Be a Supporter!

IGF Update & Misc. Stuff

  • 5,289 Views
  • 78 Replies
Respond to this Topic
Tremour
Tremour
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 23
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:04:28 Reply

At 3/9/05 03:52 PM, Aapo_Joki wrote: I doubt that would be necessary. Why would the review mods abuse their power like that?

It might not necessarily be a case of power abuse. Sometimes, people have different opinions on what's abusive and what's not. Rules can be interpreted in different ways by each individual, having a second opinion might help differentiat between stupidity and abuse. Besides, like you, I would probably trust review mods with reviews, as deleting a stupid review wouldn't really hurt anyone at all. My idea, however, really was aimed more at the flash movie aspect of things. Deleting a movie is a big step, as it could effect someone profoundly. I just think that a second and possibly even third opinion should be taken into consideration before the descision to delete is made.


FUCK

BBS Signature
ScottTowels
ScottTowels
  • Member since: Dec. 20, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 53
Audiophile
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:05:40 Reply

At 3/9/05 03:52 PM, Aapo_Joki wrote: I doubt that would be necessary. Why would the review mods abuse their power like that?
Plus, there are TONS of heavily abusive reviews out there, and it would be best to delete them as efficiently as possible.

Ok, I just wanted to protect the normal users from that tool is the review mods ever earn it (nobody said that they would get it). If that option isn't controlled then they could abuse it without nobody noticing it. Of course, most of them are usually fair and right whenever they use their administrate review button (to ban an user) but they aren't perfect.

Whenever a mod bans someone on the BBS, he is obliged to justify the ban. The ban message is there to protect the user from unfair banning. It's also there to protect the mod from a false accusation.

SeizureDog
SeizureDog
  • Member since: Sep. 2, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 25
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:47:12 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:57 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Everyone needs to keep in mind that Newgrounds.com is a huge site with many active users. As the site grows we will have less tolerance for users who want to screw around and create problems. If you cause trouble we will terminate your account. This includes people who enjoy spamming the Portal with crap Flash and try and find creative ways to win Turd of the Week, Underdog, etc.

The next batch of Dailytoons are on their way Wade...I'd like to know what your stance is on that.

TheChaosDemon
TheChaosDemon
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:51:05 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:59 PM, DemonHybrid wrote: First. Sowwy :D

first? damn

BananaBreadMuffin
BananaBreadMuffin
  • Member since: Jul. 8, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 41
Programmer
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:58:07 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:57 PM, WadeFulp wrote: You should include your NG username, website, and email address if you have made your email address public to other NG users. This way our Portal viewers can confirm you are the owner of the Flash and won't blow the whistle on it thinking it's stolen.

Yeah, and other (unnamed) sites wont steal it.


BBS Signature
Makaio
Makaio
  • Member since: Aug. 11, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 16:59:45 Reply

except for the account deletion from a spam ban i think all thats fair.
Maybe a permanent review ban would be more fitting but hey im not the guy who has to spend hours going through all those spam reviews and clearing them out so i guess i shouldnt talk

p.s. Tell Tom to come to canada for god sake we luv him up here,if he comes to the maritimes i'll give him a free seal skin hat :D (im sure i could get my newfie cousin to send me one lol........)

masterchief2888
masterchief2888
  • Member since: Jan. 27, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 17:10:00 Reply

:This includes people who enjoy spamming the Portal with crap Flash and try and find creative ways to win Turd of the Week, Underdog, etc.

Thank you finaally !!!!!!!!!!! You know how many people spam the portal with crapy flash..... TY so much ! Im tired of having to BLAM four movies which are all the same which are resubmitted after and after again.

TheTengu
TheTengu
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 14
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 17:18:53 Reply

That Sucks...

THANKS FOR THE STICKERS AND NOTE WADE!!!!!!!!!!!


Sig by: CUBrt

BBS Signature
the-phantom-spancker
the-phantom-spancker
  • Member since: Dec. 22, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 35
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 17:38:33 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:57 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Also I will be lifting all of the review bans this week. I still have a few thousand abusive reviews to clear out.

Yes finally I can get my reveiw powers back!
Thanks Wade for announcing it.

j00bie
j00bie
  • Member since: Apr. 17, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 30
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 17:41:18 Reply

At 3/9/05 04:47 PM, Seizure_Dog wrote: The next batch of Dailytoons are on their way Wade...I'd like to know what your stance is on that.

