At 10/3/06 03:25 PM, amplefied wrote:

At 10/3/06 02:51 PM, WadeFulp wrote: What we need to do is discourage users, who have accumulated a lot of points, from using their increased powers to abuse the site. They are supposed to use their power to enforce the rules and help keep crap off the site, and keep good entries on the site. If they are going to use their power to put crap on the site, and vote down good entries, that goes against what we expect from them. It takes these people a long time to bulid up these points, it takes me seconds to remove them.

Pherhaps there could be some sort of negative points?
For example, in my profile I have:

BLAMS: Involved in the termination of 7,048 crappy entries.
SAVES: Assisted in the protection of 3,812 quality entries.

If there were added points for submissions that I judged wrongly:

MISJUDGED: Have wrongly prosecuted 342 misjudged entries.

If the ratio is too high then some sort of punishment could be made, like not being able to deposit or vote on submissions that are under judgment.

It's not fullproof though, but should work on most cases.

I like the idea, but at the same time it woudln't really work. For example if people start trying to blam the spam entries, then they end up passing anyways, should they be penalized? It's not a bad idea, but it would need some serious polishing.

As far as all these UU and KK submissions go, a good way to maybe make them harder to pass judgement would be to increase the necessary score to pass judment for every extra author that's credited in the Author section. For every extra author you'd need an extra... .4 for it to pass judgment. If lots of people worked together to create a flash animation, shouldn't that reflect on the quality of the flash?

I find it kind of frustrating that the Portal get flooded with effortless entries... Just putting my thoughts out there...

At 10/3/06 04:46 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote: a good way to maybe make them harder to pass judgement would be to increase the necessary score to pass judment for every extra author that's credited in the Author section. For every extra author you'd need an extra... .4 for it to pass judgment.

That's a fantastic idea, there are always shitloads of people co-authored to make the submission look like they've worked hard on it, doing that would bring the requirement up to 1.6, then 2.0, then 2.4 (very unlikely to pass here.), then 2.8 and finally, 3.2

I support this fantastic idea.

At 10/3/06 05:01 PM, RupeeClock wrote:

That's a fantastic idea, there are always shitloads of people co-authored to make the submission look like they've worked hard on it, doing that would bring the requirement up to 1.6, then 2.0, then 2.4 (very unlikely to pass here.), then 2.8 and finally, 3.2

Well, it would stop pointess co-authoring, but wouldn't submissions just be submitted under one author instead... at least fewer people would get "credit" for it.

At 10/3/06 05:01 PM, RupeeClock wrote:

At 10/3/06 04:46 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote: a good way to maybe make them harder to pass judgement would be to increase the necessary score to pass judment for every extra author that's credited in the Author section. For every extra author you'd need an extra... .4 for it to pass judgment.

That's a fantastic idea, there are always shitloads of people co-authored to make the submission look like they've worked hard on it, doing that would bring the requirement up to 1.6, then 2.0, then 2.4 (very unlikely to pass here.), then 2.8 and finally, 3.2

I support this fantastic idea.

ew fuck no

if you're going to do that, make it MUCH less then .4 for each additional author. imagine a well made collab with 5 or more people working on it scores a 3.0, which is a green score, "good." you're seriously suggesting that entry should be blammed? thats absolutely absurd and a terrible idea. besides, its obviously open to abuse, because the only thing it would remedy would be the whole "coauthoring people who didnt actually do any work on the flash" phenomena, and that isnt the main problem here. the main problem is people's reputation of passing judgement allowing people to get away with more then they could normally, without a reputation.

At 10/3/06 05:14 PM, darkagentx wrote: Well, it would stop pointess co-authoring, but wouldn't submissions just be submitted under one author instead... at least fewer people would get "credit" for it.

Well if the submission is actually good, the authors wouldn't need to worry about it passing judgement or not.

I think it's a great idea.

At 10/3/06 04:42 PM, darkagentx wrote: The huge problem with this is that it would force even more people to vote with the crowd, potentially.

True, I thought of that, perhaps this kind of system could be implemented stealthily to keep track and punish automatically those who misuse their powers. A sort of a voting history that monitors if you've given too many fives or zeros in a row. Or it can be named into something less threatening like:

Voted movies that this user didn't get a point for 334.

