People, this isn't a question of whether we ban or regulate KK/UU/etc. because we think their Flashes are "bad".

It's a question of whether we ban or regulate KK/UU/etc. because they are spam, and are created not to be liked or admired, but to clutter up the Portal. Members of the KK/UU have admitted to such - if you look, you'll even find reviews where members of these groups have *objected* to favourable reviews, saying that they're here just to spam.

All these counter-examples of how other Flashes are high or low quality in each other's opinion are beside the point.

HAHAHAHAHA fuck you guys

glock group did the same shit,yet nobody ever bothered them, and kitty kre does the exact same thing

think before you guys give your bias

I haven't been in the portal lately, time to check it out!

you guys are gay.

golden rule: comedy over quality.

and people also have their own opinions and taking that away would make newgrounds fucking shitty and full of anime shit.

At 10/3/06 12:46 PM, TurtleLove117 wrote: ^ Above two posts.

if only there was a button you could prerss where you could, I dont know, "quote" them?

These flash crews should just stop...

They're the Uzi Union, and they kick serious ass.

At 10/3/06 06:21 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote:

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.

well, the garbage submitters wouldn't be doing what they're doing if the system weren't open to exploitation, and the stat whores are the people who make it that way. they aren't the entire problem, obviously, but i think theyre the root of the problem.

At 10/3/06 06:18 PM, Kinsman wrote: * 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.

NO. horrid idea. thats just downright censorship. a lot of hilarious flashes have come from the desire to piss off the idiotic easily-angered NG audience. I can't deny how much fun it is to get people all riled up, and I can see the reason why the KK and the UU persist. so do I think their flashes should be censored and deleted? no, despite how much i hate them as crews. this would ruin the purpose of the blam/save system. the solution isn't censorship, its fixing the loopholes that they are exploiting.

I think you're all bullshitting fags. Just vote 0 and move on.

Also be sure to 0 anything and everything by the Kitty Krew.

At 10/3/06 09:12 PM, F00D wrote:

NO. horrid idea. thats just downright censorship.

F00D, why don't you go to the submission guidelines, take a look at each of the 'Do not's, and tell me which are unnecessary censorship (which you do not approve of), and which are the closing of loopholes (which you do approve of), and why.

Also, read my follow-up posts on this thread.

There's a lot of confusion here between the idea of objecting to someone submitting a buzzing penis, and objecting to the idea of submitting five buzzing penises/dancing cutouts/etc each day, along with other spam groups submitting their five dancing Micheal Jacksons/flashing backgrounds/etc., all in order to clog up the Portal.

I'm heading to bed right now, picking this up in the morning if the thread's still around.

At 10/3/06 12:33 PM, Mind-Edge wrote:

At 10/3/06 12:32 PM, TurtleLove117 wrote: It's time like these that i wish i had 15.0 voting power X 10.

I'd BLAM all of the bullshit making it's way through the portal.

People are too nice, they need to regulate.

You can't have 15.0 X 10. The maximum B/P bonus is + 60%

Which still isn't enough to blam a movie or game right off the bat.

Meh, no biggie, it happens whenever a new group is formed, they'll stop submitting in a week or two.

I agree with Wade on this. I'm an active clock and I don't even have a clock alias.

The whole system is essentially flawed so any attempt to stem a problem will always end in complaints and different flaws.

I don't see how the Kitties or Uzis even did anything to become so popular anyway? Is there some respected BBS regular involved in one of the groups or something?

The Idea of portal mods been suggested several times, the UU is not the only one that is taking advantage of what I call a frustrated voter.

I am not saying any of these groups have not made good stuff, but I know they have taken advantage of mindset of the frustrated voter.
There is the SS, the kitty krew, the UU, the BPB, the SPB, glocks, locks, clocks, Barney bunch, PP, and heck about every group has. Probably the group that really got it going was the SS.

Now I see reviewers accusing the groups of mass voting, if you read what Wade said that is not really the case. It more they get everyone in their group to vote 5 and their friends and with the help of the frustrated voters it passes judgement.

This text sums up the feeling of many frustrated voters.
" know it's gonna get protected so it's a 2 from me so i wont miss a protection point. i want it blammed but i know i cant."

Really that sums it up it very well for many people voting on the portal.

You know I saw a comment about the original blam club, it wasn’t closed due to any abuse of anything, it just died. The times changed and people moved on, it really an idea better left locked now.

I have seen various groups and people use file swapping.
I have seen people that will make their flash 3-10MB with a good neat preloader and people will vote based on the preloader.
Heck I probably could list several other things I have seen.

