Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Why not just let the decent users keep trying and just ban the spammers? I remember 1 entry in particular that was blammed 3 times over a 2 day period, each time it had improvements on it. The 4th time it passed and now has a decent score.

Making the "take a little time" just widens the learning curve, especially when it comes to thinks like synching.

Is it a question for psychology class, because if it is that's your answer. The instructor may be showing you the power of suggestion. He gives you a "problem" with no answer and then tells you "80 percent" of people can't find it to suggest the answer is there but hard to find, hence why 80% of people can't find it.

Makes sense to me anyway.

At 12/2/07 08:54 AM, Davoo wrote: Does that sound good?

No it sounds moronic, thanks for asking though.

At 12/2/07 08:08 AM, jcorishas wrote: They probably think your Republican because that's how you were raised, instead of you intelligently deciding to be one. Because of how they were raised, they think you can't grasp some simple truth that they all can and you must have a different opinion because your stupid (because they can't be wrong, you know).

Which is argumentum ad populum fallacy. I personally don't have a problem with either view, but do think that quite a few conform to one side or the other because of being raised that way and not because they objectively believe it.

At 12/2/07 07:58 AM, FullyClothedMike wrote:
Plus, she's killed herself numerous times as of now.

Dunno I think the official story has her still alive.

But what if they had the sex, then converted to WoWism?

Nah, the laws of physics don't allow non-virgins to play MMORPG's.

At 12/2/07 07:08 AM, Nickelback12 wrote: stuff

Bullshit, his parents wouldn't be parents if they were WOW players. They'd be basement virgins, and as such, no one's parents. You fail.

At 12/2/07 05:24 AM, Alfie wrote: Damn, I've forgotten his name...

It's Darnel, and that's probably what sparked the rumor. Pico and and Darnel have voting bars, so why not Nene? Well because she doesn't have her own section of the site that she's a mascot for yet, plain and simple.

At 12/2/07 05:37 AM, Coop83 wrote:
But they are nothing to do with the question in hand. You could have at least mentioned Blam and Protection points, as that's a more simple jump :P

But they were already mentioned, although I was referring to something similar, specifically voting 0 on all UJ Flash and getting your XP and B/P set to 0.

You can change it another way, but not in a way that increases it.

At 12/1/07 06:38 PM, gfoxcook wrote: LEVEL UP!!!! 42 TIME, BABY. Douglas Adams is smiling in his grave now.

Not only is it 42... but it's one of my fave level icons of the new level system, so... I IZ HAPPY NOW.

Level 42 sucks, but level 43 is good. Too bad 34-38 suck, and that 44 sucks again, then 51 and 55. You have to get to 56 before you're out of the bad icons.

At 12/1/07 07:59 PM, Pandemic2 wrote: I used to play WOW, than I lost weight, my virginity, and moved out of mom's basement. ie. I quit.

Fixed.

At 12/1/07 05:13 PM, Lorkas wrote:

That's just a stereotype.

Not really, I mean I seriously know WOW players in real life, and that's exactly how they are.

You're so narrow minded. I mean seriously

This unsubstantiated presupposition is erroneous.

At 12/1/07 05:05 PM, echosimon wrote: let alone fuckin pay for it, seriously its so gay, would u pay (i dunno how much it is) and enjoy it, WOW people sucks dick

They play it because they're fat, virgins for life, and live in their parent's basement.

At 12/1/07 12:41 PM, shadowchaotailsevil3 wrote: 2300 posts

<sarc>ALRIGHT 1275!!! LOELZ</sarc>

At 12/1/07 11:21 AM, Life-Stream wrote:
4) Don´t try and tell me all American porn is good. 2 girls 1 cup for instance?

That's German porn dumbass.

At 12/1/07 08:12 AM, TEH-AISE-OF-SPAIDS wrote: So many people here will not shut up about anime or hentai or how totally awesome Japan is. Why?

Because they like people who do this to innocent dolphins(apparently).

At 12/1/07 10:40 AM, NEVR wrote:

He speaks the truth. I don't get why it only shows our base VP though, surely it would be better to show our full VP, like it was pre-redesign?

Might be because the added VP from ranks is ineffective in the Audio Portal, but that being the case it should show both.

At 12/1/07 04:19 AM, Acerbic wrote:
Voting Pow.: 5.80 votes

That's his base voting power only, it doesn't display your added voting power that you get from blam/save ranks. Min for instance is displayed at 7.56 because that's my base voting power. However my actual voting power is 11.04.

