Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/6/15 09:47 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 1/6/15 02:55 PM, Voltage wrote: people should feel obliged and get EXP for using anything on the site. This coupled with the potential ad revenue = exponentially more activity, and probably more people looking to become a supporter. COME ON TOM I know you wanna bro.

but there would have to be a limit like 50 EXP a day from posting so 10 posts a day.

No no no. I mean 5 EXP just for posting. Because if you got like 5 EXP PER post, you'd be racking up way too much EXP. And since we want users to use all parts of the site, it isn't heavy on EXP. So instead you get about 50 EXP for checking out all of what NG offers instead of the low EXP - this way people gotta check out portals and posting isn't a huge deal. It just is a little bonus for posting daily.

At 1/6/15 11:37 PM, kabogh wrote: There are a lot of us who are not attracted by the idea of participating in such a lousy community. Sure there are lots of nice people here, but there are a lot of bad people too. Especially those participating in the politic forum. Then there is some sort of *subtle* elitist behaviour because of user levels.

None of what you said is true. Some of the best users on the BBS are between those with posts in the hundreds to posts in the thousands. And lousy community? You want to judge one of the oldest communities on the internet that is still around as a "lousy" community? Have you even realized the shame of using websites like 4chan, Reddit, even Imgur - all of these don't promote individual thought, they instead promote group thinking.

You'd rather have a community where nobody has conflicting arguments which is fine, but that to me is lousy and pointless. A place without an argument is a place where thought doesn't exist, thus being "lousy" or "good" are hardly apparent because it's senseless to actually have a discussion there.

Well, one could argue it's like this in every forums with a rank/level system and that it gets to make the potential new members to "know their place". But in the end, it just make some users reluctant to participate (such as myself). Now if there was spam for xp, this forums would feel very boring to browse. That's how I see this happening, coming from a place even less popular than this from which people would make in the ten thousands of pointless posts and the norm there are pretty much 30,000 to 50,000 posts per user, some of which weren't even there since a year before attaining this high. Note that forum games and the such don't even count towards post count.

The description to "a post will only be worth 5 EXP a day and nothing more"

As in - post once, that's it you only get 5 EXP in a day. Not 5 EXP per post

At 1/6/15 02:39 PM, Radaketor wrote:

At 1/6/15 07:45 AM, Voltage wrote: - 5 EXP for making a forum post

This would actually encourage a lot of people to post on the BBS more.
Do it, Tom.

people should feel obliged and get EXP for using anything on the site. This coupled with the potential ad revenue = exponentially more activity, and probably more people looking to become a supporter. COME ON TOM I know you wanna bro.

At 1/6/15 09:46 AM, RedCoin wrote:

At 1/6/15 07:20 AM, Voltage wrote: be careful, NG veterans treat other vets like they deserve cancer for absolutely no reason

Ah yes, those were the days.

THOSE WERE THE DAYS

At 1/6/15 11:56 AM, Ragnarokia wrote: Also fun note that in the past being "fat" was seen as a good thing since the person could afford to eat well. Times have changed to now having people eating barely anything at all just to be thinner since it is now seen as better.

I've heard that in some areas in India, it still applies that you are "well"

At 1/6/15 09:51 AM, Ley7423 wrote: she's just saying that if you are a larger person, here are some tips on how to live a healthier and more fulfilled life despite your size, and really, I think that's wonderful.

I don't know what on earth you eat, these "fruits and vegetables" but it makes you seem happy and caring and I want to say it disgusts me.

It doesn't, but I kind of want to say it.

At 1/6/15 10:00 AM, FinaLee wrote:

At 1/6/15 09:56 AM, TwentyCharacterLimit wrote: -Dawkins-

I missed you, twentycharacterlimit. It's been too long.

GET THIS MAN A MEDAL AND FIVE VIRGINS! QUICKLY! Shield him from the reeking stench of the 2014ers!

At 1/6/15 08:48 AM, Makakaov wrote: Why is 90% of these comics gay?

I think people still assume it's 2014 and any crude 'gay' joke will somehow make it funny to make up for their lack of creative writing skills.

At 1/6/15 01:05 AM, FIGMENTUM wrote: #memed

you win 16 internets and my daughter's tight cherry virgin ass

At 1/6/15 11:39 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: It takes at least ten years, to be considered old on the internet in general. The same applies to NewGrounds.

relevant phrases include;
"I know who Homsar is"
"stickdeath.com"
"YTMND moar like NEDM amirite"
"AOL Chatrooms"
and the ever so popular
"Chrome was the best color to use on any website"

At 1/6/15 09:33 AM, AoiShinigami wrote: So, umm...

