At 10/14/02 09:28 PM, iOcide wrote: i no like this idea.
i just feel bad for that dude that has 1337 blams.
At 10/14/02 09:31 PM, iOcide wrote:At 10/14/02 09:28 PM, iOcide wrote: i no like this idea.i just feel bad for that dude that has 1337 blams.
2 people have/had 1337 blams, and they both in the blam club so its not like they can just stop voting (when they got 1337 blams they both stopped casting the last vote, but they still both helped vote, now they can't even do that without messing it up)
The point is... Don't lose your dinosaur.
At 10/13/02 06:06 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Very shortly we will be implementing some changes to the voting system. As many of you know we check a movie's score at the 25th, 50th, 75th, and 100th vote. If the score falls below the current check points threshold it is BLAMMED! In the past we had only rewarded the user who casts the deciding vote the BLAM point. We have decided this was unfair to everyone else who contributed in BLAMMING a movie. So now when you log in and you vote either 0 or 1 on a movie and it ends up getting BLAMMED, you will receive a BLAM point! Currently users hold back their vote to try and be the one to get the BLAM point. This causes the Portal to be less efficient. With the new system users will be encouraged to vote as quickly as possible or risk losing their chance at a point!
yea i noticed that people hold back there vote to get the blam. well i think this should work nicely. but i don't know. this might start something up so i'm not gonna fully back it all the way up
On the other side of the coin, users voting 2-5 on a movie that doesn't get BLAMMED will be rewarded with a PROTECTION point. We may come up with a snazzier term for this down the road, any suggestions? So if you vote 0 on a good movie, you may risk getting no points as all! Also if you vote 5 on a crappy movie, you will risk losing a point.
which really sucks right now because i didn't know this before i voted today. so i just voted a whole bunch of crap today so. oh well i guess i'll have tomorrow to do it :)
The first vote you cast is the vote that will be recorded in our system. This means you better watch the submission and submit an honest vote, as you can't come back the next day and submit a different vote to try and get a point.
that's good because i've seen that happen lots of times that people want there submittions to live or get higher rankings
We are also debating what to do about the auras. We have found a lot of people vote 0 on good movies just to get a DARK aura. Should we just let users select whatever aura they want in their user settings? Let us know what you think! Also be sure to continue to report bugs you find by leaving a comment to this post, or LilJim's previous post! Thanks!
well to be honest i don't believe the dark aura thing it's probably tru but for me i've been dark aura the whole time i've been here. i've always voted 0 but i vote 0 on the shit i think is shit!! i dont' vote on everything 0 like others. but yea i think that would be a good idea for people to change it because i would actually like to see a neutral or hell even a light on my account. but i don't wanna vote high on shit! to have to get it there. I REFUSE TO DO IT!! besides i'm a dark aura and i'm part of the blam club that would go against everything i work for!!
At 10/14/02 09:44 PM, DUDE4U2 wrote:At 10/13/02 06:06 PM, WadeFulp wrote: Very shortly we will be implementing some changes to the voting system. As many of you know we check a movie's score at the 25th, 50th, 75th, and 100th vote. If the score falls below the current check points threshold it is BLAMMED! In the past we had only rewarded the user who casts the deciding vote the BLAM point. We have decided this was unfair to everyone else who contributed in BLAMMING a movie. So now when you log in and you vote either 0 or 1 on a movie and it ends up getting BLAMMED, you will receive a BLAM point! Currently users hold back their vote to try and be the one to get the BLAM point. This causes the Portal to be less efficient. With the new system users will be encouraged to vote as quickly as possible or risk losing their chance at a point!yea i noticed that people hold back there vote to get the blam. well i think this should work nicely. but i don't know. this might start something up so i'm not gonna fully back it all the way up
On the other side of the coin, users voting 2-5 on a movie that doesn't get BLAMMED will be rewarded with a PROTECTION point. We may come up with a snazzier term for this down the road, any suggestions? So if you vote 0 on a good movie, you may risk getting no points as all! Also if you vote 5 on a crappy movie, you will risk losing a point.which really sucks right now because i didn't know this before i voted today. so i just voted a whole bunch of crap today so. oh well i guess i'll have tomorrow to do it :)
The first vote you cast is the vote that will be recorded in our system. This means you better watch the submission and submit an honest vote, as you can't come back the next day and submit a different vote to try and get a point.that's good because i've seen that happen lots of times that people want there submittions to live or get higher rankings
We are also debating what to do about the auras. We have found a lot of people vote 0 on good movies just to get a DARK aura. Should we just let users select whatever aura they want in their user settings? Let us know what you think! Also be sure to continue to report bugs you find by leaving a comment to this post, or LilJim's previous post! Thanks!well to be honest i don't believe the dark aura thing it's probably tru but for me i've been dark aura the whole time i've been here. i've always voted 0 but i vote 0 on the shit i think is shit!! i dont' vote on everything 0 like others. but yea i think that would be a good idea for people to change it because i would actually like to see a neutral or hell even a light on my account. but i don't wanna vote high on shit! to have to get it there. I REFUSE TO DO IT!! besides i'm a dark aura and i'm part of the blam club that would go against everything i work for!!
