At 10/12/06 02:09 PM, naojason wrote: It usually takes more than one individual to abuse a system enough to expose the problem though.

But since when is the SS one individual?

At 10/12/06 02:11 PM, RupeeClock wrote:

At 10/12/06 02:09 PM, naojason wrote: It usually takes more than one individual to abuse a system enough to expose the problem though.

But since when is the SS one individual?

That's my point. Most anything that has been abused on Newgrounds has required GROUPS of individuals to expose the problem in the system.

At 10/12/06 02:13 PM, naojason wrote: That's my point. Most anything that has been abused on Newgrounds has required GROUPS of individuals to expose the problem in the system.

Yes, indeed.

I'm surprised that the SS, having existed for a few years now, hasn't had action taken against it for encouraging these sorts of things.

It wasn't the SS that did this directly, but if they hadn't repeatedly exposed this flaw in the system it wouldn't be so blatently abused today.

lol@drama.

This ain't a public site, there are no stockholders. Tom has the final say, and unless he doesn't agree with what Waid does, there ain't much you can do, people. 5 pages for not much as anything, since I honestly doubt Waid is gonna budge.

I personally agree with him, I'm not much of one for spam.

At 10/12/06 02:22 PM, ElGhoulio wrote: lol@drama.

This ain't a public site, there are no stockholders. Tom has the final say, and unless he doesn't agree with what Waid does, there ain't much you can do, people. 5 pages for not much as anything, since I honestly doubt Waid is gonna budge.

I personally agree with him, I'm not much of one for spam.

Lately, there has been numerous cases where Tom has overridden a decision that Wade really seemed to push, like the file size limits, and the whole filesize based on BA deal (which was being excessively abused by non-Star Syndicate individuals I might add). Not to mention Tom likes Fat Badger, whom I'm sure Wade absolutely despises.

I personally do like the current voting system, because it gives people something to work towards on the website, and gives more incentive for people to view the Portal, but I also realize that more evils have been brought about by it than good.

It was the NG Originals that really attracted me to this site. It's a shame to see most of what Tom worked for turn out like this.

My Timeline: Voted 0 on SS Stuff, kept passing, Voted 2, cussed out Guardian in an abusive review for resubmitting a blammed movie, and joined the Star Syndicate

As for the spam issue. if the current system determines that the users want it, then either the system needs to be changed, or Wade just needs to accept it. I don't see anything wrong with the fact that I put in my one vote like everybody else despite that my VP is higher. I don't use multiple accounts. I'll even be honest - I disagreed strongly with the Star Syndicate's use of proxies to vote on movies, and I had joined a few months after that fiasco, but as anything else, it exposed a critical problem in the system that for the most part has been fixed (it's fairly difficult to vote with proxies here now).

The Audio Portal is still extremely easy to abuse. It's not very integral to NG though currently, so it's one of those "Who cares?" issues.

-1 flash for me :(

BPB started being funny, every chapter was somehow different and the intro wasn't so big. But after episode 50, they started to be annoying. Very much.

At 10/11/06 11:45 PM, Cereal wrote:

At 10/11/06 11:40 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote:

hitler around the world in 80 days should be next

Hell no, Hitler is cool.

At 10/12/06 02:39 PM, naojason wrote:

At 10/12/06 02:22 PM, ElGhoulio wrote: lol@drama.

This ain't a public site, there are no stockholders. Tom has the final say, and unless he doesn't agree with what Waid does, there ain't much you can do, people. 5 pages for not much as anything, since I honestly doubt Waid is gonna budge.

I personally agree with him, I'm not much of one for spam.

Lately, there has been numerous cases where Tom has overridden a decision that Wade really seemed to push, like the file size limits, and the whole filesize based on BA deal (which was being excessively abused by non-Star Syndicate individuals I might add). Not to mention Tom likes Fat Badger, whom I'm sure Wade absolutely despises.

I honestly doubt Tom's gonna throw his attention to things like the UU, the KK, or the SPS. It's spam, simple as that.

I personally do like the current voting system, because it gives people something to work towards on the website, and gives more incentive for people to view the Portal, but I also realize that more evils have been brought about by it than good.

I believe no "pure" system can work, either on the internet or in the real world. Pure capitalism is evil, and pure communism is evil. The downside to democracy is that the leaders get dumber and dumber as the candidates apeal to lower and lower common denominators.

It was the NG Originals that really attracted me to this site. It's a shame to see most of what Tom worked for turn out like this.

It was Jotandjab that brought me here.

My Timeline: Voted 0 on SS Stuff, kept passing, Voted 2, cussed out Guardian in an abusive review for resubmitting a blammed movie, and joined the Star Syndicate

My timeline: Voted zero. Cussed out Guardian. Stopped caring. Started voting zero again. Still votes zero on most crew stuff. If it's geniunely good, I'll pass it, but I still can't stand text to speech or shoddily tweened animation or the big spamfests that are the LL, SS, UU, KK, and SPS.