And what rules did the original batch of dailytoons break?

Kaabi
Kaabi
  • Member since: Jul. 6, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 23
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 18:00:03 Reply

Wade, I'm going to be honest, you're getting to hard on people. Sure, some people post links in their reviews. And people find creative ways to get Turd and Underdog. ITS FUNNY! Newgrounds is becoming less of a fun place to be and more of a corporation. The people who do the Turd stuff make the site a little more interesting. The site is too strict. Although the people constantly sending in crap need to be PUNISHED. No, they don't. They can do what they want, but it can get them a portal ban and there stuff will be blammed and they will suffer the harsh reviews. So the punishment is the harsh reviews, and the more crap, the more blam points for, I'm talking about the big man, Love_Daddy.

AapoJoki
AapoJoki
  • Member since: Feb. 27, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 28
Gamer
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 18:31:54 Reply

At 3/9/05 05:50 PM, Chrome- wrote: I doubt he has a problem with Dailytoons, or Daily2oons.

I don't think he's exactly a fan of them either. But I doubt he'll delete them or anything. Still, I'd like to hear his opinion about them.

EarthCrisis
EarthCrisis
  • Member since: Jun. 24, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 18:41:17 Reply

New commandment: 11. Thou shalt not spam NG. If NG is down this Sunday like Tim said it would be okay he said that it wasn't going to be last Sunday. Go to http://www.ugoto.com.

Faille
Faille
  • Member since: Feb. 6, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 14
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 19:19:13 Reply

thank you i have sent emails because i was review banned from the dailytoons saying blamm it... sorry... anywayz ill be glad to get my priveleges back!


Just here to pass the time :)
http://www.faille.deviantart.com

BBS Signature
DeviousDemon
DeviousDemon
  • Member since: Dec. 13, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 31
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 19:54:13 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:57 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Time to clean up the crap in the portal

Bravo, Wade, bravo.

(Ug. The smilies are hidious.)

DeviousDemon
DeviousDemon
  • Member since: Dec. 13, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 31
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 20:06:42 Reply

At 3/9/05 03:36 PM, Toocool100 wrote: Is it me or does Wade seem a bit more angry than he used to be. He flames alot of people now, more specifically calling many people "retards" and so forth. Plus the way he wrote this post now doesn't seem to be too friendly

dont ban me wade!

runs and hides::

I'd be angry too if the site I worked hard on for so long went to retards as well.
And many people here are. Myself included. We're whiny, stupid, obnoxious, little fucks that think that we can do whatever we want and get away with it without consequence, just because it's Newgrounds.
Granted, [I think] Wade and I split on political views, but as for hating idiots, retards, and n00bs (oh my), I think it's safe to say we loathe them with a passion... and you should too. I wouldn't want Newgrounds to start charging or having to get more adds because their bandwidth is clogged with crap like RandumbMovie#69 and NakidAnimeGurls_OMFG (not real movies --- I hope...).
My only complaint is that change is being implemented fast enough, though I realize it takes time. Maybe after taking care of spammers, idiot reviewers, posters, and flash submitters, and finishing up the changes with the interface, we might find ourselves with a tab key or spell check function in our posting abilities, or a whole new portal all together (!).

n0ir
n0ir
  • Member since: Nov. 7, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 20:08:02 Reply

Wade, I know abusive reviews is a problem, but if you want some more review mods I can come up with a list of awesome users that could get the job done for you. Does the review ban work like the bbs ban, or the portal ban does?


BBS Signature
Changwan
Changwan
  • Member since: Dec. 6, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 21:26:59 Reply

how much will it cost?

gfoxcook
gfoxcook
  • Member since: Feb. 18, 2000
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 60
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 21:46:35 Reply

At 3/9/05 04:05 PM, EKRegulus wrote:
At 3/9/05 03:52 PM, Aapo_Joki wrote: I doubt that would be necessary. Why would the review mods abuse their power like that?
Plus, there are TONS of heavily abusive reviews out there, and it would be best to delete them as efficiently as possible.
Ok, I just wanted to protect the normal users from that tool is the review mods ever earn it (nobody said that they would get it). If that option isn't controlled then they could abuse it without nobody noticing it. Of course, most of them are usually fair and right whenever they use their administrate review button (to ban an user) but they aren't perfect.