Ideally movies should pass after getting a certain amount of good reviews, but that's just not feasible.

At 10/3/06 05:21 PM, Crusty-Wiwuh wrote:

At 10/3/06 05:14 PM, darkagentx wrote: Well, it would stop pointess co-authoring, but wouldn't submissions just be submitted under one author instead... at least fewer people would get "credit" for it.

Well if the submission is actually good, the authors wouldn't need to worry about it passing judgement or not.

I think it's a great idea.

what kind of a counter-argument is that?
if you even read what he said, the kitty krew and uzi union would just start submitting their flashes with no coauthors and they would still pass. therefore, the problem would still exist.

wade's "misjudged entries" thing is a much better idea because it doesn't hurt flash authors, it only hurts the blatant stat whores, who are really the root of this problem. but like someone said before, it needs some serious fine tuning. in fact i dont think there should be any penalty at all for trying to blam an entry that everyone else voted 5 on, shitty video game sprite movies would flourish if that were the case. it should only be the other way around.

At 10/3/06 05:18 PM, F00D wrote: if you're going to do that, make it MUCH less then .4 for each additional author. imagine a well made collab with 5 or more people working on it scores a 3.0, which is a green score, "good." you're seriously suggesting that entry should be blammed? thats absolutely absurd and a terrible idea. besides, its obviously open to abuse, because the only thing it would remedy would be the whole "coauthoring people who didnt actually do any work on the flash" phenomena, and that isnt the main problem here. the main problem is people's reputation of passing judgement allowing people to get away with more then they could normally, without a reputation.

Well the thing is, co-authoring that many people may have a small effect on the score, making people think more people worked hard on it.

The bar should be raised a bit for co-authors because ideally, 5 people that actually worked hard on a movie are not likely to score 2.3 at all.

At 10/3/06 12:34 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Hopefully more people will start realizing they are shit and start blamming them.

hey wadey boi stop disn me g i wuz al up in ther til u go n edlet me u >:u

Well, until a fair system can be devised, we should be glad that Wade can see who votes what.

On the bright side, low scoring movies (with notable exceptions: TOTW and FP (see today...)) will usually disappear into obscurity. That will have to do for now...

I don't think this problem is hard to solve.

If you read the notes on the SUBMIT page, you'll see that a lot of tricks and stunts aren't permitted on Newgrounds:

* Your movie must not be someone else's work! We will delete your account as punishment.
If you see something you like elsewhere, ask them to submit it, or notify us.
* Your movie must not auto-redirect to a new site or open pop-ups!
If your submission autospawns OUTWAR, your account will be deleted and Outwar admins will be notified.
* Your movie must not simply be an ad for your site!
* Due to new laws, you may not submit photographic images of nude people engaging in sexual activity!
* Do not submit photographs that are illegal, such as child pornography and bestiality. We WILL contact the FBI!
* Your movie must not be racist or downright hateful towards specific groups of people!
* You may parody existing Flash submissions, but you must use your own artwork and not rip another author's art.
* Personal attacks towards other Flash authors will result in deletion.
* Your movie must not be a pointless "demo" or "preview" without any redeeming qualities!
* Do not submit movies or games made from public .FLA files, these will be flagged.
* Do not submit pictures in a slide show format with no interactivity. Quiz games are okay.
* Do not submit copyrighted video clips that you did not make.
* Do not submit crap entries with the intent to give users "free blam points."
* Do not swap out your original entry with something totally different, we will terminate your account.
* Do not re-submit your entry after it has been BLAMMED without making noticeable improvements. It will be flagged!
* Make sure your submission has been properly rated! Entries with grossly inaccurate ratings may result in account termination or flagging!

All of these items were added due to specific (sometimes very specific) problems and abuses that Newgrounds was having at some point or another. I was there through a lot of these incidents, and watched these guidelines get added.

Why, then, are we having all this discussion about juggling blam and protect points, or changing threshold levels, or all these other indirect ways of managing the problem? Why can't we simply do what's been done many times before, and add another entry to the SUBMIT guidelines:

* Do not submit crap entries as part of a group whose sole purpose is to annoy and spam Newgrounds members!