As for the spam issue. if the current system determines that the users want it, then either the system needs to be changed, or Wade just needs to accept it. I don't see anything wrong with the fact that I put in my one vote like everybody else despite that my VP is higher. I don't use multiple accounts. I'll even be honest - I disagreed strongly with the Star Syndicate's use of proxies to vote on movies, and I had joined a few months after that fiasco, but as anything else, it exposed a critical problem in the system that for the most part has been fixed (it's fairly difficult to vote with proxies here now).

I would suggest that Waid punishes those who skirts the rules. They know they're skirting the rules, they're doing it on purpose. They know why the rules were made, yet they're still finding ways to get around them. I say, don't fuck around.

The Audio Portal is still extremely easy to abuse. It's not very integral to NG though currently, so it's one of those "Who cares?" issues.

I quit submitting a while back due to abuse reviews.

I could see why a flash would be deleted, but his account? Why?

At 10/12/06 02:56 PM, LimeClock wrote:

At 10/11/06 11:45 PM, Cereal wrote:

At 10/11/06 11:40 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote:

hitler around the world in 80 days should be next

Hell no, Hitler is cool.

Agreed, it should be next.

The fact that Wade unflagged them made an inverse statement of what he's going for here.

At 10/12/06 12:29 PM, PT wrote: More like 125,000 people enjoys this stuff. But that's not what we're arguing about.

ARE YOU ON FUCKING CRACK!?!?!? Show me ONE KK or UU entry with over 2,000 views, or 5,000. Most have 400-1000 views, and many of those views are the same people reloading the page over and over to see how their entries are doing. You have to be the stupidest person on Earth if you think 125,000 people are watching those entries and enjoying them. Try 20-50 people enjoy them, maybe.

At 10/12/06 03:06 PM, WadeFulp wrote:

At 10/12/06 12:29 PM, PT wrote: More like 125,000 people enjoys this stuff. But that's not what we're arguing about.

ARE YOU ON FUCKING CRACK!?!?!? Show me ONE KK or UU entry with over 2,000 views, or 5,000. Most have 400-1000 views, and many of those views are the same people reloading the page over and over to see how their entries are doing. You have to be the stupidest person on Earth if you think 125,000 people are watching those entries and enjoying them. Try 20-50 people enjoy them, maybe.

Lawl at the severe ownage. But I also agree that someone who thinks that there are well over 1000 who enjoy spam flashes must certainly be on crack. Wherever did he get those figures from anyways?

At 10/12/06 02:39 PM, naojason wrote: Lately, there has been numerous cases where Tom has overridden a decision that Wade really seemed to push, like the file size limits, and the whole filesize based on BA deal (which was being excessively abused by non-Star Syndicate individuals I might add). Not to mention Tom likes Fat Badger, whom I'm sure Wade absolutely despises.

You could be more wrong with that statement.

If we are to "fix" the system we would have to lower the amount of voting power the high level users have. So what is more fair? Take away the high vote power from the hundreds of users who don't abusive it, or punish the handful of users who are abusing it?

At 10/12/06 03:06 PM, WadeFulp wrote: ARE YOU ON FUCKING CRACK!?!?!?

Hahahahahahahaha.

At 10/12/06 03:10 PM, Shadow-Angel wrote: Lawl at the severe ownage. But I also agree that someone who thinks that there are well over 1000 who enjoy spam flashes must certainly be on crack. Wherever did he get those figures from anyways?

He/she pulled them out of their ass like most idiots who quote stats when they have no clue what they are talking about.

Today I shat out a pineapple.

And I think that makes me gay.

And the pineapple looked up at me and said "hey zekey you and your friends got like 78 cartoons deleted today lawl"

And I looked at the poopy pineapple and I shreiked "OMFG"

And then I was linked to this thread.

And then I posted in it.

And here I am,

I hope the Small penis Patrol is gone too. But well done, Wade!

At 10/12/06 03:24 PM, Adam wrote: According to what I hear you only worked on like 10 of those 78 flashes :P

Didn't I hear the account that I termianted was one of his alts?

At 10/12/06 03:25 PM, WadeFulp wrote:

At 10/12/06 03:24 PM, Adam wrote: According to what I hear you only worked on like 10 of those 78 flashes :P

Didn't I hear the account that I termianted was one of his alts?

Actually you terminated Squarehard.

The poor chap is in shambles, Mr.Fulp.
So many cartoons...deleted at once? It was too much for his mind to bear!
He's in the corner now, in a fetal position. Making cow noises.
HOW COULD YOU?

E-Drama

bump

Let's do a little fun math. Some of these spammers, or those who support them, have a warped sense of reality. Like PT thinking 125,000 people enjoy these crap entries. That's like 1/4 to 1/5 of our audience, or about 20-25% of our audience according to PT.

Now, if we really think about this, if these groups had say.. 300 supporters that enjoyed the Flash and voted 5 on it, these entries would pass judgment in no time, and would have scores of 4.00 and higher and be winning awards. If they had 1,000 suppporters, forget about it, we'd all be doomed. :)

The truth is, when I check the users who are voting, it's probably 30 or less users that are voting 5. Everyone else is giving 0's, 1's, 2's, and a couple 3's and 4's.

