At 58 minutes ago, Decky wrote:

At 3 hours ago, Coop wrote: And now, a comic interlude from the Manchester Meet, last January. Me, singing Tribute, by Tenacious D.

How delightfully off topic XD. I like your beard, was that just for full on commitment to the role of the demon in that song?

No, I wear different facial hair to every Newgrounds meet. This was just the 'tache and chin-hawk motiff. Here, it is presented with BBM and Idocreating surrounding me at the same Karaoke bar.

At 4 hours ago, Coop wrote: And now, a comic interlude from the Manchester Meet, last January. Me, singing Tribute, by Tenacious D.

Why are you standing very close to the speakers when you're holding the microphone?

At 56 minutes ago, Gimmick wrote:

At 4 hours ago, Coop wrote: And now, a comic interlude from the Manchester Meet, last January. Me, singing Tribute, by Tenacious D.

Why are you standing very close to the speakers when you're holding the microphone?

This was a Manchester karaoke bar. The room was barely big enough for the three dozen people that squeezed in there and they didn't even have draught pumps on the bar, so poor was the setup.

We had a good time in spite of this, though.

At 1 hour ago, Coop wrote: This was a Manchester karaoke bar. The room was barely big enough for the three dozen people that squeezed in there and they didn't even have draught pumps on the bar, so poor was the setup.

Okay, but I don't see any other people in that picture...

At 9 hours ago, Gimmick wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591655
It doesn't violate any rules, and in fact is a proper flash, but I thought of pointing out that this has a 404 error when visiting. PM'd Wade.

Yea I told him about that yesterday too. I'm not sure he knows what exactly is going on with that. It looks more like a programming issue.

At 2 hours ago, SpiffyMasta wrote:

At 9 hours ago, Gimmick wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591655
It doesn't violate any rules, and in fact is a proper flash, but I thought of pointing out that this has a 404 error when visiting. PM'd Wade.

Yea I told him about that yesterday too. I'm not sure he knows what exactly is going on with that. It looks more like a programming issue.

I just wanted to confirm to you that it is a programming issue and they are maybe working on it. That's the official word from Wade.

So if anybody else is wondering why that flash is stuck in the portal, stop wondering :P

At 45 minutes ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591803
A resubmit of an entry that was previously blammed with no noticeable improvements.

Thanks for bringing this up. It seems it was submitted yesterday (I checked the obituaries) by a different user. I sent to Wade, he'll probably check to see if the accounts are linked and if they are, probably ban the user.

Rickroll youtube video:

• Unsuitable Submission

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

At 29 minutes ago, Tycrane wrote: Rickroll youtube video:
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591829

Score: 1.5 / 5
Well, it should hopefully get blammed.
If not...

At 5 hours ago, Gimmick wrote:

At 29 minutes ago, Tycrane wrote: Rickroll youtube video:
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/591829

Score: 1.5 / 5
Well, it should hopefully get blammed.
If not...

Thank god it did.

At 2 hours ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/589933
now that i look back on it, it's a really obvious stolen submission. you can find it by searching "trololo cat" on YouTube.

Did you take into consideration that the author says that that is his account on youtube? I'm not saying he's telling the truth, but we have no hard evidence it is stolen.

At 58 minutes ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: Also, is it just me or when flagging a review as abusive, it doesn't register?

Which browser are you using? It works fine for me in Opera 11.51. I have a great way of checking, as well - trying to moderate the review straight after flagging, so I can see that my flags were applied ;)

At 6 hours ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: Google Chrome. Sometimes when I click the abusive button it looks like it doesn't do anything.

It doesn't register for me as well. It seems that it doesn't register if you go to the user's page and then flag from there -- if you do so, the icon doesn't change.

What you need to do is you need to go to that submission and then search for the review, which can be cumbersome if it's a popular submission which has loads of pages and that review is buried deep in the pages.

I went on the portal the other day I really do like viewing UJ movies shame, I don't do it more often. Would have been cool to have new badges instead of the old ones. For reviews that what I do I go to the low scores nows stars instead of numbers. I hope some of the authors who left came back like TheWeebl miss his flashes.

