Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/1/09 12:03 AM, gumOnShoe wrote:

Wait... so I can get banned from the BBS because of a news post I made in my user page? PATHETIC!

If you were paying attention it would be a rarity. Like, for instance, you were using your user page to organize an attack against the bbs. Or, you were posting seriously illigal shit on your userpage. And generally, you entire account just gets locked by Wade. You shouldn't ever be banned for petty or trivial things on your user page.

Its either that or (if the offense is serious) having wade threaten to delete their account :X

I doubt my offense is serious.

Your attachment to sonic and forum games is trivial to most of the stuff we deal with. The only reason Mal or any other mod would dislike you is because you think we do and you bring it up ALL the time. Trust me, Mal doesn't give you a second thought in his spare time. You're just a blip that occasionally pops up in the same thread. He doesn't hate you or have a vendetta. And if you think he does you need to approach him a lot more casually.

As for your forum game, I too would have told you it wasn't happening, but you need to handle that situation better. We clearly have a no forum games rule and INSTEAD of asking nicely and presenting something simple you came up with this huge complicated mess and just expected us to let you run it. And of course you set us up as the bad guys. Do you see the trend here? You are demonizing us all the time, and frankly its a little trite.

Finally your issues with reviews don't belong in this thread because this isn't about reviews; however, I locked Rage's whistle thread and it was clearly a unanimous moderator decision to do so. Given that you can't see what the moderation team can about who is flagging what and how many times, I don't think you can really make an informed decision about what is necessary and what isn't when it comes to whistles.

Well I can see how they can get banned. That is probably more serious.

In general, yeah.

Here's a suggestion that will make the BBS more MATURE: Get rid of smartass comments. Like in threads with the title 'I have a severe cold', get rid of posts saying 'You're going to die!!! Don't worry, I'll be at your funeral!' or 'Nobody cares' or 'Go kill yourself' or anything similar. It's gives a better first impression for the BBS and should actually discipline the user.

In general, we already do that.

Here is another rule to be enforced: READ THE THREAD ENTIRELY! I'm sick of people not reading the entire thread and then make themselves look like an ass because they didn't read the FUCKING thread! If it's clearly evident that the user didn't read the OP's first post, then the post should be deleted. It just encourages new users to skip reading the thread and post whenever they feel like regardless if they made themselves look like a dumbass or not.

http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/9271 02

Again, this has little to do with moderation as we already do that. That's a user issue and one we can't fix.

Oh yeah, an edit button for posts would be really helpful.

At 6/5/09 02:03 AM, Reckon wrote: Oh yeah, an edit button for posts would be really helpful.

No it wouldn't. Because then rule-breaking users would use it to get out of trouble.
This has been discussed before. Go and look around will ya?

At 6/5/09 02:03 AM, Reckon wrote: Oh yeah, an edit button for posts would be really helpful.

Never going to happen I'm afraid.

From liljim's opening post in the Ideas for Newgrounds' Evolution MK3 thread:

Suggested ideas previously rejected:

BBS edit button.

At 6/5/09 02:17 AM, NEVR wrote:

At 6/5/09 02:03 AM, Reckon wrote: Oh yeah, an edit button for posts would be really helpful.

Never going to happen I'm afraid.

From liljim's opening post in the Ideas for Newgrounds' Evolution MK3 thread:

Suggested ideas previously rejected:

BBS edit button.

I posted this in a locked thread a few days ago, because if it's not a programming issue then I really don't understand why the edit button is such a no-no.

"That's stupid, but I do agree that this forum needs an edit button and I don't know why people make it out as such a taboo. Just have an edit button and put a small message saying the post has been edited just like any other forum. Even NG blogs have this function. Allow mods to see the original post and no abuse can occur. At least add this function for topic starters because it's tedious maintaining info topics with the current system"

Opinions?

At 6/5/09 02:37 AM, life wrote: "That's stupid, but I do agree that this forum needs an edit button and I don't know why people make it out as such a taboo. Just have an edit button and put a small message saying the post has been edited just like any other forum. Even NG blogs have this function. Allow mods to see the original post and no abuse can occur. At least add this function for topic starters because it's tedious maintaining info topics with the current system"

Opinions?

