At 1/4/06 12:02 PM, onnet092 wrote: Here here to that

lol dude your 14 so dont be trashing 13 year olds when u got only a maxiumum of 1 year on em

lmao Newgrounds politics. Why don't you just delete the portal Wade Flup? If you stop Clocks, Locks, Glocks and Stars from voting on their own movies, than why not Foamheads and every 13 year old who protects shitty hentai quizzes and tutorials?

Does Newgrounds have a way to track whether certain groups of users tend to vote on the exact same movies? Not to punish them par se, but so you can at least be able to get a warning of whether there are people who tend to vote on mass and give them extra scrutiny.

Like say for example, a bunch of users named tom, dick and harry all tend to vote 5 on the same movies and 0 on the same movies. That should at least give warning signs that they are mass voters.

At 1/4/06 02:13 PM, BigBlueBalls wrote: Does Newgrounds have a way to track whether certain groups of users tend to vote on the exact same movies? Not to punish them par se, but so you can at least be able to get a warning of whether there are people who tend to vote on mass and give them extra scrutiny.

Like say for example, a bunch of users named tom, dick and harry all tend to vote 5 on the same movies and 0 on the same movies. That should at least give warning signs that they are mass voters.

I think it would say something like this:

Portal Votes by RandomUser001 on 1/04/06:
Zero on Entry:
276841

Wade, I Heart You!

At 1/4/06 12:05 PM, SuburbaniteHunter wrote: And he shall sriketh teh e-bitches with his all mighty admin powers. Bedn 5:45

lawl

At 1/4/06 02:16 PM, HAcoreRD wrote: I think it would say something like this:

Portal Votes by RandomUser001 on 1/04/06:
Zero on Entry:
276841

Yeah but it's got to somehow organize it in a way that all the users who voted on that movie are compared to who voted on other movies. Then go through all the movies for say the last month or few months and let it check to see if any users get grouped together as voting on the same movies, with the same vote.

Again, I'm not saying that these people get necessarily banned right away, just that it would help Wade watch and look for patterns, then decide the right course of action depending on the situation. I realize there are times that it could be coincidence, say if I happen to like the same movies as another user here, it could end up looking like we're part of a group when we don't even know each other. At the same time coincidental patterns only tend to last so long until it's obvious that people are screwing with the system.

At 1/4/06 12:00 PM, WadeFulp wrote: From this day on any user who has found to purposely swing a score will have their accounts terminated.

Yeah this goes out to all the people who vote to alter a score, you bastards.

Pwned. Those noobs still got off too easy though.

Those bastards, they got what they deserved though

I firmly believe we should alter the review system, so that users can only vote an overall five. That way, it's nice and fair for everyone. Any other course of action would clearly be condoning mass-reviewing.

At 1/4/06 12:01 PM, Bou wrote: Or just ban all 13 year olds.

Why? I'm 13 and I barly ever review flash, and when I do it's fair. I'd never go out and gang blam a flash.
Banning all 13 year olds would be stupid and futile, because I doubt it was all 13 year olds doing it to begine with. I say just bann people doing it, it will eventualy stop.

Seems a bit harsh to people who just put clock / lock / glock / star / whatever in their name, especially if they're not officially within the group. Hell, even some forum mods are in some of these groups. Also, how do you plan to stop unknown groups, ike outside forums, from doing anything like this?

If NG groups get pushed 'underground' in the internet world, they'll still exist and everything will get funnier.

At 1/4/06 02:54 PM, Earfetish wrote: If NG groups get pushed 'underground' in the internet world, they'll still exist and everything will get funnier.

Most of the big groups have been pushed underground. Hell, there's most likely mass voting groups out there nobody has heard of.

At 1/4/06 02:54 PM, Earfetish wrote: If NG groups get pushed 'underground' in the internet world, they'll still exist and everything will get funnier.

->Undergrounds.

Would be like totally the best NG-related forum ever.
"Undergrounds - too hot for Newgrounds!"

right on wade.

At 1/4/06 12:29 PM, sketch0587 wrote: Then why isn't j00bie deleted

he's done that more times than I've seen you make news threads ;)

dont listen to him hes lying i tells ya

Better late than never

Nice job Wade! Where would be with out you, I hope they don't come back pieces of crap!!!

what i meant to say was:

wow wade you are doing a great job!!!!! you show them who is the boss around here!!! you are teh kewlies!!! ^_^ and all that other generic crap.

come on this should be on page 23 by now.

Seriously, it's the fucking internet.

Who cares.

At 1/4/06 03:23 PM, j00bie wrote: come on this should be on page 23 by now.

Needs more random bug pictures.

Good job Wade. You make Newgrounds a better place, so does Tom and liljim. You make the system so much safer.

I think this is a poor solution.

At 1/4/06 03:28 PM, coldfire1 wrote: Good job Wade. You make Newgrounds a better place, so does Tom and liljim. You make the system so much safer.

You have to rub a bit harder and faster for him to splooge.

At 1/4/06 12:00 PM, WadeFulp wrote: We are getting sick and tired of users pulling crap like this to alter scores so they can win and entries that should win do not.

i agree with this, it is wrong, but maybe users have been doing this as there hasn't really been that much of a penalty. A solo artist should stand the same chance as a user from a group, though this is not the case.

i don't want to come off as a hypocrite, as i, too, belong to those newgrounds groups, and have unfairly reviewed movies with a 10 because i liked them, sometimes due to the group. In my honest oppinion, a 10 would be rare, only the cream of the crop should deserve a 10, but in the past i have given out 10's all too often. lately, i try to vote on the movie more fairly, based on content, effort, and humor, as they should be. 0's are used all too much too, though i cba to write a 0 review. the movies that SHOULD deserve a 0, are those that are blammed, but if it passes, it is probably better than a 0 anyways.

Meaning if a Clock or a Lock, or a SS member submits an entry, no other Clock, Lock, or SS member should review it or vote on it until after the weekly awards are over.

this, i do not quite agree with. sure, it makes sonce sence, but i think that is too extreme. now-a-days, 95% of the movies i review, are under judgement, which is when i first see them. to have to go back and review some of those movies a week later seems silly. personally i don't care about the number of reviews i have, i just love to tell authors that i enjoyed their submission as soon as i finished watching it, or to give some constructive criticism where needed.

anyways, this is just a long ramble, instead of doing my work here at school >_< lagatag's post annoyed me, as he probably doesn't understand the situation fully, yet he still decides to call them noobs, even though they are probably far more familiar with newgrounds and visit more often than he does; nothing against you personally, lagatag. though i do feel something should be done about this, i think that some of the reactions are a bit too extreme.

oh yeah, on the subject of the SS winning the RCP this week (saddly i am biased as i helped make the movie) but i think that was a good submission, in which us artists worked hard to put that collab together. it's been months since we started it, and at last we have finished, but i'm sure many users won't even watch it, and will just 0 it because it is a SS movie :/

i should probably get back to work, as class is almost over. maybe i shall collect my thoughts, and finish spewing them over the page once i get home :p

At 1/4/06 12:00 PM, WadeFulp wrote:
If these groups were ethical they wouldn't even vote on or review entries submitted by members of their groups.

thats the most retarded thing i ve read in quite a while

At 1/4/06 03:31 PM, The-Blaminator wrote:

At 1/4/06 03:29 PM, LeekClock wrote: I think this is a poor solution.

You're just saying that because you're a clock.

You're just saying that because you're not a clock.