At 10 hours ago, phantomlassuk wrote: I went on the portal the other day I really do like viewing UJ movies shame, I don't do it more often.

A member of the EGB going to the portal and watching under judgement flashes?! No, I simply don't believe it ;).

Would have been cool to have new badges instead of the old ones.

I agree. The old badges now stick out compared to the rest of the website. I was quite disappointed when the badge system was completely untouched in the redesign. But who knows, they might change it yet.

I hope some of the authors who left came back like TheWeebl miss his flashes.

I think TheWeebl released a flash not too long ago.

At 1 hour ago, Decky wrote: I agree. The old badges now stick out compared to the rest of the website. I was quite disappointed when the badge system was completely untouched in the redesign. But who knows, they might change it yet.

I agree as well. I found it quite a disappointment when I found out that there were no additional B/P ranks after the redesign, as I'd hoped to get a higher maximum voting power. I also expected to get a nice looking badge after the redesign so I could possibly stop. Ah well, this only steels my resolve to get that ubiquitous Sup. Commander rank and join the rest of those who have.

Am I using the word "ubiquitous" properly?

• Unsuitable Submission

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

Is this a rule-breaking flash too? It only links to another website, so I think it is.

At 8 hours ago, Decky wrote:

At 10 hours ago, phantomlassuk wrote: I hope some of the authors who left came back like TheWeebl miss his flashes.

I think TheWeebl released a flash not too long ago.

Yup

At 19 hours ago, Knuckstrike wrote: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/592121
Is this a rule-breaking flash too? It only links to another website, so I think it is.

The one thing to double check when you come to report these is that the tags haven't been edited and locked to "deletion". An author isn't going to put their own tag to that, so a mod has already got to it. While we're in the "no-man's land" of no mods at the moment, that's a great way to ensure that nothing that shouldn't get through does.

At 8 minutes ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: I've been noticing an awful lot of generic "Spot the Difference" games in the portal. http://austerity.newgrounds.com/news/post/696363#comments

Scroll down and look at Tom's post.

Yup, it's always by the same accounts too.

I usually give a fat zero. There's clearly no effort, it's just the same recycled platform, hyper generic crap.

It's the equivalent of having a bunch of games factory clones with different colors and objects.

Maybe it's time for a new revolution

At 13 minutes ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: I've been noticing an awful lot of generic "Spot the Difference" games in the portal. http://austerity.newgrounds.com/news/post/696363#comments

Scroll down and look at Tom's post.

He's on top of things here on Newgrounds. People just assume they'll pass and vote for the easy way.
There's so many terrible games... It's not even the copycat biking games that get me anymore. It's the "find X" games. Find numbers, find differences... I mean, come on now. We're not looking for Carmen San Diego here...
And I believe it's commonly agreed that these games simply stink.

At 10 minutes ago, Ronald-McDonald-LoL wrote: And I believe it's commonly agreed that these games simply stink.

I agree, it's annoying that they almost always pass though :/. I personally find the typical generic dress-up games to be the worst. I see quite a few of them getting uploaded every week. I can't help but wonder who achually enjoys clicking and dragging items of clothing onto some celebraty or general cartoon person. Maybe I'm just not the target market.

At 10 minutes ago, Decky wrote: Maybe I'm just not the target market.

The target audience is probably young girls, which conflicts with the site's tradition target audience of teenage boys. I don't know who it was who saw NG and decided, "hey, we should put really girly games here!"
NG is not the most friendly and welcoming place for children.

Who knows, maybe there's an underground group of aging men who enjoy these games, sort of like the My Little Pony shenanigans.

At 2 hours ago, Ronald-McDonald-LoL wrote:
Who knows, maybe there's an underground group of aging men who enjoy these games, sort of like the My Little Pony shenanigans.

Don't even get me started on how freaking weird the whole Pony thing is.

Anyway, I think their thinking that by spamming the website with their mediocre games they can get some revenue from ads. Even thought they're essentially idiots for thinking that, that's the only reasoning I can see out of this.

