Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/17/07 10:20 PM, Wylo wrote: The 12/17/07 Top 150 Voting Power Update

Thanks for the update, Wylo.

058) 12.22 -------- 7.64 Ehwaz003 EGSC -1
059) 12.22 +0.03 7.64 Coop83 EGSC

Maybe there's a chance of passing someone for experience as well in the future :) I'm only 6 ranks behind Ehwaz003

At 12/17/07 10:20 PM, Wylo wrote: The 12/17/07 Top 150 Voting Power Update

Thanks for the update Wylo.

Users entering list: Pieriku
Users that have left the list: UND

Hello and goodbye.

Average: 12.06

Nice, I'm getting close to being above average.

Level uppers:
N/A

Oh ok.

At 12/17/07 10:21 PM, Wylo wrote: 076) 11.94 +0.01 8.07 alhill General
077) 11.94 +0.04 7.46 Bahamut EGSC

Nice! No ranks down or up and a nice +0.04 VP increase. :) Only 0.06 to go until I hit 12 and by then, I should have passed alhill.

At 12/17/07 10:20 PM, Wylo wrote: The 12/17/07 Top 150 Voting Power Update

Nice update Wylo.

001) 14.00 +0.03 8.75 YoinK EGSC

Congrats to YoinK on being the first to reach 14.00 VP!!!

100) 11.55 +0.03 7.22 Dream-of-Duke EGSC +1
101) 11.55 +0.01 7.22 ThreeStar EGSC -3

Where I will be when I hit Sup. Commander. Nice to see that I´ll climb about 30 ranks as soon as I get there.

130) 11.23 +0.05 7.02 Major-punk EGSC +1
131) 11.22 +0.04 7.01 Sentio EGSC -1
132) 11.22 +0.05 7.01 milinko959 EGSC
133) 11.20 +0.05 7.00 Seamonky EGSC +2
134) 11.19 +0.03 7.22 Auz Commander
135) 11.19 +0.03 7.88 Dent0n Colonel -2

It doesn´t seem like I´m gonna move up or down anytime soon...

Yea, I am back to the top 100, hopefully, I can hang around a bit longer this time.

At 12/18/07 03:39 PM, Auz wrote: Congrats to YoinK on being the first to reach 14.00 VP!!!

Yea.. this is the 2nd time reaching 14.00 .... but first one to reach it after the redesign.
15.00 VP is definitely possible with the new system. It's all just a matter of time.

I'm slowly making my way to the last rank..was tired of being so close to it for a couple of years now. When I do reach it, I'll be #2. I was as high as #3 at one point.

At 12/19/07 12:54 PM, CaptainBob wrote: I'm slowly making my way to the last rank..was tired of being so close to it for a couple of years now. When I do reach it, I'll be #2. I was as high as #3 at one point.

Lovely. I finally make my way to the 13th spot and now I'm forced to wait patiently for the big toe to strike. I should've seen this coming.

012) 13.36 +0.03 8.35 Parasoul EGSC
013) 13.33 +0.02 8.33 ReconRebel EGSC +1
014) 13.31 -------- 8.32 alexsmolik EGSC -1

I've been chasing Parasoul for how long???

My mistake. I thought CaptainBob's voting power was less than mine. Sue me for the double post. :P

At 12/19/07 10:19 PM, ReconRebel wrote: My mistake. I thought CaptainBob's voting power was less than mine. Sue me for the double post. :P

noob ;)

At 12/20/07 12:31 AM, CaptainBob wrote:

At 12/19/07 10:19 PM, ReconRebel wrote: My mistake. I thought CaptainBob's voting power was less than mine. Sue me for the double post. :P

noob ;)

You are not far away from being leveled up to EGSC, once you get 30000 total b/p points, your vp should be back to the top 3 again.

At 12/19/07 09:56 AM, YoinK wrote:
Yea.. this is the 2nd time reaching 14.00 .... but first one to reach it after the redesign.
15.00 VP is definitely possible with the new system. It's all just a matter of time.