sorry about that all of you i wuz depositing for my 2nd account for somebody since he's gone for the weekend. plz keep this in mind of my account if u think on it wade ^_^ thx
how will I know if i get protect point, blam point wade.
wade it rocks I also agee about the aurus light does not really apeal to me
At 10/14/02 05:13 PM, TheJoe324 wrote: Exactly, Getting a blam used to be something special, I got 800 by BEING the blamming vote, now all you have to do is vote bad on it and you get rewarded. I don't know HOW many movies I missed and I didn't get angry that I didn't get the blam, I just knew I had to try harder next time. If you make it easier to get blams, they lose their whole meaning. BLAMMING a movie means that you casted the last vote, not that you vote 0 on it. When I look at my blam count, I want to know that I took out that many movies on the last vote, not that I HELPED that many movies get blammed.
What's the difference? You were part of the problem. You and everyone else who held their vote back and didn't vote unless you had a chance to get a BLAM. This caused many movies to sit at 22-23 votes for a long time, and maybe never reach 25. If a movie is crap, and someone votes 0 to remove it they are doing their job, it's not a bad vote, it's a good vote if the movie deserves to be removed. So that person should be rewarded for helping to filter the system. Why should you be the only one rewarded because you cast the vote that triggers the check point? You didn't cast the deciding vote, you just casted another vote. The 24 people who voted before you are the ones who decided if the movie should come or go, you just jumped in and stealed the show. If a movie is a .30 and you come in at 25 and vote 5 the movie would be blammed and you would be rewarded for trying to vote 5 on a piece of crap movie, is that fair?
At 10/14/02 05:29 PM, TheJoe324 wrote: Yeah, now there can be up to 24 people that DIDN'T actually BLAM the movie getting credit for blamming it, of course their vote helped in getting it blammed. but they just hurt it, they didn't KILL it, which is exactly what a BLAM is, when you KILL or DELETE the movie off of the site. I would have NO problem if "Blams" and "Blam points" were separated, but instead they are just added to your normal blam count like you "BLAMMED" the flash. No matter how you would like to think they are the same, they are NOT. Lets see here, taken directly from the FAQ:
Q: What is a BLAM?
A: A "BLAM" is the slang term used to describe the deletion of a Portal movie due to low user scores. Users are credited for BLAMS, and have even formed a BLAM Club!
The DELETION of a portal movie, votes 1-24, 26-49 51-74 and 76-99 don't DELETE the movie, they HELP it towards deletion, but they don't directly delete it, so why are they getting credit for Blams?
You guys really make yourselves sound like a couple of pricks. :)
"Yeah, now there can be up to 24 people that DIDN'T actually BLAM the movie getting credit for blamming it, of course their vote helped in getting it blammed."
You say, "of course their vote helped in getting it blammed." BINGO MORON! They watched the movie, they took the time to vote, they help filter out crap, why shouldn't they get credit? If they spend everyday filtering content on NG and have 5,000 BLAMS GOOD FOR THEM! There will still be people who spend more time filtering content, and they will have higher stats that almost everyone. Maybe a lot of people will have 500 blams, but you'll have 8,000!
