can you friggen READ?

[Mugetsu88]

as i'm looking through a buch of reviews for various movies, i see a pattern of people posting reviews complaing about stuff that the author clearly states in the description.
one big example is Grand Theft Boner,
the artist clearly stated in his discription that his movie had no plot, yet there are a ton of reviews that complain about the movie being plotless. like the author wasn't aware of it.

"The Music and Graphics were impressive,but ur story line kinda suked.I think u should have made the story line a little more intrested,because by the end of the clip I got bored."

What Fucking story?, there was no story!

oh yeah and how many times does tom and wade have to explain that you cant blam a submission after it has passed judgement, meaning that if you write a review like

"what the fuck was that!!?

This filth should be blammed at once!"

for a submission thats on the front page, you are a fucking moron.........

ok im done ranting............i'm going to my happy place.........................

[scottmale24]

stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

[Jr4]

no i cant :(

[Blue-Wolf]

Can you friggen READ?

No. :'( Why does everyone insist on bringing this up!?

Whoo, 666....

[BUCK-Jefe]

At 7/26/04 08:50 PM, scottmale24 wrote: stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

Then why the hell is **KeanuReevesisonFire** still here? Not to mention "B".

Anyway, yea that pisses me off when people don't read the comments. But a constructive review is better than no review or an abusive review even when the comments arent read.

[HAGGARD-GUY]

At 7/26/04 08:50 PM, scottmale24 wrote: stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

if movies could be blammed past the judgement period then there would really be no point for a judgement period at all huh? Movies can be removed after judgement but you cant just vote 0 and have it blammed.

[BareNakedMike]

At 7/26/04 08:53 PM, Blue-Wolf wrote:

Can you friggen READ?

No. :'( Why does everyone insist on bringing this up!?

Whoo, 666....

it says 660 but thats nothing im gonna have 999 :)

yea I hate it when ppl do that too but most of them are unkowned to us unless we see their review.

[n0ir]

At 7/26/04 08:50 PM, scottmale24 wrote: stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

wrong. its impossible.. only if the admins think its not suitable, or it broke rules, it can't be blammed.

[analog-alkali]

At 7/26/04 08:49 PM, Mugetsu88 wrote: there are a ton of reviews that complain about the movie being plotless. like the author wasn't aware of it.

"The Music and Graphics were impressive,but ur story line kinda suked.I think u should have made the story line a little more intrested,because by the end of the clip I got bored."

What Fucking story?, there was no story!

Yeah, but just because a submission was intended to have no story, doesn't mean to say one can't bring that up as a bad thing about a submission!
Imagine someone made a flash without any graphics. In the notes the author writes "this flash was not intented to have grahphics". Am I supposed to ignore the fact that there's nothing to look at?
Basically what I am trying to say is that if a flash has no story, and I think there should be a story in it, i'll say so. MY review, MY opinions.

[JKirk]

At 7/26/04 08:50 PM, scottmale24 wrote: stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

wtf not blammed.. maybe like taken off of newgrounds for unsuitable,stolen, etc.

[Scrotaculous]

At 7/26/04 08:49 PM, Mugetsu88 wrote: as i'm looking through a buch of reviews for various movies

Yes a "buch" of reviews. You should stop talking right now. Cause thats how your being to people who hit the wrong key that might be right next to the key they wanted.

[Blue-Wolf]

At 7/26/04 08:57 PM, BareNakedMike wrote:

Whoo, 666....

it says 660

SHH! I noticed that afterwards. Leave me and my inability to count alone.

[sirevil]

I kind of have that problem with one of my movies, people thinking I'm anti-clock. and they don't even look at the date from when I sent it in

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/52088

[That-Is-Bull]

God, you wouldn't believe how many people say you can cheat in my game, which clearly says (two times, and in just about every respond to every review) NOT to tell me this, as I already know. Almost every fucking review says "hay i fond a way 2 cheet"

[iscrulz]

At 7/26/04 08:49 PM, Mugetsu88 wrote: as i'm looking through a buch of reviews for various movies, i see a pattern of people posting reviews complaing about stuff that the author clearly states in the description.

people do not read the authors comments

[iltopop]

Madness apothasis is another example. He clearly states that the movie is low quality by defult but people continue to say that it isn't as smooth or have as good of graphics as his other madness films

[FUNKbrs]

The purpose of the judgement period is to stop movies from getting snowballed. Snowballingis where a movies first vote is low, and that causes all other voters to vote low. However, if a submission has a blank period where the score cannot be seen, this does not happen. It also allows movies to have a minimum number of votes before getting blammed, meaning a more democratic blamming.

[Mr-Fluffykins]

At 7/26/04 08:50 PM, scottmale24 wrote: stuff can be blammed after it's passed judgement... it just takes a while.

no it can't

[Mr-Fluffykins]

At 7/26/04 09:07 PM, sirevil wrote: I kind of have that problem with one of my movies, people thinking I'm anti-clock. and they don't even look at the date from when I sent it in

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/52088

omg whistle points half of thoose reviews are abusive

[scottmale24]

At 7/26/04 09:16 PM, iltopop wrote: Madness apothasis is another example. He clearly states that the movie is low quality by defult but people continue to say that it isn't as smooth or have as good of graphics as his other madness films

he says the movie plays in low quality, not that it is low quality.

[iltopop]

At 7/26/04 10:07 PM, scottmale24 wrote:

At 7/26/04 09:16 PM, iltopop wrote:

he says the movie plays in low quality, not that it is low quality.

details details you still get my point