Whenever a mod bans someone on the BBS, he is obliged to justify the ban. The ban message is there to protect the user from unfair banning. It's also there to protect the mod from a false accusation.

There's something important everyone needs to keep in mind.

If review mods could delete reviews themselves, instead of waiting for Wade to do it... this would be GREAT for link spammers...

But for other abusive reviewers? It would just get rid of their bad shit and they wouldn't learn any lessons from it.

The review BAN is important because the banned person will figure out they did something wrong to GET banned and THINK about changing their behaviours.

That said, I'm fine with review mods either being able to set a time for a ban, or all bans being 1 month or some set amount of time (except for link spam bans, which should be permanent (which usually means a day or two until Wade destroys the account, period). Because Wade can't get to all the accounts that are banned and sift through the reviews like a machine. He's only human.

As long as the ban is long enough to IMPACT someone's behaviour, it's long enough.


gfox // wi/ht?#9 // 2x10k PentaList (final update: 3/15/2008) // Bahamut's List!
a long, long time ago: 60000 b/p (#2) // 36000 blams (#3) // 24000 saves (#1)

BBS Signature
Bob-Friskit
Bob-Friskit
  • Member since: Jul. 10, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 21:47:00 Reply

Good job, doing ...stuff Wade

To the people complaining bout' the fun being sucked out of newgrounds
hey people shouldn't have submited such crappy flashes in the frist place; so they could earn turd o' week, ect.

I'm mean the whole point of newgrounds is to watch flashes and share them with others.
Not watching some guy suck dick cuase the artist hates em' *cough piconjo *cough cough

ScottTowels
ScottTowels
  • Member since: Dec. 20, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 53
Audiophile
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 22:55:19 Reply

At 3/9/05 09:46 PM, gfoxcook wrote: There's something important everyone needs to keep in mind.
If review mods could delete reviews themselves, instead of waiting for Wade to do it... this would be GREAT for link spammers...

Indeed but this greatness doesn't eliminate the possible problems. That's why I think that a delete button wouldn't be enough. It would need something else to control or justify the deletions. Unlike the BBS deletions, these deletions would affect the overall reviewing score so they would have an effect on portal awards. Anyway, nobody said that this option is going to exist for review mods so I wonder why we are discussing about this subject.

But for other abusive reviewers? It would just get rid of their bad shit and they wouldn't learn any lessons from it.
The review BAN is important because the banned person will figure out they did something wrong to GET banned and THINK about changing their behaviours.

Well, you could delete the review + ban the user + ban message. That would be even better but the problem is that you guys have only the middle option so yeah, the current works very well even though the banned reviewer often needs to talk about his ban on the BBS, on an instant chat or per email because he doesn't understand why he was banned.

As long as the ban is long enough to IMPACT someone's behaviour, it's long enough.

Too bad that the user often needs to contact a mod to understand why he was banned. Everyone would like to get more details about the reviewing bans (for example, they might want to remember which review(s) caused that, etc.) I admit that even I would post about this in the BBS but fortunately I don't need to because I mostly typed constructive reviews.
There is also the type of user that never learns...and we both know that his behaviour isn't affected by long bans.

XwaynecoltX
XwaynecoltX
  • Member since: Jan. 17, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 52
Movie Buff
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 22:57:17 Reply

At 3/9/05 09:46 PM, gfoxcook wrote: That said, I'm fine with review mods either being able to set a time for a ban, or all bans being 1 month or some set amount of time (except for link spam bans, which should be permanent (which usually means a day or two until Wade destroys the account, period). Because Wade can't get to all the accounts that are banned and sift through the reviews like a machine. He's only human.

As long as the ban is long enough to IMPACT someone's behaviour, it's long enough.

1month with no reviewing good lord, i ove newgrounds movies and love reviewing them, 1 month would be crazy...

~X~


~X~ ~X~ ~X~ (FOLLOW-ME)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
POXNORA ??? A Very Unique game

BBS Signature
n0ir
n0ir
  • Member since: Nov. 7, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 23:12:53 Reply

*X for review mod.