Here's your next foolish example:
"A "BLAM" is the slang term used to describe the deletion of a Portal movie due to low user scores. Users are credited for BLAMS, and have even formed a BLAM Club!"
The deletion of a Portal movie due to low user scores! User scores! Not just YOU the deciding vote! It was BLAMMED because of low user scores! ALL THE USERS WHO VOTED LOW! GET IT!?!?!?
FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK...
1. Let us change our auras in our user profiles! No, really - Voting high on crap and low of badass-ness makes us complete fools.
2. Tell us how we can get these so-called "PROTECTION" points. In detail - if you can.
3. Don't hunger for BLAMS so much, everyone! Watch before you vote 0 or 1!
That should hopefully clear some things up. I swear.
At 10/14/02 07:31 PM, Silent_Shadow_2049 wrote: exactly, if i vote 0 on something and it's not within the blam range, i dont want a point for it getting blammed in the future. Like i said in an IRC chat, blamming is considered a skill, you have to earn a BLAM, not just vote 0 on something that is going to be blammed 5 minutes. You can't be lazy about this, do you realize how many blams a person can get within a 24 hour period now? you could get 34-100 or more a day, what good is that? It's just like EXP, blams were meant for one person and ONE preson only. It makes no sense to give out free blams to anyone willing to vote a zero on a good or bad movie. THIS SYSTEM IS FLAWED, FIX IT.
No, the system was flawed before. Look. When you say it takes "Skill" to get a BLAM, what a bunch of BS. Your "skill" means you are all sitting around waiting for a movie to get 24 votes so you can all pounce on it. That's skill? I call that holding back a vote, prolonging the existence of crap on the portal! I call that inefficient filtering of new submissions! Maybe you didn't notice that most of the submissions in the 50 most recent didn't have 20 votes by the time they left the list! Maybe you didn't notice now they have MANY more votes because people are not holding back their votes! This was the problem, and this is why we changed the system. If someone watches 30 movies in a day and votes 0 on 15 of them and 13 of them end up getting blammed, they deserve to get 13 blam points for taking the time to watch the movie and vote. You think you should only get a point because you may not have even watched the movie and you saw "hey, this movie is going to be blammed, I'll just wait and throw a 0 at it!" That's not skill! That's cherry picking! Why should the poor guy that actively watches every submission come in, and votes promptly on it never get any points? Some honest faithful voter could watch everything and vote honestly on it early on, and then you come along, Mr. Cherry Picker, and vote when it's at a checkpoint and get your points. Why shouldn't the other guy who's probably working harder not get a point too?
At 10/14/02 08:28 PM, Silent_Shadow_2049 wrote:
wade, what you fail to realize is, if a group decides to target a user, say they target a new movie submitted by a respectable user who creates 3 or 4 point work, if they get enough people to vote bad on it, they can blam it and they all get points for blamming a good movie. Not only did they just BLAM a good movie, but they get rewarded with a blam point, ALL OF THEM. How good is that system now? I speak on behalf of a few from the Blam Club, of whom do not like this idea, one of our top blammers who had retired when she hit 1337 (that's one thousand three-hundred and thirty-seven) blams. Now she has 1338 thanks to this crappy system you have now. She voted a 1 and got a point she didn't want, thus ruining what she had strived very hard to accomplish. Please do us a favour and please just stick to what the voting system used to be.
If you spent all that time to get your blam totalto say 1337 it should say "LOSER". Are you people here to make your BLAM total say "1337" or help filter the new content on NG? If all you are here to do is spell 1337 in your profile we don't need you.