Unless they make it rescale when pimp hits level 60, which there's a lot of speculation of. In which case, I'll be pretty enraged.

At 12/21/07 01:14 AM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/19/07 09:56 AM, YoinK wrote: Yea.. this is the 2nd time reaching 14.00 .... but first one to reach it after the redesign.
15.00 VP is definitely possible with the new system. It's all just a matter of time.

Unless they make it rescale when pimp hits level 60, which there's a lot of speculation of. In which case, I'll be pretty enraged.

Why would they make it rescale when Pimp hits level 60? It defies logic. Putting the experience requirements and therefore the Voting Power back on the sliding scale seems like it might still be a possibility, but given that the only people who need to know about this at the moment (for the next 2 years :P) are the Admins, we can merely speculate.

I couldn't see Pimp suddenly achieveing level 60 as a massive boost to his VP or penalty for everyone else.

At 12/21/07 12:11 PM, Coop83 wrote:

Why would they make it rescale when Pimp hits level 60? It defies logic.

You're damn right it does, but so does making members get banned from submitting Flash if they get 2 entries blammed within 30 days, and so did it defy logic when they put the scaled system in the first time they did it. So I dunno.

Putting the experience requirements and therefore the Voting Power back on the sliding scale seems like it might still be a possibility, but given that the only people who need to know about this at the moment (for the next 2 years :P) are the Admins, we can merely speculate.

I know, I just strongly hope they do not.

At 12/21/07 12:21 PM, BlueHippo wrote:

I couldn't see Pimp suddenly achieveing level 60 as a massive boost to his VP or penalty for everyone else.

I was curious about how things would work when Pimp reached level 60... perhaps this PM i got back from Tom can better answer your question

At 11/19/07 4:01 PM, TomFulp wrote:

Blah

What he's trying to say is that NG hasn't decided what should happen, but they've got 2-3 years to think of that. If we leave them to get on with the other aspects of running the site (Like making the last Secret :P) they will deal with this issue when it becomes more pressing.

At 12/22/07 04:25 PM, JerkClock wrote: You're damn right it does, but so does making members get banned from submitting Flash if they get 2 entries blammed within 30 days, and so did it defy logic when they put the scaled system in the first time they did it. So I dunno.

That was put in place to stop people from spamming submissions in order to use alternate accounts to get the Blam Points. Personally, I think it should be 2 entries blammed in a fortnight for a 5-day ban. Something like that would be effective, but not over the top, as you can still make worthwhile progress in a flash in 14 days.

At 12/22/07 05:18 PM, Coop83 wrote:
What he's trying to say is that NG hasn't decided what should happen, but they've got 2-3 years to think of that. If we leave them to get on with the other aspects of running the site (Like making the last Secret :P) they will deal with this issue when it becomes more pressing.

Dunnoit sounded pretty clear cut to me, he said there's levels past 60, just that they haven't decided if they should get their own icons yet.

That was put in place to stop people from spamming submissions in order to use alternate accounts to get the Blam Points.

And it didn't work, it hurt the users who want to contribute to NG.

Personally, I think it should be 2 entries blammed in a fortnight for a 5-day ban. Something like that would be effective, but not over the top, as you can still make worthwhile progress in a flash in 14 days.

I think it should be never.

At 12/22/07 07:21 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/22/07 05:18 PM, Coop83 wrote: That was put in place to stop people from spamming submissions in order to use alternate accounts to get the Blam Points.

And it didn't work, it hurt the users who want to contribute to NG.

What basis makes you say that it doesn't work? Since that was implemented, I've noticed a marked improvement in the number of Saves per day I'm getting and a noticable decline in my Blams per day. My voting habits have not changed, yet this change has to be down to something. Perhaps it was the fact that we're seeing less crap and more quality entries through the portal, due to this new rule?

I think it should be never.