BBS Signature
gfoxcook
gfoxcook
  • Member since: Feb. 18, 2000
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 60
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-09 23:37:06 Reply

At 3/9/05 10:55 PM, EKRegulus wrote:
At 3/9/05 09:46 PM, gfoxcook wrote: There's something important everyone needs to keep in mind.
If review mods could delete reviews themselves, instead of waiting for Wade to do it... this would be GREAT for link spammers...
Indeed but this greatness doesn't eliminate the possible problems. That's why I think that a delete button wouldn't be enough. It would need something else to control or justify the deletions. Unlike the BBS deletions, these deletions would affect the overall reviewing score so they would have an effect on portal awards. Anyway, nobody said that this option is going to exist for review mods so I wonder why we are discussing about this subject.

Not in this topic, no. But the possibility of review mods being able to delete reviews HAS been brought up before. I can't remember if it's a liljim idea or a Wade idea.

So that's why we're discussing it.

As for review deletions, OBVIOUSLY admins could still see the deleted reviews. They could restore them and warn the mod if someone complains and is proven correct. This is just more shit that will clog up the admins' plates, though, so that kinda defeats the purpose.

There is no perfect system until we can program trusted, infallible A.I. modding programs.

But for other abusive reviewers? It would just get rid of their bad shit and they wouldn't learn any lessons from it.
The review BAN is important because the banned person will figure out they did something wrong to GET banned and THINK about changing their behaviours.
Well, you could delete the review + ban the user + ban message. That would be even better but the problem is that you guys have only the middle option so yeah, the current works very well even though the banned reviewer often needs to talk about his ban on the BBS, on an instant chat or per email because he doesn't understand why he was banned.

Yes, ban messages would be okay, except that then review mods have to worry about hatemail and shit like BBS mods do. Don't assume that the mods are going to be abusive when 99% of the time on the BBS, it's the other way around.

That said, I wouldn't mind a little checkbox while banning that says "please check which reason the user is being banned for (more than one, if applicable)" and then features this listing:

1) Link spam
2) Character spam
3) identical reviews to multiple entries
4) hateful speech at flash author
5) hateful speech in general
6) asking for movie to be blammed
7) posting nothing but "thanks for voting" screen results.
8) etc. etc. etc.

And then whatever reason or reasons were selected would be shown to the user for the whole month they're banned if they try to review again. That would be nifty, yes.

As long as the ban is long enough to IMPACT someone's behaviour, it's long enough.
Too bad that the user often needs to contact a mod to understand why he was banned. Everyone would like to get more details about the reviewing bans (for example, they might want to remember which review(s) caused that, etc.) I admit that even I would post about this in the BBS but fortunately I don't need to because I mostly typed constructive reviews.
There is also the type of user that never learns...and we both know that his behaviour isn't affected by long bans.

There's nothing wrong with someone asking why they were banned in the abusive reviews topic on Wi/Ht?, man. Since when has anyone discouraged that behaviour?

And no, some people don't learn. But just like prison terms... that's why they're long: to stop the user (at least for awhile) from doing the shit they want to do again... again.

At 3/9/05 10:57 PM, XwaynecoltX wrote:
At 3/9/05 09:46 PM, gfoxcook wrote: That said, I'm fine with review mods either being able to set a time for a ban, or all bans being 1 month or some set amount of time (except for link spam bans, which should be permanent (which usually means a day or two until Wade destroys the account, period). Because Wade can't get to all the accounts that are banned and sift through the reviews like a machine. He's only human.

As long as the ban is long enough to IMPACT someone's behaviour, it's long enough.
1month with no reviewing good lord, i ove newgrounds movies and love reviewing them, 1 month would be crazy...

~X~

Someone earlier in this topic said 1 month, I was just using that as an example. Hence the "or some other set amount of time" part.

Besides... some people have reported being review banned for 2 months or more. The CURRENT ban system lasts FOREVER (unless Wade removes the ban himself).

A one month ban may SOUND long, but it's a lot shorter than SOME reviewers have been banned for in the past couple of years, so... that's not that "crazy" at all, man. Infinite bans are far more crazy.


gfox // wi/ht?#9 // 2x10k PentaList (final update: 3/15/2008) // Bahamut's List!
a long, long time ago: 60000 b/p (#2) // 36000 blams (#3) // 24000 saves (#1)

BBS Signature
SeizureDog
SeizureDog
  • Member since: Sep. 2, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 25
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 00:24:09 Reply

At 3/9/05 05:41 PM, j00bie wrote:
At 3/9/05 04:47 PM, Seizure_Dog wrote: The next batch of Dailytoons are on their way Wade...I'd like to know what your stance is on that.
And what rules did the original batch of dailytoons break?