I agree that an edit button could be useful. I think people (mostly mods and users that get hacked frequently) are more concerned about the abuse of the edit button, rather than the usefulness of correcting "your" to "you're". On a larger scale, think of how easily the edit button could be abused. Gaining access to someones account, adding some CP to their posts, and bumping a topic. That's a one way ticket to deletion if a mod catches it, and the original poster did absolutely nothing wrong. I think what would be an interesting idea, is to set a time limit to posts that can be edited. Lets say, 1 week. After one week (plenty of time to alter a post or two) the post is locked, and CANNOT be altered in any way.

At 6/5/09 02:37 AM, life wrote: "That's stupid, but I do agree that this forum needs an edit button and I don't know why people make it out as such a taboo. Just have an edit button and put a small message saying the post has been edited just like any other forum. Even NG blogs have this function. Allow mods to see the original post and no abuse can occur. At least add this function for topic starters because it's tedious maintaining info topics with the current system"

Opinions?

Not really worth the abuse we open ourselves up to. For purposes of info threads, perhaps it would be useful if there was a single updateable post which appears at the top of every page and requires a password to edit. That way, the OP could have whatever he needs to update at the top of every page, only editable by him, but doesn't link it directly to his account so he can pass it on to someone else if he loses interest. I see this especially useful in Clubs with rules for joining that have changed since the club's origin, or in threads that poll users.

Thoughts?

I don't think we should get banned for posting in spam forums.. Seriously.. We don't all have good judgement.

A user accessible delete post would be nice, with the similar function as making threads, deleting only up to 4-10 posts per day, to avoid abuse. This would cut down on mistake posts, and clearing up larger threads with old/useless information.

At 6/5/09 02:45 AM, Elios wrote: think of how easily the edit button could be abused. Gaining access to someones account, adding some CP to their posts, and bumping a topic.

But without an edit button there's nothing stopping someone gaining access to someone's account and posting several threads worth of childporn. :\

Also, guys, please note this isn't a "What feature do you want on the BBS?", this is a "What can the mod team do to improve the BBS"

This talk of edit buttons and delete buttons is all very well but it's not something we as a moderator team can change. This thread was designed so you can say "Well, I find it annoying that I was banned by X for Y but then X went along and did Y right after me!" or "Well I think that you guys need to respond to PMs quicker" or something.

Stuff we can actually change.

At 6/5/09 09:02 AM, BananaBreadMuffin wrote: But without an edit button there's nothing stopping someone gaining access to someone's account and posting several threads worth of childporn. :\

Very true. Either way, there's always a risk.

At 6/5/09 09:07 AM, BananaBreadMuffin wrote: Also, guys, please note this isn't a "What feature do you want on the BBS?", this is a "What can the mod team do to improve the BBS"

My bad, sry, got carried away with the button thing.

At 6/4/09 10:21 PM, BananaBreadMuffin wrote: I think this is quite possibly one of the best threads of the last six months, definitely the most interesting read.

Every thread I've seen that's even remotely like this has been locked.

At 6/6/09 01:34 PM, GOTHCLAWZ wrote: Every thread I've seen that's even remotely like this has been locked.

Really? Maybe it's because most of those threads don't have the support of mods trying to police them and endorse them, and because they encourage some of the nonsense that's going on here where people only post their individual grudges against certain mods. Now if you have something to add next time, please do so, if not? Please don't post here anymore.

This shouldn't be the air you're grievances thread, you should be able to point out a problem you see, and maybe offer a workable solution to it that we can consider.

I would just like to see less stupid rule threads.

Like Poozy's new "/thread" rule. I find these things simply annoying.

At 5/31/09 11:21 AM, cast wrote:

At 5/31/09 11:08 AM, Gagsy wrote: Mods not overlooking the rules themselves just because they have mod status.

Yeah, double standards are quite apparent at times.

yeah, like the whole gay mods thing should've been stopped long before poozy locked it.