Well, we're all entitled to an opinion.

At 12/23/07 04:48 AM, Coop83 wrote:
What basis makes you say that it doesn't work?

The fact that spammers found a way around it.

Since that was implemented, I've noticed a marked improvement in the number of Saves per day I'm getting and a noticable decline in my Blams per day. My voting habits have not changed, yet this change has to be down to something. Perhaps it was the fact that we're seeing less crap and more quality entries through the portal, due to this new rule?

That's not because of its implementation its because users who used to mass 0 vote everything have been getting reset(in both B/P and XP) and those of us who are biased toward protecting Flash have accumulated more voting power with time.

At 12/23/07 07:21 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/23/07 04:48 AM, Coop83 wrote:
What basis makes you say that it doesn't work?

The fact that spammers found a way around it.

And because spammers found a way around it it should be abandoned? I don't think that this is the way to go.

That's not because of its implementation its because users who used to mass 0 vote everything have been getting reset(in both B/P and XP) and those of us who are biased toward protecting Flash have accumulated more voting power with time.

Well, do you have an example of any user that had this happen to him? I know the newspost Tom made a few years ago, but I doubt that any user ever got his Exp and B/P reset (of course, if you have proof, the doubt will be gone ;) ).

At 12/23/07 07:21 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/23/07 04:48 AM, Coop83 wrote: What basis makes you say that it doesn't work?

The fact that spammers found a way around it.

That is why there is always evil in the world. We cannot ask spammers to stop spamming, but we can make sure that we do not assist them for those useless protection points.

At 12/23/07 07:31 PM, Haggard wrote:

And because spammers found a way around it it should be abandoned?

YES, that's exactly the course of action that should be taken. It was supposed to weed them out, but didn't do a fuckin thing to them and only hurt the poor constructive user who only want to contribute, that an extremely good reason to throw it the fuck out.

Well, do you have an example of any user that had this happen to him?

I can't link to them if they're deleted dude. :|

At 12/23/07 08:37 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/23/07 07:31 PM, Haggard wrote: And because spammers found a way around it it should be abandoned?

YES, that's exactly the course of action that should be taken. It was supposed to weed them out, but didn't do a fuckin thing to them and only hurt the poor constructive user who only want to contribute, that an extremely good reason to throw it the fuck out.

To exaggerate that thought a bit: Why not abandon the laws? People have always found a way around it (or do it anyways, even though there's a law against serveral actions), so why not just burn that fucking thing?

I can't link to them if they're deleted dude. :|

Oh yeah, right... silly me! *smites his forehead*

At 12/26/07 01:17 PM, shadowchaotailsevil3 wrote: my max vote power is 6.56

Im making my way up there somehow.

You can always dream! But I do hope to see you around in a few years. P.S: When is the next update? I want to see if I am still in the top 100, lol!

At 12/23/07 07:21 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 12/23/07 04:48 AM, Coop83 wrote:
What basis makes you say that it doesn't work?

The fact that spammers found a way around it.

I'm overruling this by the example that regular users are willing to sit down and wait for their ban to expire, before resubmitting.

That's not because of its implementation its because users who used to mass 0 vote everything have been getting reset(in both B/P and XP) and those of us who are biased toward protecting Flash have accumulated more voting power with time.

No, I'm saying that my voting habits haven't changed, but I have genuinely seen an increase in the number of protectable submissions of late.

At 12/23/07 07:56 PM, Dream-of-Duke wrote: That is why there is always evil in the world. We cannot ask spammers to stop spamming, but we can make sure that we do not assist them for those useless protection points.

Exactly, we need to take on each flash as it comes through the portal and judge it adequately on its own merrits and flaws, rather than those of the author, no matter who they are, or how many submissions of theirs have already passed judgement.

At 12/23/07 08:37 PM, JerkClock wrote: YES, that's exactly the course of action that should be taken. It was supposed to weed them out, but didn't do a fuckin thing to them and only hurt the poor constructive user who only want to contribute, that an extremely good reason to throw it the fuck out.