And then police this guideline, removing movies with the threat of account deletion held in reserve. A BBS announcement of the new rule, and we're golden.

At 10/3/06 12:34 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Hopefully more people will start realizing they are shit and start blamming them.

PROOF ENOUGH
UU sucks yay

At 10/3/06 05:34 PM, F00D wrote:

At 10/3/06 05:21 PM, Crusty-Wiwuh wrote:

At 10/3/06 05:14 PM, darkagentx wrote: Well, it would stop pointess co-authoring, but wouldn't submissions just be submitted under one author instead... at least fewer people would get "credit" for it.

Well if the submission is actually good, the authors wouldn't need to worry about it passing judgement or not.

I think it's a great idea.

what kind of a counter-argument is that?
if you even read what he said, the kitty krew and uzi union would just start submitting their flashes with no coauthors and they would still pass. therefore, the problem would still exist.

wade's "misjudged entries" thing is a much better idea because it doesn't hurt flash authors, it only hurts the blatant stat whores, who are really the root of this problem. but like someone said before, it needs some serious fine tuning. in fact i dont think there should be any penalty at all for trying to blam an entry that everyone else voted 5 on, shitty video game sprite movies would flourish if that were the case. it should only be the other way around.

At 10/3/06 05:18 PM, F00D wrote:

At 10/3/06 05:01 PM, RupeeClock wrote:

At 10/3/06 04:46 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote: a good way to maybe make them harder to pass judgement would be to increase the necessary score to pass judment for every extra author that's credited in the Author section. For every extra author you'd need an extra... .4 for it to pass judgment.

That's a fantastic idea, there are always shitloads of people co-authored to make the submission look like they've worked hard on it, doing that would bring the requirement up to 1.6, then 2.0, then 2.4 (very unlikely to pass here.), then 2.8 and finally, 3.2

I support this fantastic idea.

ew fuck no

if you're going to do that, make it MUCH less then .4 for each additional author. imagine a well made collab with 5 or more people working on it scores a 3.0, which is a green score, "good." you're seriously suggesting that entry should be blammed? thats absolutely absurd and a terrible idea. besides, its obviously open to abuse, because the only thing it would remedy would be the whole "coauthoring people who didnt actually do any work on the flash" phenomena, and that isnt the main problem here. the main problem is people's reputation of passing judgement allowing people to get away with more then they could normally, without a reputation.

The '.4 extra' was just a random figure I threw out. But even then I've noticed that as soon as people see that many people 'took part' in a flash they tend to vote higher.

At this point it doesn't seem like there's a perfect solution and my idea doesn't necessarily attack authors. I often support new artists by giving them a decent score in hopes that it'll motivate them to do better. Usually, if the author submits good flash animation where it's obvious that a sincere amount of time and effort was devoted to it, it'll pass judgment without much trouble.

wade's "misjudged entries" thing is a much better idea because it doesn't hurt flash authors, it only hurts the blatant stat whores, who are really the root of this problem.

And I do disagree with you when you state that the root of the problem should be blamed on stats whores because people who submit garbage entries are also guilty. I also didn't reject the idea of a 'misjudged entries' stat. Evidently, both ideas need serious polishing.

At 10/3/06 06:18 PM, Kinsman wrote: I don't think this problem is hard to solve.

* Do not submit crap entries as part of a group whose sole purpose is to annoy and spam Newgrounds members!

And then police this guideline, removing movies with the threat of account deletion held in reserve. A BBS announcement of the new rule, and we're golden.

That would not work...that's totally an opinion issue. For example, I saw a KK entry today that I genuinely liked, but there are people who would rather have the entire KK deleted.

And if we have entire groups being banned/deleted by admins, you may as well just remove the entire B/P system.

Have you watched one, Wade? The intro is very 3Dish with good music. Then they turn into very bad collaboration shit. Anyways I bet 50% people only watch to see if it's OK to see if they get a blam or a portection hell I used to do it but now after movies like this I watch it through.