At 11/30/07 07:04 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 11/30/07 06:24 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: It is?

Yes.

I don't have a hard time believing that, but en.dumbfuckipedia.org isn't something I would call proof.

Nonetheless, I do agree.

There's too many ways around it though. For one, if say, you're a good Flash author called "SickDeathFiend", they don't tend to want to ban you for spamming sometimes 30+ entries a day on an alt of yours called say, "piconjo."(for the record I thought that piconjo shit was funny, but it was still a spammy cirmvention of the system)

For another, even the ones that would get banned will just proxy their way around said bans.

At 11/30/07 07:55 AM, Haggard wrote:
No, it's unfair to spam the portal with shitty flashes. There's a good reason that anybody can only submit 2 flashes per day. And if those get banned that person has to wait a bit.
It's totaly understandable, so stop whining.

Those who do it to spam the portal just bypass that shit anyway, so that's really irrelevant. The only users who obey the ban are constructive ones who often get discouraged because of it.

At 11/30/07 01:40 AM, Euroc wrote:
Your example is a heat of the moment one... would you have a problem viciously killing a person who and raped and murded 3 elementary school girls... twelve years after it happened?

The only part I'd have a problem with is killing him instead of keeping him alive in order to keep torturing him

What if the person showed true remorse?

Then I would argue psychologically torture him with his memories of it instead. It's more fitting that way.

Understand, if it were still fresh or if I happened to catch this individual they may have to execute me for the ruthlessness I would take. But 12 years later... after the passion is gone and this person is a different man.... Are you the same person you were 10 years ago? I'm not the same person I was five years ago. Life does that.

Hence why our justice system needs to practice stuff on a case by case basis.

I don't think I could. I could throw a switch, or pull a lever, but not flay or cut or rip...

Well I could, if the person was sick enough to deserve it.

At 11/30/07 01:00 AM, ArmandoMorat wrote:
It's automatic, and I highly doubt that you'll be able to get an administrator to lift the ban.

The reason for this is to make it so accounts trying to spam the Portal, whose movies have been blammed, don't continue spamming the Portal, thereby foiling their plans.

Most of all, 12 days is a good long while to forget about an alt account while you sulk about not being able to submit movies. :P

The ironic thing is that spammers just bypass the ban. It only causes people who want to actually contribute to give up. I told Wade this a while back, I understand his reason but it was a bad idea.

At 11/30/07 12:20 AM, Euroc wrote:
I can't really argue against your 'fuck em' ideaolgy. That is how I have been feeling too recently, but I'm not yet ready to give up on our system. I mean, I can argue statistics about deterrence and such but you have taken a hard lined stance that will not be swayed. I think with the right leaders our system can be saved. Our country has been through some tough times, and I really hope (almost pray, if I were into that) that our Nation will be great again. Do consider the following before you lose all confidence in our system... Many nations have moved rights to victims over criminals. I own several firearms. I love them. I like the cold metal and a smoking barrel. I like the mechanical clinks and cachinks I hear when I chamber a round. But I digress. I have license to carry a concealed firearm in nearly all public and private places. Government buildings are about all thats off limits. I dont have to retreat anymore thanks to "make my day" legislation. I am also allowed to use lethal force on an intruder, regardless of their intent. So some things have gotten better for the law abiding.

I'm more saying our system sucks because of the way rhetoric and semantics bastardized it.

For instance, people argue against the death penalty because of the "Life, Liberty and Persuit of happiness" thing. But they are too stupid to realize that by the same logic you can't throw people in jail either because that's taking away their "liberty." Then they argue about what's a "right not to be inconvenienced" and there is no such fucking thing. There is order over freedom, sure, but no right not to be inconvenienced by others, that's pure and utter bullshit.

Maybe I'm disillusioned, but I have considered going into law enforcement to make a difference. I think most people enter with that idea. I could kill an intruder in my house. I could kill a mugger at a 7-eleven. I could kill and person I caught molesting a child in the act. But I didn't even like it when the blood ran down my hand when I cut my oldest daughters umbilicle cord! There is no way I could torture someone to death while they are in a harmless position. I think it would be hypocritical for me to try to force someone to do something that I could not bring myself to do.

