Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

i think it would be better if mods couldnt ban for ANYTHING. they should have to choose a category, like blowing a whistle. and they hafta have reasonable cause.

At 6/3/09 04:47 PM, SuperMarioBrosS wrote: ...

This is what's making the BBS un-fun. Far, far too many users (Mods and regulars alike) taking an online forum as seriously as cancer of the brain.

People need to recognise the BBS for what it is: a place to have fun. Now that DOESN'T mean that we need to throw out the rules. A remoival of boundaries would make the place LESS fun for a majority of the users.

But just take into account:
If you're not here to have fun, go elsewhere.

And that is the whole purpouse of this thread- make the BBS more fun again. Being set boundaries does NOT mean we can't act like morons every now and then.

Just to reinforce my point:

At 6/3/09 03:49 PM, NeonFlame126 wrote: The mods haven't really done anything to kill the BBS's fun. The users have.

Exactly. On the other hand, I'd like to direct attention to the thread made by Evark almost two years ago, but it still holds true.

Now, should we bitch about it? No, because we have to improve to a certain extent. The first step towards change is making the first step yourself.

At 6/3/09 05:14 PM, SCUD14 wrote: This is what's making the BBS un-fun. Far, far too many users (Mods and regulars alike) taking an online forum as seriously as cancer of the brain.

Well I want to help NG so of course I'd take this shit seriously. However, if the BBS gets worse, I'll leave for good. It's not like I will lose something or die because of it.

People need to recognise the BBS for what it is: a place to have fun. Now that DOESN'T mean that we need to throw out the rules. A remoival of boundaries would make the place LESS fun for a majority of the users.

If someone said 'FUCK YOU ASSHOLE' and continued to annoy you in EVERY thread you went in, you would consider that fun?

I have fun in the BBS, only to see the fun go away after 2 posts because some jackass made a joke that destroyed the fun. The only fun in the BBS is helping users with issues like what reviews to flag, etc. All else is shit (when the thread is like 2 hours old).

But just take into account:
If you're not here to have fun, go elsewhere.

I'm here to help the BBS by trying to bring problems WITH examples. Fuck this rule. If the mods don't moderate properly, this place will have no enjoyment value.

By saying this, you are also saying that you want the helpers that make the BBS better (by pointing stuff to the mods by PM) to get the fuck out and leave the jackasses that make this place a rotten pile of shit here unpunished.

~

Just because I made an 8,100+ character post doesn't mean that ALL my points are wrong. Some of them may be wrong, I'll admit but that's because of personal experience. You don't even have any details to fight my reasons. I'm still pounding you down with more details.

I'm not going to correct your spelling errors by the way

I think that moderators are taking their place too seriously. A short and spammy post is most times the funniest type of post.

In my opinion, mods should try to be more picky when locking threads. Let's take for example that thread reanimator54 made with his "artwork". It obviously failed beyond human logic, but everyone had a lot of fun making that kid pissed, and I think that the BBS would be way more onjoyable if we lived a lot more by the "law of the jungle" (let the noobs be ridiculized until they learn their lesson), in my opinion, if less threads were locked, it would be way more fun.

I know that for someone who has a different point of view, this post is completely retarded, but it's just what would make these BBS more fun.

Well, i think we have gotten a little icthy of "backseat" I mean thats is why we have users, to tell some one else there doing something wrong, just dont ban someone everytime they say "bud, this is agaisnt the rules" but if they go ahead and say "loloz you mofo this isnt alllow dipshit" then go ahead.

we need more interacting topics, somethign can get everyone posting, a little fun for everyone,

Seriousness is killing the BBS, nothing else.

"Also, I directly address this MAINLY to Malachy: STOP BEING AN OPINIONATED MORON."

Mal has banned me countless times for the lulz. One of the best mods on the team if you ask me, and I know Mal. He only bans when you need to be banned. Not because he feels like it, just because you need a break or because you're dumb as hell.

No, that's not brown nosing. I've just seen a different side to Mal, a less serious more funny one, and the guy is pretty fair.

Dear Poozy, my sister did not meet a man named Moses yet.

At 6/3/09 04:54 PM, PortalGun wrote: i think it would be better if mods couldnt ban for ANYTHING. they should have to choose a category, like blowing a whistle. and they hafta have reasonable cause.

Yeah...that's never going to happen, and watch how bad the BBS gets if we can't remove the really bad offenders. You'd be BEGGING for us to be able to ban again.

Maybe the mods should take two days off, let the BBS run rampant, and see how long it is before people are calling to have them and the rules back.

At 6/3/09 06:05 PM, SCUD14 wrote: Maybe the mods should take two days off, let the BBS run rampant, and see how long it is before people are calling to have them and the rules back.

Wouldn't even be a day, and also, we'd have to clean up the mess.