And it passes because people around here have the attitude that it's decent enough to pass. Nobody votes 1. So if it's decent enough to pass, they'll vote 2. Not 1. Even though it likely deserves a 1.

I'd really like to see the statistics on how many people actually vote 1.

At 6 hours ago, SpiffyMasta wrote:

At 2 hours ago, Ronald-McDonald-LoL wrote: Who knows, maybe there's an underground group of aging men who enjoy these games, sort of like the My Little Pony shenanigans.

Don't even get me started on how freaking weird the whole Pony thing is.

I have to admit that I know nothing about the whole Pony take over that seems to have happened quite quickly a good few months back now. I remember My Little Pony being quite big about 12 years ago as one of my cousins collected the toys but how come teenage guys have started to like this new, more cartoony version? Is there something I'm missing here? Has it gone funny or is it just to be a little "different"? Seriously I don't get it.

I'd really like to see the statistics on how many people actually vote 1.

I vote 1. So there is one for the statistics ;).

At 2 hours ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: Agreed. Before the redesign took away the Top Uploaders list, girl games were already dominating the list with their awful dress-up games. I vote 0 on dress-up and spot-the-difference games, though the worst part is seeing them pass with a 3.15.

I think those users are no longer on those lists because I remember seeing their 300 or 400 odd flashes go down to 200. Not bad, there's a start.

At 10 hours ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: Those "lists" are no longer there and they no longer link to them. If you go to the original Top Uploaders list, it was last updated August 2007.

But there was a list that showed igirlgames and some other uploaders in the top uploaders list...what list was that?

At 1 hour ago, SCTE3 wrote: Hopefully when it gets updated those cookie cutter accounts will be excluded from the list. Mostly because they could care less about who likes the games, just free advertising for their five second dress up games.

The problem being that these cookie cutter accounts spring up a lot. Say for example, there was this gamesgrow or something that recently came and is submitting these flash; it won't take long for other new ones that have no way of automatically being excluded.

At 1 hour ago, MistyEntertainment wrote: but I'd much rather see a not-so-good submission from an actual user win a daily than a cookie cutter account.

True, this, but what exactly is the definition of a "cookie cutter account"? The ones that win awards may as well be from a legit company producing games rather than a company that produces dressup games and ones that are just for +1 flash?

Thanks I noticed that TheWeebl had uploaded a new flash last month. I too hate those cookie cutter games, I have no problem with them passing if it a legit vote. The same bland game passing is not right. If you check the user page of those authors they, only have submissions posted no news posts or reviews. I don't go on the portal much these days, but I gather you mean the same authors are the ones right?

At 12 hours ago, Austerity wrote: We definitely need to band together to vote 0 on all these things and not vote 2 for those extra save points, tempting as they are.

While I can appreciate that sentiment, we are NOT a blamming club, and we do NOT group vote on anything. To be more accurate, if we ALL vote fairly, and all recognize what each flash is for what it's worth, the blams will occur naturally.

At 1 minute ago, Gimmick wrote:

a company that produces dressup games and ones that are just for +1 flash?

They're doing it for the money. The more games they have out the more ad revenue they get. Pumping out a few of the same exact game several times a day means a steady stream of money. I'd like to know who is making these and where they come from, if they have a sweatshop somewhere where they force people to pump these out just so one person can get all the money. Like a pimp in a way.

You are correct - a "cookie-cutter" account that produces the same type of flash over and over again with only minor graphic changes (such as the "Meet and F**k" and "Spot the Difference" games) is doing it for recognition, and not for the betterment of Newgrounds. Theoretically, the flashes themselves my not be in violation of the rules here, but the quantity of all of the look-alike flashes that they pump out can be considered a form of spamming.

It may be advantageous that if an account is reported as "cookie-cutter" or "mass-producer", it should be flagged as such, and every flash they submit would show some sort of banner / message / visible notation on the voting screen that the flash is submitted from a mass-producer; this would then let the voting community be aware of the intentions of the account and their flashes so they could vote accordingly.

It's a borderline subject, but in the end, as long as you vote fairly according to your own opinion, and don't vote just for stat points, the true crap will get voted out of the portal.