At 10/3/06 06:25 PM, SlashFirestorm wrote:

At 10/3/06 06:18 PM, Kinsman wrote: I don't think this problem is hard to solve.

* Do not submit crap entries as part of a group whose sole purpose is to annoy and spam Newgrounds members!

And then police this guideline, removing movies with the threat of account deletion held in reserve. A BBS announcement of the new rule, and we're golden.

That would not work...that's totally an opinion issue. For example, I saw a KK entry today that I genuinely liked, but there are people who would rather have the entire KK deleted.

And if we have entire groups being banned/deleted by admins, you may as well just remove the entire B/P system.

Many of the other entries in the SUBMIT guidelines are a judgment call, based on opinion as well. But the reason the rules were put up is because Newgrounds, as a whole, knew that the problem needed to be regulated.

Most of the cases we see now - the ones that led to this message thread being created - are clear enough. If cases come by that are more difficult to call one way or another, we let the Newgrounds administration make that call, and debate matters with them if enough people disagree.

But we should not be afraid of the fact that we might have to debate matters sometime, if the alternative means sitting back and letting the spam problem cpntinue to choke the Portal's Under Judgement section.

And frankly.. the fact that you liked a KK entry doesn't change the fact that they exist to spam the Portal. The occasional good entry they might make is just there to charm you, and make you hesitate in coming down on them.

At 10/3/06 06:33 PM, Kinsman wrote: Many of the other entries in the SUBMIT guidelines are a judgment call, based on opinion as well. But the reason the rules were put up is because Newgrounds, as a whole, knew that the problem needed to be regulated.

True, but something like "annoying" is totally different. Lots of people are annoyed at IWP, but not allowing him to submit would be ridiculous.

And frankly.. the fact that you liked a KK entry doesn't change the fact that they exist to spam the Portal. The occasional good entry they might make is just there to charm you, and make you hesitate in coming down on them.

It wasn't the first I liked, and probably won't be the last. It's dangerous to criticize an entire group and accuse them of being crap, because every crappy group can sometimes produce great flash.

It really boils down to this...they pass. Oh well. Different people have different opinions. If they break rules...like they fileswap, or spawn pop-ups, or whatever...they should be deleted. But we shouldn't punish the authors for the actions of the voters. Newgrounds was forged from controversial content...groups like the KK/UU/whatever are just the modern version of it.

Well, I don't want to make a whole topic about this so I'll just post my opinion on these "groups" like the Uzis, Kitties, Barneys, Locks, Glocks, Stars, Robots, and other spam groups here. I personally think that the only "group" with good flash are the Clocks (and not the people who make a one frame movie and stick a -clock on the end of their name). Flash should be judged on quality of the actual flash (graphics, plot, humor, or action, etc.) not on who's submitting it. I fail to realize how these groups just get immedeate fanbases anyway. It seems ANYONE who makes a spam group instantly gets their flashes fivened. It may have been funny the first couple of times when a total shit flash gets accepted with a really high school and all the abusive reviews come in, but after a while it loses its novelty. Anyway, I'm in favor of any action taken against shit-flash groups. But until something happens, the high level users will probably continue to push their movies through anyway.

At 10/3/06 06:44 PM, SlashFirestorm wrote:

At 10/3/06 06:33 PM, Kinsman wrote: Many of the other entries in the SUBMIT guidelines are a judgment call, based on opinion as well. But the reason the rules were put up is because Newgrounds, as a whole, knew that the problem needed to be regulated.

True, but something like "annoying" is totally different. Lots of people are annoyed at IWP, but not allowing him to submit would be ridiculous.

Do you really have such little faith in your own ability to draw distinctions?

And frankly.. the fact that you liked a KK entry doesn't change the fact that they exist to spam the Portal. The occasional good entry they might make is just there to charm you, and make you hesitate in coming down on them.

It wasn't the first I liked, and probably won't be the last. It's dangerous to criticize an entire group and accuse them of being crap, because every crappy group can sometimes produce great flash.

That's not a response to my point - I can just say my point again, that the occasional good Flash a spam group makes is *a different matter* than their base purpose. If they have a good Flash they made, they can submit it independently of their spam group banner, and not use it to try and disguise their true intentions.