I once saw the idea of using the whistle system to catch things like I stated above after they passed, and have portal mods check the submissions for the abuse. Also I like to add this. Have the portal mods able to help out with whistled submissions.

While that can help, more than anything the minds of the voters almost need a wake up call.

At 10/3/06 12:46 PM, TurtleLove117 wrote: ^ Above two posts.

Exactly!

The intro's are good, the same goes with the Kitty Krew... but after that, they turn into bullshit.

Plus, people go mainstream and vote 5 for the protection point.

press the 'reply with quote' button. also what is UU?

At 10/3/06 12:48 PM, TurtleLove117 wrote:

*regrets not signing up 7 years ago...*
I'm just a hardcore lurker, i finally decided to get active with an account once i saw how bad the Portal was getting.

But besides the UU, their's alot more bullshit that sneaks on through... why is the portal so easy?

that reminds me,next time diposite and you would be higher than me.

At 10/3/06 10:13 PM, Commie-Uzi wrote:

At 10/3/06 10:12 PM, Adam wrote:
I just lost any and all respect I had gained for the UU after that anti-Rasta day.
You guys were so much better as the Blocked Band when you weren't all nubs.

ha cha cha cha cha cha

oh wait, i didn't read all of your post. We're not the Blocked band.

At 10/3/06 09:55 PM, Adam wrote: SIR WE ARE NOT A BRIGADE WE ARE A SYNDICATE.

That's MA'AM, sorry about that, thare are more groups than ever.

I've never used proxies to upvote my own flashes, I do ask friends to 5 my flashes of course and sometimes they will vote below 5. I've gone over the math with this with an SPS hater once and also explained to him why I did the series and he began to respect me and the series more.

I never said you used proxies, Imore saying the problem is what I call the furstrated voter than anything else. I do admit some groups have put various things in flash that are darn right halarious. I'll vote 2 or more just based on tha. I see nothing wrong with it. I was more saying how thing got to this point.
.:

They are dumb, it is hardly worth anything. No turd eligibility if you fileswap in the first place.

I agree, it really doesn't happen like it used to. Yet still has potential for abuse.

I have seen people that will make their flash 3-10MB with a good neat preloader and people will vote based on the preloader.
Heck I probably could list several other things I have seen.

Agreed.

In addition, some people vote 0 on good flashes because they personally did not like the theme or it wasn't violent. That's bullshit, artists put months of effort into flashes and that should also be addressed.

While I understand what you are saying
There are always going to be poeple who don't like an author that will vote poorly on thier submissions
The oppisite can be true for the same author, there are people who love their workan will rate it highly.
Can you really punish that?
It almost like say you have to vote this way if they did this or that.

It's a tricky thing, the system has fla. There no doubt in that, but the hard part is coming up with a good solution.

At 10/3/06 09:49 PM, ramagi wrote: While that can help, more than anything the minds of the voters almost need a wake up call.

Yeah, they do.

But I think NG staff has to stop aiding these spammers. In that thread "post abusive reviews here!" it's basically all reviews that were left for spam entries, and the reviewer ends up getting banned. The saddest part about that is the people leaving the abusive reviews are the ones voting 0 on these entries, and the people marking these reviews as abusive are the spammers.

Right now, the spammers are winning because people are getting review banned for leaving nasty reviews on spam submissions. I mean comon, it's spam. If someone leaves a abusive review, they deserved it.

At 10/3/06 09:07 PM, Kes wrote:

At 10/3/06 07:44 PM, GoldenHammer wrote: good solutions:

bad

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.

sux

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

what determines crap? the yuyu is crap!!

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)

makes little sence. I submit so called "shit" and my ba is over 3.30. And I have 2000 exp. 20 flashes a month aint bad, but there are some great artists with no exp that have an account just to submit.

bad or sux are not valid arguments, explain why its not a good solution
obs: yuyu its not crap, its a master piece of perfect work, and the guys of UU will NEVER do something better

At 10/3/06 09:22 PM, Kinsman wrote: F00D, why don't you go to the submission guidelines, take a look at each of the 'Do not's, and tell me which are unnecessary censorship (which you do not approve of), and which are the closing of loopholes (which you do approve of), and why.

all but the "personal attack" rule are ok at the moment

Also, read my follow-up posts on this thread.

all that you seem to state in your follow up posts is that your rule could be open to debate. that isn't the case. if its a rule, the admins alone have the final say in what breaks the rule and what doesn't. in addition, you say that the rule would only affect people who are cluttering the portal on purpose. maybe it would work for the kitty krew, who are blatant about their intentions, but all the other crews would have to do is claim that they are actually trying to create good flashes when in reality theyre trying to piss people off. as a result, theyd probably end up being even more succesful in their goals by using more subtle techniques then they would by just outright saying "we're trying to spam the portal and piss people off." therefore, the problem wouldn't be solved. people would just find a way around it. and then the admins would have to step things up and start censoring all flashes that they feel shouldn't have passed judgement, and this would cause a viscious cycle that would eventually ruin the portal for thousands of people with different opinions then yourself.