Does anybody have anything else new or constructive to say? Because right now it seems like we're just repeating ourselves on all sides, or throwing out things that simply won't happen in a million years.

At 6/3/09 06:44 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Does anybody have anything else new or constructive to say? Because right now it seems like we're just repeating ourselves on all sides, or throwing out things that simply won't happen in a million years.

Alright.

What exactly do you plan on doing with this thread?

At 6/3/09 06:47 PM, Twilight wrote:

At 6/3/09 06:44 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Complaint on how bad this thread is getting

What exactly do you plan on doing with this thread?

Meh.. if it's getting as crappy as he says, it's not gonna end out good.

At 6/3/09 06:44 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Does anybody have anything else new or constructive to say?

What is the current policy regarding the signing of bans?

I can't remember the last time I had an unsigned ban, but I know it's happened before and it's frustrating to not know who to contact.

Would there be any way to edit the system so that bans are automatically signed by the mod who handed them out?

Some of you BBS mods are taking this Nazi mod thing way to serious like rig and I'm not talking about banning. I'm talking about posting in General sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches" Mods should be appreciated not feared.

And if you have to ban something like "/thread" Please ban M.S paint too it's getting way to fucking annoying that I even stop with M.S paint

At 6/3/09 06:54 PM, Parlux wrote: sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches"

No it isn't.

Dear lord no it is not.

I think a warning for the first time you do something would help. Instead of banning off the bat. Also, less bantime if a thread is accidentally spam. As in, the OP had sincere intentions but not the best methods.

At 6/3/09 06:55 PM, Twilight wrote:

At 6/3/09 06:54 PM, Parlux wrote: sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches"

Dear lord no it is not.

I know. A ban sammich tastes horrible and you feel bored and guilty afterwards!

At 6/3/09 06:55 PM, Twilight wrote:

At 6/3/09 06:54 PM, Parlux wrote: sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches"

No it isn't.

Dear lord no it is not.

I was trying to make a point as In it was funny when he first became a mod. Then other mods try to cash in to the Oh "I'm a mod now and I'm gonna be an asshole for here on out" To make this clear I mean Rig. No I never been Banned by Rig I have nothing against him, but I seen the nazi mod thing more then once (BBR, Eyelovepoozy, Sanjay)

At 6/3/09 05:14 PM, SCUD14 wrote: This is what's making the BBS un-fun. Far, far too many users (Mods and regulars alike) taking an online forum as seriously as cancer of the brain.

I do agree with a large part of what you're saying. I think I should say now that within this thread, I feel as if some of the posts I've made go a bit over-the-top in the stuffy department, and they may even come off as a little bossy when discussing another user's ideas. If anyone has felt like that when reading a post of mine here, then I'm sorry. If that's the case, then I probably need to work on my tone.

I think there's a fine line between taking an online forum super-seriously, uppity even, and letting the whole thing descend into e-anarchy as two extremes, as you go on to imply. As I've said before, I post in this here thread because I like the Newgrounds BBS (I honestly don't think it's "shit" as too many seem to believe; I could do be doing much worse things with my time than what I generally do here, trust me), and when relaitively established regulars/e-friends start to disappear for various reasons, then I'd prefer to get to the bottom of it, like many users and mods alike here have had a crack at discussing. That's what I believe to be the primary intention of this thread anyway: as far as I see it, it's certainly not to bitch to/about other users, that's just pretty painful to read, as usual.

***

Just something while I'm here, I'll bring up something about SuperMarioBroS and the points he made. I've been saying for a long time in this thread that the great, sometimes unforgiving, world of online foruming is turned by opinion, and that's clearly obvious in this thread. Hey, they're important things about ourselves when we're talking to people we don't know and have never met face-to-face. Going by that maxim, your points are fair enough.

I feel though, that you don't do yourself much justice by going out there and addressing specific mods in the way that you do, if you see what I mean. It's similar to that thought of, "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" in this certain thread, which I'll admit is a little unfortunate at times, but it's reall only fair if you're asking for change at the same time. I do actually remember that "game" you attempted to get going, though not in great detail admittedly. I remember it being complicated, and I wasn't really all that surprised by the lock if I'm honest with you. As for another point: I've got to say, it's better to ignore posts if you believe they're uninteresting, stupid, etc. to you personally, even if they're getting in the way of a potentially good discussion. It's happened to me, sure, but you can't really have everything. I'd love it some of the fundamentals about BBS behaviour could be changed, while still allowing people to have a fun time... but I'm fine with what we've got, if truth be told.

As for Malachy... well, again, this is down to personal opinion, but I think he's a good mod, and he seems to be a decent guy from when I've spoken to him in Stickam once or twice, or in the largely informal Politics forum regulars lounge. I think I was first introduced to him shortly before he was made review mod, and I can't say I've seen him be a major arsehole or anything. That, and he made me laugh once. Just for that, he could be in my good book, yes, I constantly carry around a good book and a bad book.