At 10/14/02 10:35 PM, WadeFulp wrote:At 10/14/02 08:28 PM, Silent_Shadow_2049 wrote:wade, what you fail to realize is, if a group decides to target a user, say they target a new movie submitted by a respectable user who creates 3 or 4 point work, if they get enough people to vote bad on it, they can blam it and they all get points for blamming a good movie. Not only did they just BLAM a good movie, but they get rewarded with a blam point, ALL OF THEM. How good is that system now? I speak on behalf of a few from the Blam Club, of whom do not like this idea, one of our top blammers who had retired when she hit 1337 (that's one thousand three-hundred and thirty-seven) blams. Now she has 1338 thanks to this crappy system you have now. She voted a 1 and got a point she didn't want, thus ruining what she had strived very hard to accomplish. Please do us a favour and please just stick to what the voting system used to be.If you spent all that time to get your blam totalto say 1337 it should say "LOSER". Are you people here to make your BLAM total say "1337" or help filter the new content on NG? If all you are here to do is spell 1337 in your profile we don't need you.
Yeah, I'm with you Wade.
Extreme BLAMmage does not make you cool. Only biased.
At 10/14/02 10:35 PM, WadeFulp wrote:At 10/14/02 08:28 PM, Silent_Shadow_2049 wrote:wade, what you fail to realize is, if a group decides to target a user, say they target a new movie submitted by a respectable user who creates 3 or 4 point work, if they get enough people to vote bad on it, they can blam it and they all get points for blamming a good movie. Not only did they just BLAM a good movie, but they get rewarded with a blam point, ALL OF THEM. How good is that system now? I speak on behalf of a few from the Blam Club, of whom do not like this idea, one of our top blammers who had retired when she hit 1337 (that's one thousand three-hundred and thirty-seven) blams. Now she has 1338 thanks to this crappy system you have now. She voted a 1 and got a point she didn't want, thus ruining what she had strived very hard to accomplish. Please do us a favour and please just stick to what the voting system used to be.If you spent all that time to get your blam totalto say 1337 it should say "LOSER". Are you people here to make your BLAM total say "1337" or help filter the new content on NG? If all you are here to do is spell 1337 in your profile we don't need you.
The two people who previously had 1337 amount of blams DID help out after, they just never casted the blamming vote after that. they vote down tons of shit every day to help it get filtered out so don't say that they don't help get crap blammed.
The point is... Don't lose your dinosaur.
At 10/14/02 10:31 PM, WadeFulp wrote:At 10/14/02 07:31 PM, Silent_Shadow_2049 wrote: exactly, if i vote 0 on something and it's not within the blam range, i dont want a point for it getting blammed in the future. Like i said in an IRC chat, blamming is considered a skill, you have to earn a BLAM, not just vote 0 on something that is going to be blammed 5 minutes. You can't be lazy about this, do you realize how many blams a person can get within a 24 hour period now? you could get 34-100 or more a day, what good is that? It's just like EXP, blams were meant for one person and ONE preson only. It makes no sense to give out free blams to anyone willing to vote a zero on a good or bad movie. THIS SYSTEM IS FLAWED, FIX IT.No, the system was flawed before. Look. When you say it takes "Skill" to get a BLAM, what a bunch of BS. Your "skill" means you are all sitting around waiting for a movie to get 24 votes so you can all pounce on it. That's skill? I call that holding back a vote, prolonging the existence of crap on the portal! I call that inefficient filtering of new submissions! Maybe you didn't notice that most of the submissions in the 50 most recent didn't have 20 votes by the time they left the list! Maybe you didn't notice now they have MANY more votes because people are not holding back their votes! This was the problem, and this is why we changed the system. If someone watches 30 movies in a day and votes 0 on 15 of them and 13 of them end up getting blammed, they deserve to get 13 blam points for taking the time to watch the movie and vote. You think you should only get a point because you may not have even watched the movie and you saw "hey, this movie is going to be blammed, I'll just wait and throw a 0 at it!" That's not skill! That's cherry picking! Why should the poor guy that actively watches every submission come in, and votes promptly on it never get any points? Some honest faithful voter could watch everything and vote honestly on it early on, and then you come along, Mr. Cherry Picker, and vote when it's at a checkpoint and get your points. Why shouldn't the other guy who's probably working harder not get a point too?
Ok, lemme set some stuff straight. When we hold Blam sessions at the blam club, we work hard IF NOT HARDER than most of these people here. It takes a lot of time and effort to hold these sessions, and a LOT of prep work. And these LOSERS you are referring to are what we call Targetmasters/mistresses, they are responsible for bringing crap submissions up for review, and are responsible for the blams. I only do the refresh thing when i haven't gotten a blam in days. Most of the time i either just vote on a VOD or just vote and not worry, i only have 71 blams, i could have double or triple that if i really wanted, but im happy with what i have.