(I am the user Complete, but it is currently banned)

I am now officially leaving the BBS (Not newgrounds) because now the mods are just simply out of control, power hungry, pieces of shit. I am banned for making a joke in a thread, which we had to describe Tom Fulp in one word and everyone else saying "God" "awesome". I decided to be a rebel and say "A faggot" but of course, I get banned, perm banned that is. If that is not corruption, I don't know what is. Sure, maybe words like that are immature, but guess what? Some of the mods are guilty of the same thing and get away with it. So why not demod and ban them?

I'll tell you why- some of you are too damn ban-trigger-happy. There was a time where we had good threads, good mods preventing only the stuff nobody liked in. Now we mods BANNING things people enjoy because apparently "Too many people like it". But hey, if posting "a faggot" constitutes as a perm banned, I'm done. These forums are no longer entertaining, and I can only be wishful that we don't get "Flash Mods" who ban flashes everyone likes. Now I see why users that are very popular, been here for a long time are leaving, it just isn't fun anymore. The joke first began when EyeLovePoozy became a mod, and the corruption from there just accelerated.

And if any admin is reading this- I highly recommend you get rid of the current mod team and just select laid-back, fun users everyone likes to be moderator. And by all means, NEVER fucking let the mods vote on more mods, chances are that is how EyeLovePoozy, and other moderately-hated mods get power. From experience, I have been to forums where the popular users, laid back ones were modded, and guess what? Those forums had plenty of good, original threads.

Here's 2 complaints. The way Newgrounds responds to complaints and defining 'spam'.

If somebody has a problem about something on the website and talks about it here, a counter argument such as the reason why it is put there in the first place could be easily used. Like say when people moan about spam threads because they get banned for 1 or more days when they didn't know as to whether it was spam or not. That would be a perfectly good complaint, but then you can come back with "You still posted in a thread which kept the spam alive, that's why the rule needs to be there".

You can pretty much make any decision or rule you want and find ways of justifying it, the fact is that people are being banned when they unintentionally posted in something which they thought was legitimate and not a spam thread. That is a problem.

I was in a group called The Lucky 7 Crew. Our flash wasn't all spam, we had some creative stuff going on with some of our flash. Yoshi77777 asks me to make a club in the "Clubs & Crews" forum. Now if we had a group and could discuss things on one thread then there would be better communication and we could improve our flash collaborations. We where just a group of flash artists, but I get banned for 30 days and were claimed to have made a spam thread and that if I were to make another one I could be deleted.

What makes the moderator so sure that I was trying to start a spam thread? I was just making a group for me and the crew.

At 6/6/09 04:51 PM, Complete400 wrote:

I totally agree with you 100%. The general BBS users are shit scared of what they do now. Mods these days ban people and lock threads without even giving any explanation as to why it happened.

A lot of you mods are being unprofessional and lazy. Also, when users criticize each other they can't ban one another, but when people criticize mods or admins they get banned. I thought the freedom of speech was a good thing, people can't have there own opinions any more.

I made a thread asking what people thought of the BBS rules. It got locked and the moderator said "It's the rules, get over it". It was a chance for users to talk about how they thought the rules should be and it may have benefited the administrators by giving them ideas for new rules. It's like we are expected to behave like sheep.

At 6/6/09 04:51 PM, Complete400 wrote: (I am the user Complete, but it is currently banned)

You're posting with an alt while banned???

I am now officially leaving the BBS (Not newgrounds) because now the mods are just simply out of control, power hungry, pieces of shit.

That's my point; they won't buy it. I have to get into deeper shit by ELABORATING to pin the point down. These mods have (weak) resistance; it will take some work to make them stop denying. I got to corner them.

I am banned for making a joke in a thread, which we had to describe Tom Fulp in one word and everyone else saying "God" "awesome". I decided to be a rebel and say "A faggot" but of course, I get banned, perm banned that is.

Saying 'faggot' is against the rules. It's the first rule in the BBS book that is broken. Besides, I bet dissing the creator of NG either way will get you banned big time.

If that is not corruption, I don't know what is.

In your situation, the mod did the right thing. However, in many others, mods do big mistakes. OPINIONATED mods cause the MOST corruption. I have already listed an opinionated mod and went through a huge elaboration of it.