So, let's be gracious and say 50 users really enjoy these entires. We'll say our average daily audience is 500,000 users, to keep it simple. Some days it's a little less, somedays it's a lot more (650,00 or more on weekends).

So 50 / 500,000 x 100 gives us 0.01%

So 0.01% of our daily audience enjoys these entries. Yet, we should change our system because these 0.01%? How about we terminate their accounts instead instead of punishing everyone else?

BTW, if there were 100 of them, that's 0.02%, and if there were 1,000 that's 0.2%. They are INSIGNIFICANT and if they don't want to play by the rules, they can easily be removed.

At 10/12/06 03:34 PM, WadeFulp wrote: So 0.01% of our daily audience enjoys these entries. Yet, we should change our system because these 0.01%? How about we terminate their accounts instead instead of punishing everyone else?

What you just said is great.

And as a user, when I submit my Flash I worked 3 months on, I don't want it being pushed down in the portal by spam Flashes that took 2 minutes to make.

It's not fair to the people who actually submit good Flash games and movies.

At 10/12/06 03:34 PM, WadeFulp wrote: So 0.01% of our daily audience enjoys these entries. Yet, we should change our system because these 0.01%? How about we terminate their accounts instead instead of punishing everyone else?

I wouldn't say 1 out of 10000 people like the flash, it's not 500000 people that see it, more like 400 to 1000, like you said earlier.

Still though, termination of accounts seems way extreme for people who genuinely enjoyed the movies, it DOES happen.

At 10/12/06 03:34 PM, WadeFulp wrote:
So 0.01% of our daily audience enjoys these entries. Yet, we should change our system because these 0.01%? How about we terminate their accounts instead instead of punishing everyone else?

so they should be teerminated because they like something the majority dont?

BTW, if there were 100 of them, that's 0.02%, and if there were 1,000 that's 0.2%. They are INSIGNIFICANT and if they don't want to play by the rules, they can easily be removed.

the rules allow them to vote whatever they want

To add more drama to this topic I am going to reveal a SHOCKING REVELATION!

I am carrying Wade's child.

I'm sorry! I'M SO SORRY! :C

*flees into the suntset*

rupeeclock is a faggot

I can see my thread just reached six pages. I just saw the submission they were updated, therefore spam will be nuked.rules,

At 10/12/06 03:14 PM, WadeFulp wrote:

At 10/12/06 02:39 PM, naojason wrote: Lately, there has been numerous cases where Tom has overridden a decision that Wade really seemed to push, like the file size limits, and the whole filesize based on BA deal (which was being excessively abused by non-Star Syndicate individuals I might add). Not to mention Tom likes Fat Badger, whom I'm sure Wade absolutely despises.

You could be more wrong with that statement.

If we are to "fix" the system we would have to lower the amount of voting power the high level users have. So what is more fair? Take away the high vote power from the hundreds of users who don't abusive it, or punish the handful of users who are abusing it?

Well, alright then. That is why I said "really seemed" in the particular statement that you're quoting.

As for the answer to your question: Take it away. One person, one vote is more fair than one person, thirteen votes any day. As History has proven (both in and out of the Internet), one's experience with voting does not necessairly prove they are capable of making a good voting decision and hence should not be a reason to increase their voting power. As far as I'm concerned, even weighing someone's vote more than one is abuse.

If you truly want a system where one's opinion and feelings about the worth of a Flash movie should be more heavily weighed than others because they've voted on more and have more experience voting (example, Chrome- before he was deleted), then you simply need to respect the overall decisions of the 200 voters that resulted in the overall passing of a movie (considering the relative weights on all ends), no matter what your personal opinions are. As long as people aren't unfairly garnering extra accounts and proxies to vote, I do not see a real problem in the context of the current system, as it then does what it is supposed to.

Besides that, just getting rid of the abusers in the current system not only shows strong opinionation about their voting habits, but also doesn't stop the problem permanently. Also, as Placebo is saying, you're just scaring people out of voting what they want/feel by taking such a stance.

This was ironically the same issue that led to people getting rid of the 3/5th's Compromise, because slaveholders were practically getting 20 votes or more (think about it, they're your slaves, so you'd probably be able to control how they vote too if you're not voting FOR them), whereas, the good, moral man that didn't own slaves only had one vote and less power over some elite.

I know the statwhores will just hate me for this because ZOMG NO VOTING POWER!

At 10/12/06 03:42 PM, jn wrote: rupeeclock is a faggot

Thanks for the pointless attention!

I have an idea that might help fight against these sorts of things.

It's about 170 people voting 0 and 30 people with high people voting 5 right?

Give new accounts a starting power of 2 votes, that would nearly double the negative pull on bad submissions, and give a bit more incentive to make an account.

At 10/12/06 03:54 PM, RupeeClock wrote:
Give new accounts a starting power of 2 votes, that would nearly double the negative pull on bad submissions, and give a bit more incentive to make an account.

Bad idea. There might be a masterpiece submission under judgement like the yuyu that deserves more than a 2.