The original batch is safe now. It's virtually been protected just because of it's influence of the portal.

However, I have seen some series that closely resemble the dailytoons that have been completely whipped out. The Acadamy anyone?

I'll I'm saying is, don't push your luck.

ScottTowels
ScottTowels
  • Member since: Dec. 20, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 53
Audiophile
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 00:28:05 Reply

At 3/9/05 11:37 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Not in this topic, no. But the possibility of review mods being able to delete reviews HAS been brought up before. I can't remember if it's a liljim idea or a Wade idea.
So that's why we're discussing it.

It's also not the first time that I discuss about this subject with you. (hoping that my memory didn't fail again :P)

As for review deletions, OBVIOUSLY admins could still see the deleted reviews. They could restore them and warn the mod if someone complains and is proven correct. This is just more shit that will clog up the admins' plates, though, so that kinda defeats the purpose.

yeah. That makes sense. If the admins can still see the reviews then the unfair banned users would be protected from an abusive mod. As your explanation indicates it, it doesn't seem efficient at all... :(

There is no perfect system until we can program trusted, infallible A.I. modding programs.

If only dreams were the reality.

That said, I wouldn't mind a little checkbox while banning that says "please check which reason the user is being banned for (more than one, if applicable)" and then features this listing:
And then whatever reason or reasons were selected would be shown to the user for the whole month they're banned if they try to review again. That would be nifty, yes.

That would be a great idea for you guys, especially if it would still be anonymous bans.

There's nothing wrong with someone asking why they were banned in the abusive reviews topic on Wi/Ht?, man. Since when has anyone discouraged that behaviour?

Nobody. I simply said that most users need to contact a mod so they can know why they were banned for. A ban won't impact their behaviour if they don't exactly know why they were banned. You forgot to mention it so that's why I did.

And no, some people don't learn. But just like prison terms... that's why they're long: to stop the user (at least for awhile) from doing the shit they want to do again... again.

yes and they are even users that never learned how to type constructive reviews and they never were punished...*looking at the 2nd spot of the top reviewers*

DJRunaway
DJRunaway
  • Member since: Jan. 20, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 01:32:51 Reply

Good job wade, clean this site :D
After 4 years of Newgrounds, I still can't get enough... And with those stupid stealing/spamming whores out of the way, Newgrounds will even be better :D

Thanks for making NG so addicitve... Although... It's bad for your social life ;)

HellaBAD1
HellaBAD1
  • Member since: Apr. 16, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 02:51:44 Reply

So yeah, I attended the GDC and since I was there I went to the IGDF. Alien Hominid on two or three awards (can't remember as I'm rather drunk from the reception.) Gish won two, I believe, and Edmund proposed to his GF on stage and she said yes. Discuss, and now I must sleep.

Ken-Korrupt
Ken-Korrupt
  • Member since: Aug. 19, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 15
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 05:12:38 Reply

At 3/9/05 01:57 PM, WadeFulp wrote:
Also I will be lifting all of the review bans this week. I still have a few thousand abusive reviews to clear out. PLEASE read the review guidelines before you submit a review to Newgrounds.

Alright! It's going to be nice to be able to review entries again!

Slightly-Crazy-Dude
Slightly-Crazy-Dude
  • Member since: Jan. 14, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 35
Blank Slate
Response to IGF Update & Misc. Stuff 2005-03-10 08:14:26 Reply

At 3/9/05 06:40 PM, iLLiCit_JmBd wrote:
Wade is fucking sick of cleaning up the mess you guys make and I agree with him that the overwhelming shit that is coming to the site is too much to handle and it requires too much man power that can be used on more useful things.

Oh, wait a minute. You've caused more problems on NG than any otrher one person, dont act all high and fucking mighty, when you're guilty of those things yourself. Fucksake.

I like the idea of the new moderator tools, and yep, it sure would keep the main stream on constant bullshit"we" put on Newgrounds everyday. I hope everything works out, and i hope the new Audio ortal is almost done :D