Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/22/13 01:06 AM, Yoshiii343 wrote:
...
Have you people actually considered the fact that those low rating scores might be from actual, honest votes?

What's with all these protective attitudes of older users? None of those who has posted on here has bad music, I can't say for mine, but have you take a look at everyone else before coming up with that assumption?

Anyone who has common sense shall know honest scores of your cannot work. Please stop your bullcrap defensive posts.

About to fail at quoting, so forgive me!

At 1/22/13 02:29 AM, shieldurhope wrote:

At 1/22/13 01:06 AM, Yoshiii343 wrote:
...
Have you people actually considered the fact that those low rating scores might be from actual, honest votes?

It can't be. I Took a listen to Jcool's stuff and it's defenitely worth more than two stars.
[b]Another suggestion is display the song's score (out of 5 stars) next to it's name on the audio page as well as the artist's page.[/b] Just another idea on making it easier to find good stuff. (This may become null if we get the old layout back.)

The issue I see with this is that it conflicts with a common complaint: the scores aren't accurate. =X
One can imagine the minute (possibly negative) reactions to having scores become more important.

The voting system isn't flawed. It can be improved, but we have to look at how it's used. A lot of users listen to a song and view it three ways. 5 Star "Amazing and in love with this track. It's going on my music player of choice", 3 Star "Eh, it was good. Can use improvements", and 1 star "I didn't like it". Then you have the people who vote to change the system to their favor, such as voting other peoples songs down to boost their own up. I'm only repeating what's been said before, even in this thread.

The rating and reviewing function work great together. When a reviewer uses them in a pair, then and only then can you without a doubt say a song "deserved" the score it received. The reviewing and rating process will always have a hint of subjectiveness and opinion! That said, text reviews are more solid in function and reasoning than a rating on it's own. You can receive feedback in the form of constructive criticism or more general feed back. Reviewing lets the audio publisher know what was going on when that user gave it a 1 ~ 5.

The review & ratings have the potential to be useful, it's just not used that way sadly.

Wait, did I miss something? Why are our audio tags so severely limited right now?

Regardless of the reason, I find it extremely annoying I can't even use "Music Box" as a tag (darn spaces) and that there's a 4 word limit. At least make it...I don't know, 6 words.

Right now I got stuck with:

"Music Box Classical Lullaby"

People need to be less shy and hit up others for collabs more often. I've made a lot of friends through collabs on this website, but a lot of the time I just feel surprised when, IDK 50 people download a track, probably at least half of them are musicians, and noone wants to shoot the shit one audio geek to another.

But yeah, people just need to be less shy I think.

This thread is going nowhere, same to others. We all like to talk, but could anything we said be done for once?

- Old record medal system (gold, silver, etc)
- Get rid of the 1-5 score method. Only use "Like it" or "Hate it". Both require a review.
- Rid the unification of Score Power between the Audio and Flash Video per user. Audio power is separate from Flash Video scoring power. For example, to boost Audio Power, you'll have to do your daily 5 votes to add 10 points to your xp towards the next level. You can choose which power you want displayed via a control panel option. Like: Audiophile or Flash Watcher... or something similar.
- Able to delete a song regardless of votes/popularity.

That's all I can think of right now. Take it what it is.

there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review. when the site was at it's peak (and at the time busier than the current active AP) you'd get close to a 1:1 return on reviews, and it wasn't even compulsory! seriously, fuck compulsory reviewing!

so maybe something like that would be nice.
or, make reviews a 50 character minimum and then make another "best of" list for top reviewers (i.e. people who wrote the most reviews)
seriously though, fuck compulsory reviewing.

...or compulsory anything else really haha

At 6/17/13 04:21 AM, Sequenced wrote:

At 6/17/13 03:22 AM, gridcrawler wrote: This thread is going nowhere, same to others. We all like to talk, but could anything we said be done for once?

actually both @WadeFulp and @TomFulp check up on this thread once in a while.

The last time I heard someone discussed about NG voting problem was 2009, and probably way before I knew this site.

Anything changed? Answer me.

At 6/17/13 04:55 AM, Sequenced wrote:

At 6/17/13 04:35 AM, gridcrawler wrote:
Anything changed? Answer me.

I've noticed a significant lack of votes in the audioportal over the past couple of years. it's more about the reviews nowadays.

I would like to believe so, but sugar coating statement won't help the fact that so many people are still complaining about old age voting problem.

At 6/17/13 11:48 AM, TomFulp wrote:

At 6/17/13 04:18 AM, midimachine wrote: there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review. when the site was at it's peak (and at the time busier than the current active AP) you'd get close to a 1:1 return on reviews, and it wasn't even compulsory! seriously, fuck compulsory reviewing!

That is really really really tempting to try out! Could get more artists to participate in reviewing, in general.

definitely! they used to let you write a short description as the hyperlink text too, i thought that was worth noting
oh, and this is a thing that would be good for the other portals too i think. except maybe not flash. i dunno!

At 6/17/13 04:18 AM, midimachine wrote: there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review.
or, make reviews a 50 character minimum and then make another "best of" list for top reviewers (i.e. people who wrote the most reviews)

I think this 50 character minimum (or some other number) would be great - especially if the option to link your own track at the end is implemented.

Even though it be would awesome, random listeners/ non artists shouldn't be forced to write a minimum of anything, as long as their reviews stick within the guidelines. They may just not have that much to say - not everybody can be a great reviewer, right?

But maybe, for ARTISTS who are leaving a review and would like to link their own track, THEY should have some sort of character limit. I mean, people with at least some audio experience should have more than a couple of words to say about a track - especially if they're going to link their own track for review at the end.

Otherwise with no minimum, wouldn't it be easier (but stupid) to just leave a really nonconstructive review in order to leave a link/gain exposure ?
I don't know if this kind of thing can be implemented, but I think it makes sense.

TL;DR - Make a character minimum for reviews where people would like to link back their own work. (and would this apply to linking only audio, btw? What if different types of artists want to cross-promote ? )