Sure, maybe words like that are immature, but guess what? Some of the mods are guilty of the same thing and get away with it. So why not demod and ban them?

Good question.

I'll tell you why- some of you are too damn ban-trigger-happy. There was a time where we had good threads, good mods preventing only the stuff nobody liked in. Now we mods BANNING things people enjoy because apparently "Too many people like it". But hey, if posting "a faggot" constitutes as a perm banned, I'm done. These forums are no longer entertaining, and I can only be wishful that we don't get "Flash Mods" who ban flashes everyone likes. Now I see why users that are very popular, been here for a long time are leaving, it just isn't fun anymore. The joke first began when EyeLovePoozy became a mod, and the corruption from there just accelerated.

Posting 'faggot' is against the rules. If this is the reason why you say this, then your point is 100% invalid.

True statement you said: "These forums are no longer entertaining"

I'm planning on DITCHING the fucking BBS for sure. Most of my bans were opinionated. If I was banned for MY OFFENSES, then I don't care because I made a mistake and I deserve the punishment. However, I'm mainly banned because of A MOD'S GOD DAMN OPINION. That is, making a post is equal to saying 'someone ban me'. If I have to put up with unnecessary frustration to have fun, this place isn't worth it. The only bans I got that weren't opinionated were Zerok's (he's a good mod) and SevenSeize's. Those I deserved. The rest of the bans; fuck them. KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF WHEN MODERATING.

And if any admin is reading this- I highly recommend you get rid of the current mod team and just select laid-back, fun users everyone likes to be moderator. And by all means, NEVER fucking let the mods vote on more mods, chances are that is how EyeLovePoozy, and other moderately-hated mods get power. From experience, I have been to forums where the popular users, laid back ones were modded, and guess what? Those forums had plenty of good, original threads.

I agree with what you said here. However, the entire team isn't bad (although I got to say, 50+% are bad) but if they fix their act (which may not happen), then that is good enough.

Poozy took a good step making the rule 'no /thread'. People posting '/thread' are fucking annoying. And Poozy is a good mod; I don't see how he deserves hate from people.

I see that we're still on the subject of mods, lol.

I'm not going to get back into a debate about what the mod team is doing right or wrong, but I will sat this to all the users who are leaving, or thinking about leaving the BBS:

If you really feel that the mods are out to get you, then just don't give us the excuse to ban you. It really is that simple.

I'm not going to try and persuade anybody to change their minds about staying or leaving, because frankly it's none of my business... but if you are going to leave, please don't make a big thing about it on the BBS; it doesn't help anybody.

At 6/6/09 06:48 PM, SuperMarioBrosS wrote:

At 6/6/09 04:51 PM, Complete400 wrote: (I am the user Complete, but it is currently banned)

You're posting with an alt while banned???

If his account is permanently banned then why would he care?

I am now officially leaving the BBS (Not newgrounds) because now the mods are just simply out of control, power hungry, pieces of shit.

That's my point; they won't buy it. I have to get into deeper shit by ELABORATING to pin the point down. These mods have (weak) resistance; it will take some work to make them stop denying. I got to corner them.

Dude, no matter what you write in topics, you will be banned for trolling. There is nothing wrong with being a critic, but because trolling is the nickname for criticizing they can make it sound like it's a bad thing so you don't do it.

But that's why you get the chance to say it here.

I am banned for making a joke in a thread, which we had to describe Tom Fulp in one word and everyone else saying "God" "awesome". I decided to be a rebel and say "A faggot" but of course, I get banned, perm banned that is.

Saying 'faggot' is against the rules. It's the first rule in the BBS book that is broken. Besides, I bet dissing the creator of NG either way will get you banned big time.

Someone big headed enough to ban you for calling them a faggot must be really self concious an pathetic. But it was more likely that it was a moderator sucking his balls.

If that is not corruption, I don't know what is.

In your situation, the mod did the right thing.

Did the moderator do the right thing? Are we supposed to suck Tom's cock too?