I think I know how you feel. I had a negative opinion of BadReligionSkater for a while because of a 30-day ban in 2006. Hey, I was being a moron, it was fair enough. I like to think I learnt from it. aviewaskewed is another one, after a comment he once made addressing me. I think he's a nice guy now, from me being a self-proclaimed Politics lurker extraordinaire, and from posting in this thread. I'm betting most "grudges" work their way eventually. Sure, I don't love all the mods now, but I think that might be asking too much. As I've said before, they're a diverse bunch. That's not to say they don't have their shared... ahem, ways though. ;)

Just some thoughts anyway, ehm.

I have an Idea that the admins will never go for but It's a worth a try. A spam forum just post any thing you like (There will be a few rules and if you fuck up once perma banned) the forum will be delete all the threads every 24 hours.

Now you can get all the shit that you wanted to post and get it out of your system.

At 6/3/09 07:11 PM, Parlux wrote: I have an Idea that the admins will never go for but It's a worth a try. A spam forum just post any thing you like (There will be a few rules and if you fuck up once perma banned) the forum will be delete all the threads every 24 hours.

Now you can get all the shit that you wanted to post and get it out of your system.

Its been proposed before, but the reason we had moderators to begin with was to avoid that because the bbs was taking up too many resources.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the BBS. I don't think it's going to change because we will always have our set of assholes, and young users.

I don't remember a time when I really got pissed over something... Oh wait, there was one topic but that was it. I think the moderators are doing an "okay" job, they're not the brightest people around, but at least they try to make this place fun.

I've been banned fairly and I don't think any moderator has treated me like shit. I have problems with attention whoring, I see that way too much around here. The attention whoring and the dick sucking pisses me off. Just a reminder to the ass kissers, "just because you're sucking up, doesn't mean you'll be a moderator." Sure, you can join events but that doesn't mean you'll be one anytime soon.

I am a very quiet person in the BBS and I've been just looking around the BBS lately. The other problem with this BBS has to be the not the regulars, nor the moderators. But the lack of originality in people's topics. I don't give a shit if you've been in a fight with a girl, and lost (which is pretty embarassing, but this is the internet; free shit).

If topics have more "epic" in them, maybe I'll party along, but I will never spam no matter what the other people are doing. Some of you guys might read this, some of you might not. I don't give a shit if you flame me from this statement I made, if you agree "thanks" but if you don't "go fuck yourself."

At 6/3/09 07:14 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

Its been proposed before, but the reason we had moderators to begin with was to avoid that because the bbs was taking up too many resources.

Can you at lest ban M.S paint spam the bbs would be 5% percent better if that was gone too and thats not a estimate that's hard data

At 6/3/09 06:51 PM, Fyndir wrote: What is the current policy regarding the signing of bans?

Mods don't have to sign any of their bans. I usually sign most of mine, but we do reserve the right not to sign our bans -- sometimes the potential hassle just isn't worth it.

At 6/3/09 07:20 PM, Parlux wrote:

At 6/3/09 07:14 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

Its been proposed before, but the reason we had moderators to begin with was to avoid that because the bbs was taking up too many resources.

Can you at lest ban M.S paint spam the bbs would be 5% percent better if that was gone too and thats not a estimate that's hard data

No, I'm not crushing out any outlet for creativity left on the bbs. That's a horrible idea.

the thing i hate is when a debate...not a flame war...is going on and the thread gets locked :P

and also....

i'm afraid to post new threads on the BBs due to the fact that a dick-wad moderator will ban me just because i want some views of what people think :(

At 6/3/09 07:26 PM, 111122223138 wrote: i'm afraid to post new threads on the BBs due to the fact that a dick-wad moderator will ban me just because i want some views of what people think :(

A pro-tip is to use the search bar before posting a new thread. This way, if a thread has been done before, you know not to post it, and if it has been done before and locked, you can read the locked one to see WHY it was locked.

If the thread you're planning to make doesn't show up in the search bar, ask yourself if it's something that should be on the BBS, or if it could go in your news post. If it's something silly then yes, it runs the risk of being locked (although you getting banned for it is a little extreme unless it's really bad content).

If you still aren't sure, you can ask a mod.

Also a line on the rules has been bothering me;

"If you're not here to have fun, go elsewhere."

A lot of the fun is killed by the mods themselves. Just because a topic is stupid doesn't mean it's not fun. I believe a lot of the mods will lock a topic simply because they personally themselves don't like what it's about, not because of their mod status.

I don't know. Just seems like it's going downhill a bit lately, and I never thought I'd say that.

i fully agree...and i agree with what you said about the "just cause they don't like it"...cause i made a thread ablout thing sint he bible you think is wrong.... 29 posts later = locked :P ...