Can I count myself as an old timer just because I've been here on Newgrounds since about 2002-2003?
Or it only counts if you have been registered or even submitted something?
And if it's the latter, then does 2009 count yet?

look we can all say we saw the site in 2000 but didn't have the brain capacity to sign up then, but point is you should take pride in that registration date because like growing up, having a brain is what makes the difference

submit content? naw, if that were true then we might as well say people that got awards are the only 'worthy' vets

tbh, having content then just means you wanted to have some fun and/or just had a hand in internet history. like my shit is a testament of an idiot 13 year old doing what he can on a shitty demo flash trial of flash mx in 2004, therefore I am a relevant science experiment.

At 1/6/15 07:58 AM, Hoodie wrote:

At 1/5/15 11:31 PM, dinopirate23 wrote:

fun

I've heard that excuse too much.

make that 2 that have heard it too much

At 1/5/15 09:22 PM, YenMuffin wrote: Why is it only voting gets you experience?
Shouldn't being an active part of the community on any front give experience? What about writing reviews and helping users on the forums?

you're right, we should make it so you get
- 5 EXP for daily voting on animations/games
- 5 EXP for voting on audio submissions
- 5 EXP for voting on art submissions
- 10 EXP for reporting stolen content + whistle upgrade
- 5 EXP for making a forum post
each per day

At 1/6/15 05:09 AM, Gergaloth wrote: Body pillows aren't actually women.

correction: Body pillows don't count as inflatable animals either

I think the reality is:
- Fat people live in a fake world and don't pay attention to themselves, which makes them funny, generally hypocritical, but in a weird sense more focused on living in the now

- Skinny people live in the "real" world which isn't saying much, considering they're getting fit now so they're not totally overweight in the future - which (as they don't understand, as usual) is retarded in retrospect because they can easily have a health problem anywhere between 24 hours to 24 years where they have some form of health issues related to their oh-so-religious exercise regiment and radical dieting mechanics, where they will probably throw it away and become a fat person or die

Nobody wins, glorifying fat or promoting "good health" all result in the same stupid idea that's just a giant distraction for changing the world for the better so people can feel better about looking or feeling a certain way

and if you HAVE to promote being fat, or being skinny, fuck you, you shameless sack of shit

be careful, NG veterans treat other vets like they deserve cancer for absolutely no reason

welcome back, become a supporter, Voltage out

At 1/6/15 04:22 AM, SubparTony wrote:

At 1/5/15 02:59 PM, Voltage wrote: I'd steal the idea, but the presentation is bland and cliche. She would probably marry you if she has low enough expectations to think this is remotely interesting. 2/5.

You know, the proposal presentation has little to nothing to do with the answer, unless it's absolutely horrible.
And cliche and bland is not even close to horrible. Let alone that most people are attracted to such cliches.

I never said the word "horrible" nor did I compare it to such a thing, I said "if she has low enough expectations" which is not 'horrible,' it's more or less pitiful or pathetic. Not necessarily horrible

At 1/5/15 03:07 PM, someaveragechap wrote:

At 1/5/15 10:18 AM, NewgroundsMike wrote:
It doesn't matter what you suck on. You still suck.

You're an uncreative ass clown.

wow, that was funny - tell me, do you usually get your insults off LGBT subreddits?

this first post is really shitty, i mean seriously don't give me this long ass post about something obviously fictional. just tell me, "there'll be a hellish takeover on mars, we're all fucked - here's the point, will you or will you not vote for a Doom FPS MMO?"

anyone that wears earbuds have no standards for listening to music, pitiful creatures

Forget about the game, I'mma spit the truth - I ain't gonna stop until I get them in they birthday suits

I'd steal the idea, but the presentation is bland and cliche. She would probably marry you if she has low enough expectations to think this is remotely interesting. 2/5.

@TomFulp, I hear that @Voltage guy is coming out with some gems in 2015.

I also admire audio artists @shaggyhaired and @misterscoops, who have some interesting music on here and off NG.

In regards to animators, we have a lot of talent so I don't know if I can do any active shoutouts for many. @KarmaKimmy7, @EASTBEAST, and @SebzX12 as pixel animators I enjoy with @rebaz as my favorite "new" pixel artist for his Double Dragon animation released awhile back.

At 12/31/14 03:22 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 12/31/14 03:19 PM, WahyaRanger wrote: Who even does this, honestly?

There are several reasons for people to do this, mainly for attention. Then there's the possibility that the person may have sort of a mental disorder like Stokes.

If someone frequently posts to themselves/likes their own shit it's safe to assume they're possibly a child molester and masturbate a LOT, they probably also mutilate small animals, and/or have an obsession with ferrits

I have none without the use of my right ankle. Pretty rough, but I'm being honest.