However, in many others, mods do big mistakes. OPINIONATED mods cause the MOST corruption. I have already listed an opinionated mod and went through a huge elaboration of it.

One person chooses what's right and what's wrong. People make mistakes.

Sure, maybe words like that are immature, but guess what? Some of the mods are guilty of the same thing and get away with it. So why not demod and ban them?

Good question.

Poozy doesn't give a reason, he thinks he's funny because of it. He should be de-modded for not even saying what it was that he banned you for, or why he locked the thread.

Posting 'faggot' is against the rules. If this is the reason why you say this, then your point is 100% invalid.

His point is valid because we are discussing the BBS, maybe that rule shouldn't be there. Loads of people use that word online. But we can't

True statement you said: "These forums are no longer entertaining"

Exactly, you risk being banned if your thread makes people laugh.

I agree with what you said here. However, the entire team isn't bad (although I got to say, 50+% are bad) but if they fix their act (which may not happen), then that is good enough.

MindChamber thinks he's god. He also acts tough online which I find hilarious. I seem to remember him going to prison and there being a picture of him looking glum with a black eye.

Poozy took a good step making the rule 'no /thread'. People posting '/thread' are fucking annoying. And Poozy is a good mod; I don't see how he deserves hate from people.

Poozy? He's not funny, he doesn't give you a reason for why he's locked something or banned you and he's very ban happy.

i kinda like the lack of an edit button. it sort of enforces a think before you post mentality. there are no erasers for your jackassery.

This is the last time I'm going to say this, guys.

This thread is not your venting grounds for mods you dislike. We're being a little more lax here, but that's to enable you guys to say what you think about what we could be doing better as a team.

Any posts after this that contain unnecessary complaints about individual mods will be deleted, no matter how long they are. You can say what you think, yes, but let's not get into the trend of using this thread as somewhere to freely bitch about individual moderators without consequence. If you have a problem with a mod, take it up with a site admin.

Jonas has said to lock this thread if it gets too terrible whilst he's away for the weekend... don't make me do that. Please.

At 6/6/09 07:29 PM, NEVR wrote: Jonas has said to lock this thread if it gets too terrible whilst he's away for the weekend... don't make me do that. Please.

I'm right there with him. STOP SLAGGING ON INDIVIDUAL MODS. This is why you don't usually get nice things. Because you just call us "lazy" idiotic, or claim all your bans are unjustified and you don't post evidence. You wouldn't want people following you around slagging you every chance they get, why do you think we would?

So yeah, stop trashing individual mods and really, I think we SHOULD move on from that because I think we've got all the suggestions we need on moderation right now, it's just getting to flameing now. If you guys can't handle a lax thread and make some good and mature opinions you're gonna lose this thread and we'll probably not want to do this again.

If you want to be treated like intelligent people and have you're opinions heard, you need to act like intelligent people who's opinions are worth being heard and considered.

At 6/6/09 07:29 PM, NEVR wrote: Jonas has said to lock this thread if it gets too terrible whilst he's away for the weekend... don't make me do that. Please.

Crap. I had hoped to put a little more thought into my post here, but whenever a line like that appears in a thread, a lock is not usually that far away (thanks to people not taking the hint), so I suppose I'd better voice my opinions as they are if I want to take advantage of this brilliant idea of a thread:

If there's one thing the mod team as a whole could do better, it's explanation. I've noticed that some mods are very good at getting users to see eye-to-eye with them, while others are... well, rubbish. To this effect, I think that all BBS mods (that don't already) should try to put more into their explanations of why their actions are justified.

The easiest (and best) way of doing this would be simply to spend more than 2 seconds on lock messages. Yes, the thread may be completely stupid, and the reason why it's getting locked is obvious to 90% of the forum base, but what about the new users and/or people that have never actually seen the reason behind the locks? The kind of thing I'm getting at is like this:

Example 1:
"No religious debate topics"
Pretty straightforward, but it doesn't actually explain why they're not allowed. However, simply lengthening it to:
"No religious debate topics, because they too easily turn into over-opinionated flame wars."
is, in my opinion, much better (even a completely new user would understand why he/she shouldn't make religious debate topics after reading that), and only took a few extra seconds to write.