At 6/3/09 06:51 PM, Fyndir wrote: Would there be any way to edit the system so that bans are automatically signed by the mod who handed them out?

If you saw some of the shit we had to put up with, you would TOTALLY understand why signing bans isn't mandatory.

At 6/3/09 07:04 PM, Scarab wrote: Hey, they're important things about ourselves when we're talking to people we don't know and have never met face-to-face.

True, true...

Going by that maxim, your points are fair enough.

Fair enough.

I feel though, that you don't do yourself much justice by going out there and addressing specific mods in the way that you do, if you see what I mean.

Yes I do see what you mean. However, addressing certain mods may show them their flaws (although I doubt they will fix it).

I do actually remember that "game" you attempted to get going, though not in great detail admittedly.

Yes it was lacking details. It was still in construction. But construction stopped since resenting the mods is hopeless.

Unless you're talking about you remembering what it was about. It doesn't matter really.

Mods prevent me from launching it

At least that is what the mods think...

~

I remember it being complicated, and I wasn't really all that surprised by the lock if I'm honest with you.

Your opinion is welcome. I'm not going to flame.

And it was complicated so that it would be interesting. I find simple games boring. However, no matter how concise or strictly the rules are, there will always be a moron breaking the rules and/or not reading the 8 posts properly. I'm sick of people breaking the 'Lurk first, post second' rule. I've read the ENTIRE thread here so I did abide by that rule.

As for another point: I've got to say, it's better to ignore posts if you believe they're uninteresting, stupid, etc. to you personally, even if they're getting in the way of a potentially good discussion.

You pointed out a flaw that I'm thinking of fixing. Thank you.

It's happened to me, sure, but you can't really have everything. I'd love it some of the fundamentals about BBS behaviour could be changed, while still allowing people to have a fun time... but I'm fine with what we've got, if truth be told.

It may be fine as it is, but it could be better. If it can't be better, then there's no point in this thread. However, significant improvements can be made to make the BBS better. If I have to give up an hour looking for bullshit and reporting it to a mod (which I bet they will take care of it before I even report it), I'm willing to do it. I'm already doing that with abusive reviews; the BBS shouldn't be any different.

As for Malachy... well, again, this is down to personal opinion, but I think he's a good mod, and he seems to be a decent guy from when I've spoken to him in Stickam once or twice, or in the largely informal Politics forum regulars lounge.

Again, you're entitled to your own opinion. Just because I think that he moderates poorly doesn't mean that it's a true fact. I'm aware of opinion & fact.

I think I was first introduced to him shortly before he was made review mod, and I can't say I've seen him be a major arsehole or anything. That, and he made me laugh once. Just for that, he could be in my good book, yes, I constantly carry around a good book and a bad book.

I met him in Mal's gift to you: Review Answers. Surprisingly, the mess that made us hate each other actually started later in that exact same thread.

I think I know how you feel. I had a negative opinion of BadReligionSkater for a while because of a 30-day ban in 2006. Hey, I was being a moron, it was fair enough.

I was a moron to Mal so I believed I deserved the 30 day ban. He nearly fell into a huge trap that would have gotten him into deep shit though. Fortunately, I didn't take it that far. I ended the mess with him (although the hatred against each other is still rampaging) and he dropped the 30 day ban,

I like to think I learnt from it. aviewaskewed is another one, after a comment he once made addressing me. I think he's a nice guy now, from me being a self-proclaimed Politics lurker extraordinaire, and from posting in this thread.

I personally don't know him so I can't say anything.

I'm betting most "grudges" work their way eventually. Sure, I don't love all the mods now, but I think that might be asking too much. As I've said before, they're a diverse bunch. That's not to say they don't have their shared... ahem, ways though. ;)

Still have a grudge with Mal though. In the BBS, we're fine with each other. When it comes to dealing with abusive reviews, we hate each other like hell. He wants me to stop flagging abusive reviews since he thinks that I'm throwing the non-abusive reviews in his path. Well first of all, if I were to throw non-abusive reviews in his way, I'd have a garbage whistle. But I DON'T so clearly his stupid logic doesn't even make any sense. I'm still yet to figure out where he comes up with these bullshit assumptions...

Unfortunately for me, Malachy is trying to bring this issue into the BBS (when he bans me, he bans me more harshly than normal because of the abusive reviews conflict). How is he bringing this issue here? His Review Answers 2.0 thread is the answer. That is where trouble is arising. Got to live with it though. If he's sweeping across the BBS hunting me down, he's going to have some trouble.

Just some thoughts anyway, ehm.

Your thoughts were much appreciated kind sir.

At 6/3/09 07:55 PM, idle wrote: If you saw some of the shit we had to put up with, you would TOTALLY understand why signing bans isn't mandatory.

Care to give us an example kind sir or is it private business?