There's a lot of confusion here between the idea of objecting to someone submitting a buzzing penis, and objecting to the idea of submitting five buzzing penises/dancing cutouts/etc each day, along with other spam groups submitting their five dancing Micheal Jacksons/flashing backgrounds/etc., all in order to clog up the Portal.

the simple fact is a lot of flashes specifically designed to piss people off and screw with the portal can still be enjoyable to a lot of people. you may dislike the intentions of the authors, but movies that were solely designed to anger and that seem to not have any redeeming qualities have actually gained a lot of fans, if for no other reason then they incite hilarious amounts of anger from reviewers. others just enjoy the simplicity of such flashes, or they find dicks attractive or something. i happen to hate the adolf hitler around the world series, and cant see how anyone would like it. i have no doubt in my mind that the authors are only making the series for the sake of spamming and angering NG visitors. but that doesnt mean i think they should be censored by the admins, because believe it or not, they have a lot of actual fans who really do enjoy the flashes. censoring them simply because of their intentions is dumb, because there are ALWAYS going to be SOME people who enjoy the flashes. your self-centered point of view is preventing you from seeing this.

anyways, i don't know why we're even debating. the admins are never going to instate your rule. newgrounds has always been against censorship of any kind, regardless of the intentions of the authors.

At 10/3/06 10:32 PM, Adam wrote: A lot of the links in that thread lead to quality animations. More quality=more views= faster review delete though.

And I got review banned for giving Metal Gear Awesome a 1 and leaving the most detailed review I've ever written for it.

Well there's going to be some links to reviews left for good animations, but that thread is mainly a promotion for portal spam and aids the authors who spam the portal.

For instance, one of the latest posts by the person with a deity whistle (big on helping the spammers), told people to flag reviews for this entry: http://www.newground..m/portal/view/342130
That entry is blatant portal spam. Review banning people for those entries is promoting spam.

At 10/3/06 10:26 PM, DFox wrote:

At 10/3/06 09:49 PM, ramagi wrote: While that can help, more than anything the minds of the voters almost need a wake up call.

Yeah, they do.

Right now, the spammers are winning because people are getting review banned for leaving nasty reviews on spam submissions. I mean comon, it's spam. If someone leaves a abusive review, they deserved it.

I am sorry but I disagree with you, no matter how crappy the submission is there is no reason to do that. It is against the review rules.
If you don't like it vote 0, and move on, or point out what is bad about the flash.
The rules are not just for some of the submissions, but all of them.

I have banned for such things in the past and will continue to do so as a review mod.

At 10/3/06 10:38 PM, ramagi wrote: I am sorry but I disagree with you, no matter how crappy the submission is there is no reason to do that. It is against the review rules.
If you don't like it vote 0, and move on, or point out what is bad about the flash.
The rules are not just for some of the submissions, but all of them.

I have banned for such things in the past and will continue to do so as a review mod.

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion.

Personally I view it as helping the spammers because they are the ones reporting the reviews. It's basically a trap just to get people review banned. The portal spamming will not stop until the spammers realize they will receive no help from moderators and admins, but right now, they are, so it will continue.

At 10/3/06 10:40 PM, Adam wrote:

At 10/3/06 10:37 PM, DFox wrote:

At 10/3/06 10:32 PM, Adam wrote: http://www.newground..m/portal/view/342130

You do realize that you just linked to one of my flashes, right?

What a coincidence. I did not notice that. I just grabbed one of the last links from that thread.