Well not everyone has that hard of a time with such things. I know I've personally caused other people who were fuckeds harm and felt pretty damned good about it. Like this one time I pissed off these slow driving pricks and in an attempt to follow me they got themselves seriously injured in a car wreck, I still laugh about that today,

At 11/29/07 10:52 AM, Euroc wrote:
Statistically that is a very, very small minority of murders. The people who commit murders like that are sick enough to not really care about the punishments because they aren't thinking about it. Sure, it would make us all feel better to know that this person suffered at LEAST as bad as his victims did, but would it really be worth it?

I don't really care who it makes feel good, just so long as the bastard gets what he deserves.

I mean, it would cause a negative world image of the U.S. Most think humane execution is barbaric.

Fuck em', it's not like we're viewed as anything but hypocritical war mongering prickss to begin with, despite the fact that our government's action are by no means supported by all of us. What are they gonna do? Go to war with us and die?

Second, we would have to amend the constitutions eighth amendment.

I'm all for scrapping our system and starting over anyway. For one thing, all bringing in democracy did was bring rhetoric into our politics.

Finally, we would have to turn our good guys into executioners who were able to cause such a horrific death and still go home and kiss their wives goodnight. It really would place our criminal justice system in a tight place.

You don't have to be a bad guy to torture people who absolutely deserve it and not be traumatized by the experience.

To force the hands of our leaders to carry out "Saw III" style executions seems unethical.

And how so?

At 11/28/07 10:37 PM, CruzAzul-19 wrote: Yay! Garbage Whistle!

Lol grats man.

At 11/29/07 01:12 AM, Euroc wrote:
We might not disagree as much as you first though. I would argue that factors like what you said in this paragraph 1) Harder to get away with and 2) More just system, have more to do with the decline in the murder rates than the actual penalty itself. Thats why I was saying I dont believe the method of execution has much of an effect on the murder rate. Also, consider how difficult it is for a jury to convict on a murder charge. In tennesse, they have a 30 percent overturn on appeals! That doesnt even touch the DAs that couldnt get the death penalty because of jury sympathy. So imagine in the penatly was more old school... boiling, burning, skinning, et cetera. How hard would it be for a conviction then? If Im on a jury you better have a hell of a lot more than eye witness testimony for me to sentence a person to be skinned, you know?

While this is true, also consider that I believe police should be more thorough. And that I don't believe everyone who commits murder should be boiled or skinned, only those who's crimes are sick enough to warrant it. So it is possible to have these punishments implemented with a common sense factor.

At 11/28/07 09:20 AM, Euroc wrote:
I think it's has more to do with the individual cultural factors in each state.

It's a factor yes, but the only one.

I think the death penalty is a non-issue with regards to its effect at deterence, one way or another. Now, if we executed people by steam roller starting at the toes would the murder rate decrease? Thats kind of the point to your argument right? Make the death penalty a lot worse and we will see a drop in violent murder.

Yes exactly.

It might, but I don't really think it would. We can only speculate, or look at historical numbers. The murder rate is down from when electrocution was the method of execution most commonly performed.

That's not because of the elecric chair going away, that's because it's much, much more difficult to kill someone and never get caught than it used to be. Back in 1920, if you did your homework on crime investigation and left no witnesses, you could pretty much get away with killing somebody. It's also true that back then we had a racist society that allowed the murders of certain races to largely go unpunished. Albert Fish mostly killed black people, but ironically it wasn't because he was racist. He was most likely one of the few non-racists around at the time. He did it because he knew it would go unpunished. And he was right, the 8 kids he was convicted of killing were the only 8 white kids he ever killed.

At 11/27/07 10:56 AM, Euroc wrote:
Explain Idaho, Utah, South Dakota, Wyoming, Oregon, New Hampshire, and a half dozen others all with murder rates well below the national average.

California has the death penalty too, but it rarely if ever practices it. As it is, the southern states that are known for using it don't do so very often. However they do it much more so than the northern states. The death penalty is irrelevant if it's almost never used.

I also mentioned that Michigan has a murder rate of 7.7 per 100,000 and was the first to abolish the death penalty.

That's not a whole lot above national averages of 5.7 per 100000. I mean if it were 25 or so I could see your point. It's less than what it is in some of the other states that are infamous for practicing it.

You never responded to these ideas. If the correlation between lethal injection and the murder rate were true and positive, then there would not be so many states that incoperate lethal injection and have a murder rate far below the national average of 5.7 per 100,000. These States even have murder rates below the average of non-death penalty states which is 3.1 per 100,000.

Ok genius explain the national average being 5.7 but the national average for non-death penalty states being 3.1.