And I will bet you that if this measure is removed, the system will be overrun with crap submissions, as before. I'm suggesting that we have made an advance and that you have buried your head in the sand over this, now that you have your opinion

Well, do you have an example of any user that had this happen to him?

I can't link to them if they're deleted dude. :|

At 12/26/07 01:17 PM, shadowchaotailsevil3 wrote: my max vote power is 6.56

Im making my way up there somehow.

Perserverance in spades and a reasonably quick ascention to Supreme Commander would certainly help you. Without those, you will not make the list.

At 12/26/07 12:57 PM, Haggard wrote:

To exaggerate that thought a bit: Why not abandon the laws? People have always found a way around it (or do it anyways, even though there's a law against serveral actions), so why not just burn that fucking thing?

"Exaggerate" is key. You're comparing a mountain to a molehill. Scaling back laws that do not work isn't the same as invoking anarchy.

Coop wrote:
I'm overruling this by the example that regular users are willing to sit down and wait for their ban to expire, before resubmitting.

Yes, regular users, and that is the crux of the problem. It doesn't hurt the spammers, it hurts the users who want to contribute, as I've been saying all along.

No, I'm saying that my voting habits haven't changed, but I have genuinely seen an increase in the number of protectable submissions of late.

Didn't say they didn't, I said those who were biased towards blamming have been getting punished and those of us biased towards protecting have more voting power due to not being punished, didn't say anything about your voting habits.

And I will bet you that if this measure is removed, the system will be overrun with crap submissions

Even if that's true, so what? More blam points, what's wrong with that?

I'm suggesting that we have made an advance and that you have buried your head in the sand over this, now that you have your opinion

Unsubstantiated and erroneous presupposition.

At 12/30/07 12:10 AM, JerkClock wrote:

Coop wrote:
I'm overruling this by the example that regular users are willing to sit down and wait for their ban to expire, before resubmitting.

Yes, regular users, and that is the crux of the problem. It doesn't hurt the spammers, it hurts the users who want to contribute, as I've been saying all along.

So regular users don't contribute to the site? I'm aware that this method may drive away some newer users, but my defence of this method is clearly laid out below.

And I will bet you that if this measure is removed, the system will be overrun with crap submissions

Even if that's true, so what? More blam points, what's wrong with that?

Tom said that he did that to speed up the portal. Less crap submissions coming in takes up less bandwidth. Pointing out to users politely, yet firmly, that their submission sucks balls and that they should work on it is the right way to go. Maybe he should have taken it a step further and said "You voted 0 on this flash, so leave a decent review, or no blam point for you, stat whore."

It appears to be the widely held belief of the users discussing here (i.e. everyone except you) that the system works. This also appears to be the case in the Administrators of the site. Rather than saying that this system is no longer viable and should just be removed, propose a new direction to move. That way, we can move the site forward and truly learn the meaning of the word evolution.

At 12/30/07 04:31 AM, Coop83 wrote:
So regular users don't contribute to the site?

Where did I say that?

Tom said that he did that to speed up the portal.

It was Wade Fulp who did and not Tom, your statement does not hold. In fact, Tom has been spotted stating the opposite:

http://web.archive.org/web/2002122117380 4/www.newgrounds.com/portal/readreview.p hp3?user_id=1

I just found it very ironic. :)

Our bandwidth problems aren't primarily the result of crappy Portal movies.

So your bandwidth argument fails.

It appears to be the widely held belief of the users discussing here (i.e. everyone except you) that the system works.

Argumentum Ad Populum. Everyone in the world can believe a lie if they wish, but it is still a lie.

This also appears to be the case in the Administrators of the site.

Actually it is the opinion of one administrator on the site, you don't know what the rest of them think, even if you did, that's Argumentum Ad Verecundium. Just because an authority holds an opinion, does not make that opinion correct.