Example 2:
"Blog it."
This one causes a recurrent grey area, I know, however a simple sentence explaining why the thread was blog-worthy would suffice, i.e.:
"You left no room at all for discussion, and the BBS isn't your personal bawwing space. That's what your blog is for."

Simple changes, I know, but if you spell it out like that, there's no room for confusion, and actions that can be construed as "abuse of power" should become less prone to butthurt whining.

And then you get ones that are just plain dumb. I really hope lock messages like "Fuck this thread." and "Yeah, no." become a thing of the past, as they really offer nothing useful to anyone. Not even the mods who posted them, as they're only inviting people to think ill of them in the lack of an apparent reason why said threads were locked like that.

If, for some reason, giving the reason every time the same kind of thread is locked is going to be a headache for the mod team to do, then there is another way: as many mods as possible should do something similar to Zerok's rules blog. Just a list of things they lock/delete/ban for on the BBS. Even if said rule blogs are all 99% identical to Zerok's, it would still rule out any confusion regarding what will and will not land you in trouble here. It would eliminate the need to explain every individual action, as any mod that does it could just link to their rule blog in their sig, and direct the OP of any locked thread to said link if they want a fuller answer as to what they did wrong.

That's my main point. A few minor ones (which I haven't yet thought about as thoroughly as I'd have liked) are listed below:

- Acting like machines. Some mods have post histories that are nothing but lock messages (you know who you are). If all you do is lock/ban/delete, what do you expect the forum base is going to think about the mod team?

- Make more use of Evark's mod-only thread (this one). It looks like a great idea, that was abandoned for no apparent reason. I PMed Evark about it, and (given his response) I think it could still be a very useful tool in getting people to see where you're coming from on several recurring issues that people like to complain and accuse mods of megalomania over.

- Some things actually aren't handled strictly enough. I have no idea why topics about weed (for example) aren't locked on-sight, as the forums are already swamped with them, they turn into flame wars about as quickly as religious debate topics, and as far as most of NG is concerned it's an illegal activity anyway (when last I checked, discussing illegal activities was against the rules to begin with). At the very least, (ironically) some explanation as to why topics like that are still allowed would be good.

- Double standards. While I see nothing wrong with the occasional silly quip from a mod, I can see why people see it as highly irritating (especially if they got banned for it). If you see another mod doing something you just banned someone for, it might be worth PMing them over it, just to try and gague whether or not said action was really ban-worthy in the first place.

- The definition of a 'spam thread'. This is apparently a very old problem, and yet it still hasn't really been solved with regards to being able to accurately tell what you will and won't get a spam topic ban for. If the mod team could get together and decide upon some concrete (or at least more clear) definitions of what a 'spam thread' is, I'm sure a lot of people here would be grateful for it.

Aside from that, it's all up to the forum base as a whole, not just the mods. Or just the regulars. Or just ANYONE in particular. All a BBS really is is a collection of posts, so it's the responsibility of everyone who posts here to make sure their posts are above a certain standard.

At 6/6/09 07:29 PM, NEVR wrote: Any posts after this that contain unnecessary complaints about individual mods will be deleted, no matter how long they are.

Please elaborate further on 'unnecessary'.

At 6/6/09 08:59 PM, GOTHCLAWZ wrote:

At 6/6/09 07:29 PM, NEVR wrote: Any posts after this that contain unnecessary complaints about individual mods will be deleted, no matter how long they are.

Please elaborate further on 'unnecessary'.

All complaints about individual mods in this thread are unnecessary; that's not the purpose of this thread.

Sorry for double posting... but I know some of you are a little confused about the backseat modding rule, which is understandable. I've made this news post to try and clarify the rule for everyone, and perhaps answer some of the questions any of you may have on the matter.

Thought it might be useful.

At 6/6/09 08:59 PM, GOTHCLAWZ wrote:

At 6/6/09 07:29 PM, NEVR wrote: Any posts after this that contain unnecessary complaints about individual mods will be deleted, no matter how long they are.

Please elaborate further on 'unnecessary'.

Unfounded, untrue, and irrelevant.