Thanks for dropping by the Blam Club IRC channel, though. I'm sure this will all work out so that everyone is happy.
I think the vote counter should be removied. If there is no vote counter then people dont know when a movie is about to be blammed so they wont wait to vote one it because they wont know which vote will be the blam vote. I think this would solve the problem.
Wow. Who knew people could get so upset over blamming crap? I personally dont give a rats ass about blamming and sh*t. No offense to blam clubbers but chill! Take a couple of prozacs and eat some cereal. Newgrounds is about watching/playing entertaining flash movies and games. Not popularity based on deleting them. !@#$ POPULARITY! Social BS!
Well, from reading all this, I'm getting the basic impression that BLAMs are *sacred* to some people. While I don't think it's that big a deal, I also think that we should at least respect how others think.
Maybe you can keep BLAMs and Blam Points seperate things, like someone suggested earlier?
And maybe even keep giving out BLAMs for the triggering vote?
That could solve this big 'civil unrest'... :-)
At 10/13/02 08:00 PM, dragonzrtite wrote: who made lesbians kissing?
Do we Care, you idiot!!
At 10/13/02 08:08 PM, TheJoe324 wrote:At 10/13/02 08:00 PM, dragonzrtite wrote: who made lesbians kissing?Well, the person who submitted it didn't technically "Make" it unless he was the one holding the camera
Does it matter Well no really it does not!!!
At 10/14/02 11:03 PM, SoulRifter wrote:At 10/14/02 10:35 PM, WadeFulp wrote:If you spent all that time to get your blam totalto say 1337 it should say "LOSER". Are you people here to make your BLAM total say "1337" or help filter the new content on NG? If all you are here to do is spell 1337 in your profile we don't need you.Umm Wade I think you fail to realize how important blams are to people. Before this new system, it was something special to get a blam. Now all I have to do is sit in the portal, and vote 0 on every single one of the lowest scoring submissions, and I am practically guranteed a blam. I've accumulated 16 new blams today, in hardly any time at all. The way you intended the blamming system to work in the first place may not have been the way it turned out, but thats the way it IS. How can you tell someone, no matter how retarded you think it is, that getting an 1337 number of blams is lame? You don't seem to realize how much time people really contribute to this site, and how important something seemingly so insignificant as an exact number of blams is to them. What you've basically done with this new blamming system, is taken away something which once meant something to some of us, and turned it into a game, which anyone can win if they have even the slightest amount of intelligence. Now it takes absolutely no effort to get a blam, where it once took patience, and exact timing to succeed. And no, just because those people contribute to a blam doesn't mean they got the blam. All they did was set up the kill for someone else to make. They didn't blam the movie, they just prepared it to die. Its two different things, and I think you are stretching the Blamming FAQ to an extent which makes it agreeable with your terms.
Your right Blams where special and were a one off thing now today i got atleast seven it just not right maybe Wade should really Re-Think this new system.
At 10/13/02 11:15 PM, TropicanaClock wrote: Yo un ban me from your chat room this is inconvient I didnt flood seriously i didnt i was not doing a thing i got baned with out warning to I would of stoped if some one asked me to stop what I was doing which was not flooding oh well ack guess im out of luck at the moment well unban me if you will
Your very sad with your life we don't need to know!
I'll repeat my question...
Will the new system influence "voting power"?
At 10/15/02 08:13 AM, SoulRifter wrote:
Yeah that'd probably be a better idea. Oh well, sorry for complaining Wade, but I still have problems with this system.
Bitch and moan all you want, the new system is better. If you don't think so look at the TOP 50 most recent! Today I checked and even movies that are in the TOP 10 most recent have 20-40 votes or more already! That's a HUGE improvement. It's because people aren't holding back their votes and are voting more freely. This is in NG's best interest. We can't change the system to make a couple people happy so they can spell "1337" GET REAL! Uhg! You make me so f'ing angry. Don't you see how selfish you are being? Jesus.