It really boils down to this...they pass. Oh well. Different people have different opinions. If they break rules...like they fileswap, or spawn pop-ups, or whatever...they should be deleted. But we shouldn't punish the authors for the actions of the voters. Newgrounds was forged from controversial content...groups like the KK/UU/whatever are just the modern version of it.

The controversy of early Newgrounds submissions came from the idea being presented. The "controversy" of these new movies is not controversy, but meta-controversy - they cause trouble for Newgrounds in the act of their posting, not trouble for society at large through the challenge of their ideas.

Don't worry about it. This is just like the Barney Bunch. Simply don't pay attention to them and they'll go away. They're attention whores, so if they don't get attention, they'll die off (sort of).

A lof ot people seem to think that "attention" is the critical thing to either give to or withold from these groups.. that giving them "attention" is somehow a sign of weakness on the part of the complainer.

The spam flashes are cluttering up the Under Judgment section, burying and obscuring better and more sincere Flashes. That's more important than whether some kids are getting "attention" or not.

There was a saying on the Internet a few years back: "That's nice. Here, have a cookie." That saying put the question of "attention" in proper perspective - it's no big deal to give someone the attention they want, since attention is a whole different matter than respect or admiration.

Do something about the spam. If anyone wants to claim a victory that they "made Newgrounds" do something about them, give them a cookie; and then regulate them.

this is BS! i support a few of these groups, liek the bpb, uu etc. What happened to free speech, when did NG become naziland. Wade for the most part i think you do a good job here, but i dont want to have to worry about my account getting deleted or altered becaused I 5d a UU or BPB movie. Sooner or later more people will get sick of them and vote 0, you shouldnt scare people in into doing that though!

I'm in the UU so, fUCK YOUa

good solutions:

increase the minimum score to -> 1.0 with 50 votes, 1.2 with 100 votes, 1.4 with 150 votes, 1.6 with 200 votes, 1.8 with 250 votes and 2.0 with 300 to pass.

bad voters lose exp: every time u vote 4 or 5 in a crap flash u will lose 1 or 2 exp points

submit ban to shity authors: batting averange less or equal than 1.5 = 1 month without submiting flash and limit the number of submited flashes per author to 1(per month) to each 100 points of exp that they have (example a guy with 700 points of exp can submit 7 flashs per month)

gee, wade, that's really nice. make someone lose nearly all of their whistle/experience points just because they have a different opinion than yours. Have you ever thought that people actually find these flashes funny? If you'd find humor in these things, you'd understand why people vote five on them. Taking away stats does no one good, espically the site. It's a lose-lose situation.

Losing all points is not harsh. They abuse them, they lose them. Simple as that. It's already happened once, it can happen again.

At 10/3/06 07:45 PM, Ying-yong wrote: gee, wade, that's really nice. make someone lose nearly all of their whistle/experience points just because they have a different opinion than yours. Have you ever thought that people actually find these flashes funny? If you'd find humor in these things, you'd understand why people vote five on them. Taking away stats does no one good, espically the site. It's a lose-lose situation.

I disagree. ppl that REALLY find this flashs funny or cool have critical mental problems. and they are a very little percentage of the users of newgrounds.

At 10/3/06 07:21 PM, Fat-Badger wrote:

What happened to free speech, when did NG become naziland.

Its because your flash sucks.

I think there should be 2 new rules.
1# That there should be no further spin-off groups allowed on Newgrounds.
2# That Anyone caugt abusing the voting system should have their xp down to zero or suffer account deletion.

At 10/3/06 07:50 PM, GoldenHammer wrote: I disagree. ppl that REALLY find this flashs funny or cool have critical mental problems. and they are a very little percentage of the users of newgrounds.

It's just the form of humor. You like LegendaryFrog, and think he is funny. I, on the other hand, think he is an untalented loser, but that's just my opinion. If newgrounds was filled with the same people who liked the same things, it would be called, " The LegendaryFrog fan Portal!" or "The Uzi Union portal!"

But no. It's called the flash portal, and crap, fbf, stickmen, sprites, parodys, anti Osama flashes, and Ying-yong flashes get into the portal. It's full of variety.