability, you can then upload 2 a day, not that there is every a need to upload 2 a day for 7 days, that's insane.