The new system will stay as it is. However we are working on a seperate little ranking system to reflect how many total points you have. (BLAM+PROTECTION). So those who had 1337 Blams will start at the 1337+ rank level, where most people are no where near that yet. If they weren't silly and didn't stay at 1337, they could have had an even bigger head start.
Blamming isn't a skill. Anyone can do it that wants to take the time. Your patience and skill is what was screwing up the system. If you can't see that having 20-30 people sitting there holding back their vote and letting a movie sit at 15-23 votes until it goes off the TOP 50 list isn't a problem then you are an f'ing idiot. The system is working MUCH MUCH MUCH better now. Look at how colorful the TOP 50 list is! It's because the crap is being removed faster, and good movies are getting more votes and reaching a level where they are assigned a color code faster.
Also the point of the BLAM club is to gang up on crap movies to help get them out of the portal faster. Why should 90% of the BLAM club members vote 0 only to have some other 10% of pricks hold back until they can get a BLAM? Why shouldn't they all be rewarded for their efforts?
What you must realize is that less than 1% of our daily traffic actually goes through the TOP 50 list and helps filter it. The other 99% of the people are looking at movies that already have over 100 votes, like the movies on the front page or in our featured sections.
So we want to reward the less than 1% of the people who help filter through the new submissions.
Another thing.
If someone votes on 5 movies a day, deposits and leaves, and another person votes on 50 movie a day, the both would have the same experience points! Now the person who puts in the over time gets rewarded and has something to show for it.
We aren't going to give anyone a special point for being the vote that triggers the check point, as that would bring us back to the same problem. So if you want to have an impressive BLAM count, instead of having 500 BLAMS compared to most people's 10-20, now you can go for 15,000 BLAMS and 20,000 PROTECTION points, or whatever.
At 10/15/02 06:45 AM, DaFreaK_B_ wrote: I'll repeat my question...
Will the new system influence "voting power"?
No it will not.
At 10/15/02 01:13 PM, WadeFulp wrote:
We aren't going to give anyone a special point for being the vote that triggers the check point, as that would bring us back to the same problem. So if you want to have an impressive BLAM count, instead of having 500 BLAMS compared to most people's 10-20, now you can go for 15,000 BLAMS and 20,000 PROTECTION points, or whatever.
Yeah but thats not the point Wade. What good is it to have 20,000+ blams when they don't even mean anything?
At 10/15/02 01:53 PM, SoulRifter wrote: Yeah but thats not the point Wade. What good is it to have 20,000+ blams when they don't even mean anything? Anyway, I appologized for complaining. You don't have to get so angry.
What do you mean they don't mean anything? Sure they do! People still have to take the time to vote, it's still work! In fact maybe more work than you did! All you had to do was watch for a movie to get near a checkpoint then send in your vote, perhaps without watching the movie! So the people who took the time to actually watch the movie shouldn't be rewarded?
You are not making any valid points. You have to look at the bigger picture. You have to think about what is good for Newgrounds as a whole. If 20,000 BLAM points doesn't mean anything, than neither would 10,000 experience points I guess if you go by your thinking.
At 10/15/02 01:15 PM, WadeFulp wrote:At 10/15/02 06:45 AM, DaFreaK_B_ wrote: I'll repeat my question...No it will not.
Will the new system influence "voting power"?
Ok, thanks for answering. I think it's cool you keep adding new things. Rock on, Wade ;)
Here's my impression of BLAM-hungry freaks - "YARRRR! THAT RECENT SUBMISSION IS LABELED VERGE OF DEATH!! I MUST NOT WASTE TIME WATCHING SUCH SHIT! I NEED A BLAM RIGHT NOW! MORE BLAMS MAKE ME COOL!! YAAAARRRRRRR!!!"
No! Bad! BAD!
Where can we change our auras and where are our "settings"?
At 10/13/02 08:00 PM, dragonzrtite wrote: who made lesbians kissing?
Who made me say Who gives a shit shut up i do not care if you a masturbation freak i do not care if a friend told you i do not care. Ever tried to search type in anything and at lease 1 thing will come up on it.