At 10/3/06 10:26 PM, DFox wrote: But I think NG staff has to stop aiding these spammers. In that thread "post abusive reviews here!" it's basically all reviews that were left for spam entries, and the reviewer ends up getting banned. The saddest part about that is the people leaving the abusive reviews are the ones voting 0 on these entries, and the people marking these reviews as abusive are the spammers.

the people marking it as abusive aren't the spammers, they're Wi/Ht visitors who are looking for a better whistle level. you're a fucking dumbass

Right now, the spammers are winning because people are getting review banned for leaving nasty reviews on spam submissions. I mean comon, it's spam. If someone leaves a abusive review, they deserved it.

ugh fuck off

if you dislike a spam flash, don't stoop to their level by leaving an abusive review. this is exactly what they want from you.
that thread is one of the most useful and well-liked threads on these boards, and has resulted in more rightful punishment for stupid little assholes then any other thread. if there's anything worse then a kitty krew faggot, its an abusive-review leaving faggot. doesn't matter what flash it is.

At 10/3/06 07:23 PM, RumMonkey wrote: I'm in the UU so, fUCK YOUa

At 10/3/06 08:26 PM, pearuzi wrote: HAHAHAHAHA fuck you guys

glock group did the same shit,yet nobody ever bothered them, and kitty kre does the exact same thing

think before you guys give your bias

At 10/3/06 08:31 PM, MinuteMaidPremium wrote: you guys are gay.

golden rule: comedy over quality.

and people also have their own opinions and taking that away would make newgrounds fucking shitty and full of anime shit.

At 10/3/06 08:58 PM, Platinum wrote: They're the Uzi Union, and they kick serious ass.

At 10/3/06 09:20 PM, Platinum wrote: I think you're all bullshitting fags. Just vote 0 and move on.

Also be sure to 0 anything and everything by the Kitty Krew.

look at their responses, look how inteligent and wise are the spammers... (sarcasm)
if they are asking for ban, just give what they are asking for...

At 10/3/06 10:44 PM, Adam wrote: Dfox would you personally like to see reviews telling you what to improve on or reviews saying "zomg that sucked?"

If you were submitting legitimate entries then of course you wouldn't want to see reviews like that.

But spam entries deserve reviews like that. Why should people waste their time and tell you how to make an entry that you CLEARLY had no desire to put any work into better? It's just silly. We all know these people aren't submitting these Flashes to get suggestions. They are your common spammers.

At 10/3/06 10:46 PM, F00D wrote: the people marking it as abusive aren't the spammers, they're Wi/Ht visitors who are looking for a better whistle level. you're a fucking dumbass

Sure, I'll buy that after they decide to stop spamming, then we can call them Wi/Ht visitors.

ugh fuck off

if you dislike a spam flash, don't stoop to their level by leaving an abusive review. this is exactly what they want from you.
that thread is one of the most useful and well-liked threads on these boards, and has resulted in more rightful punishment for stupid little assholes then any other thread. if there's anything worse then a kitty krew faggot, its an abusive-review leaving faggot. doesn't matter what flash it is.

I think you need to calm down. I don't participate in this abusive reviewing, but apparently you do. How can you honestly have the nerve to come in here and say "abusive review leaving faggots" when you're one of them? That's just hilarious.

Is that rule about a portal ban after 'x' number of blammed submissions still in effect? I've always felt that was a step in the step in the right direction. Combine that with voters "waking up" and voting how they felt about a flash, rather then trying to get a protection point, and while it may not make everyone happy, what does pass would be a better representation of what the majority of people on NG enjoy.

And yes, I do agree that no submission deserves abuse from viewers.

At 10/3/06 10:43 PM, DFox wrote:

At 10/3/06 10:38 PM, ramagi wrote: I am sorry but I disagree with you, no matter how crappy the submission is there is no reason to do that. It is against the review rules.
If you don't like it vote 0, and move on, or point out what is bad about the flash.
The rules are not just for some of the submissions, but all of them.

I have banned for such things in the past and will continue to do so as a review mod.

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion.

Personally I view it as helping the spammers because they are the ones reporting the reviews. It's basically a trap just to get people review banned. The portal spamming will not stop until the spammers realize they will receive no help from moderators and admins, but right now, they are, so it will continue.

Actually all those reviews do is encourage the people submitting the flash.
They want to piss people off. That is the whole goal of some of te submissions out there. To see how many people they can get to leave abusive reviews on the flash.
It not a case of letting them win by removing the reviews, or banning the abusive people. They already won when the reviewers chose to leave the abusive review in the first place. They submitter goes cool I pissed people off, I'm going to do it again.
I could even point to certain posts by some memebers of groups even loving the hate reviews. I rather not give them that satisfaction.

The submitterof the crap is winning more at the voting stage when the average voter goes, oh this group submitted this, I'll just vote 2 to get my point. I know personally I have many poitns, but I have lost many points as well because I didn't vote to save a submission that got protected, and the opposite voted to protect a submission that got blammed