At 1/1/15 12:41 AM, Piper wrote:

At 1/1/15 12:27 AM, Bit wrote: Kamehameha to you, too.

O

and a merry la-le-lu-li-lo to you two

why does anybody care

uh try the story of all straight relationships, how do you think your father and mother are initially conceived anyway? gay clones?

your thread is bad and you should feel bad

At 12/29/14 08:38 AM, armydanywolf wrote:

At 12/28/14 04:45 PM, someaveragechap wrote: Wrong forum. You would have gotten a reply in Where is/How to.

Are you using IE?

oh.. sorry then. i posted here because the one i linked was posted here too if im right.
im using an older version of firefox

update flash player, java, and browser, problem solved

Here's the fun part about online relationships - when you can't see people face to face, you have no idea what on earth that person is actually like. While they can appear as normal as the next guy or girl next door, they're also just as CRAZY as the guy or girl next door. Actually, they can either be a guy or girl if they know how to pull off their shit.

The one thing that bugs me the most about online relationships is the lack of actual affection. Call it years of ignorance or maybe just being cast aside like an old newspaper or a used condom, people are always in a relationship for something. It could be a mutual something or it could just be to get something out of the other person. In any regard, I say don't trust shit.

You're so much better off chasing that person that constantly says "no" (rape jokes aside since that's not what I'm trying to get at) then that person that's just like "YES!" Like, who the fuck just stops there? Do you play a video game to click "yes" and win after five hours? That's not a relationship, that's some stupid mutual bullshit someone in the relationship is using to get SOMEONE ELSE to notice them.

And to every idiot that really pegs it so simply as "wanf 2 fuk lok 4 gf thanks," you're confusing the mentality of some stupid fucking 12 year old that has no real identity in life for some lonely fat guy that is totally desperate. Both ends have common traits, but you need to mark it like this:

1: Desperation
2: Mindset
3: Mutuality
4: Potential
5: Actuality

These are your 5 core "outlooks" as a soiree for a relationship. And yes, for the guy that bangs 100 chicks or just 1 in their life (sad, sad souls), these are all the basic mechanics. First, is a man/woman desperate for affection? You can tell when they're just so off-putting about whatever it is they swear by. If you're desperate to be in a relationship, that's a bad sign. That person is easily anything between a loose cannon and a rapist.

Next is their mindset. Are they actually sane, or do they exhibit cases of periodic psychosis? Do they typically lie to cover up things, are they actually honest? In my time I've noticed that the reality of things is actually a fuck ton scarier than some stupid online fling you have with someone. No lie, this chick laughed about murder once after I had sex with her. She also had no grasp on self-esteem and she just talked about god and wanted to have sex in a shower too small for us. That's a giant red flag to get the fuck out of that one.

Mutuality - do you two want to rule the world? Yes? Great! That means you have something in common with somebody else, you obviously instinctively belong together and you both should pursue that weird fucked up idea you have of population control or believing in god or thinking "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" is the only good sitcom FX has and ever will have. Do you two disagree with voting? That's ok - everyone knows men that aren't leaders and women that vote poorly are actually a commonality, which speaks for the majority of NG users that try to satirize relationships like they actually know any better when I think it's clear none of you can take a fucking joke or at least stop talking about shit that doesn't -actually- involve you.

Here's another qualifier that the majority of people forget, and that's potential. Now I'm not much for optimism, or pessimism, but I am one sucker for reality. Are you both poor? Guess what - you are most likely to produce offspring and live like monarchy by abusing the system and not relying on money like a useless rich turd! Everyone seems to want to marry a rich person or something, but rarely do people say, "I'd actually like to marry someone with similar perspectives as I do, know how to hustle like me, and have my same struggle." That's because nobody fucking says that, you probably don't say that, and you think marrying into a rich family or something is a logical decision when it's clear you have no real idea on how to manage finances and they have no idea how the fuck food stamps work because they've never been a poor person like you.

And finally, "actuality." Do you ACTUALLY see yourself marrying this other sack of shit somewhere down the road? No? Oh, you only want to date and that's your belief? Cool. Do you actually want to trust your partner and not keep digging around partners like used needles at a filthy Meth head convention out of Detroit? Then be ACTUAL, realize the potential ahead of time, and think ahead.

Now to tie this insanely long, arduous post to the topic of "online relationships" - you have to tie all of this in AND at the same time understand the actual potential of what the fuck a relationship is whilst trusting someone on the other side of the screen, hoping they aren't blowing someone else, using you as a joke, sleeping with a million different people, conning people, killing people, pretty much anything your mind can imagine. Is that to say online relationships are stupid and not worth pursuing?

No, but I will warn you - reality is what you make of it, but not everything is what it seems.