Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/13/10 10:55 AM, rune-hunter wrote: Yeah Holland is an easy name for our country.
We got north and south Holland that are provinces in our country.

I'm such an outcast. In my profile it says Netherlands =).

At 8/15/10 10:25 AM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/15/10 09:50 AM, rune-hunter wrote: That's a big accomplishment.

Not really. I don't understand how people get banned from reviewing myself. Don't you have to be really abusive for a stack of reviews?

It seems that I wrote to short reviews that got me banned.

At 8/15/10 04:17 PM, rune-hunter wrote:

At 8/15/10 10:25 AM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/15/10 09:50 AM, rune-hunter wrote: That's a big accomplishment.

Not really. I don't understand how people get banned from reviewing myself. Don't you have to be really abusive for a stack of reviews?

It seems that I wrote to short reviews that got me banned.

I guess i'm one of those lucky ones then. No review bans and only a few forum bans of a day each. I tend to stick to the rules and writing lengthy reviews isn't a big hassle considering you're critiqueing the animation or game.

At 8/15/10 06:21 PM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/15/10 05:16 PM, sixflab wrote: I guess i'm one of those lucky ones then. No review bans and only a few forum bans of a day each. I tend to stick to the rules and writing lengthy reviews isn't a big hassle considering you're critiqueing the animation or game.

That's such biased shit banning someone for short reviews.

Well, it's in the Reviewing FAQ, chapter, line and verse. You might get all of your reviews deleted for writing short, shitty reviews just to get high in the rankings. If you're on this list, you're under higher scrutiny.

Sure if they're one liners and 20 are done in one day you might deserve it for spamming but its my belief that if you can get at least two lines that summarise the flash to the reader then there's no need to go into extreme detail.

Do you read other people's reviews? Just a thought, as I rarely do - the only time I read reviews, aside from when I'm modding is when I read the reviews I receive for my works.

I write with the reader in mind, not the flash artist.

A great thought if you're reviewing a DVD, for example, which the actors and director are extremely unlikely to read your critique on. However, with the way that Newgrounds works, you can advise the author how to improve and they actually have a decent chance to read it and act on these suggestions.

I think that is a reason I get lots of responses.

Wow, this thread. I have to point out something. Just because they have the most reviews doesn't necessarily mean they're the top or best reviewers. I think that to be a top reviewer you have to give out the most "useful" reviews than just having the total amount. Therefore this thread is in accurate.

At 8/16/10 05:15 AM, Neonleo wrote: Wow, this thread. I have to point out something. Just because they have the most reviews doesn't necessarily mean they're the top or best reviewers. I think that to be a top reviewer you have to give out the most "useful" reviews than just having the total amount. Therefore this thread is in accurate.

How do you propose we make such a list? Going through the hundreds upon hundreds of pages to check how many reviews are marked 'helpful'? Updating would take dozens of hours and by the time you get to the end, the list has already changed and lost its accuracy.

Besides, those 'helpful' or 'unhelpful' marks mean jack anyway since people are just voting on reviews whatever they feel like. Like give a 9/10 or lower to a popular submission and it's gonna be marked unhelpful, even if you write 20+ lines on what's good and what could be better. Also, if I wanted to get up this list really high, I'll just - bomb the shit out of all the other reviewers which wouldn't be fair.

So doing it like you suggest isn't very practical or meaningful. Besides the meaning of "top" here was the highest review count anyway, because you just can't make a list based on quality.

At 8/16/10 08:54 AM, Auz wrote: Besides the meaning of "top" here was the highest review count anyway, because you just can't make a list based on quality.

That's all you had to say. My bad for not understanding correctly.

At 8/16/10 05:15 AM, Neoncouch wrote: Wow, this thread. I have to point out something. Just because they have the most reviews doesn't necessarily mean they're the top or best reviewers. I think that to be a top reviewer you have to give out the most "useful" reviews than just having the total amount. Therefore this thread is in accurate.

Yeah, your right in someway.
I will admit that my reviews aren't that good...
I just have the problem that I'm dutch, it's sometimes hard to translate dutch terms and words to English.
So, that's why my reviews don't really have smart talk about audio and animations and stuff because I can't come up with those English words.
Sometimes I read reviews from you guys with these smart words and terms.
It makes me jaloues that I can't write such good reviews...

At 8/16/10 05:21 PM, rune-hunter wrote: Sometimes I read reviews from you guys with these smart words and terms.
It makes me jaloues that I can't write such good reviews...

I actually find that to be a crime from time to time, and I'm a criminal for doing it myself. I often times (and noticed some others have too) use these highly sophisticated words while the review quality is terrible. I just did it in a review I wrote. The glittering generalities don't make the review better, it's something I need to improve on as well.

At 8/16/10 04:53 AM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/16/10 02:36 AM, Coop83 wrote:

At 8/15/10 06:21 PM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/15/10 05:16 PM, sixflab wrote:

That's such biased shit banning someone for short reviews.

Well, it's in the Reviewing FAQ, chapter, line and verse. You might get all of your reviews deleted for writing short, shitty reviews just to get high in the rankings. If you're on this list, you're under higher scrutiny.

I know which is why some of the shortest reviews I write are about two lines at the least and that's when I can summarise them up easily and not offer anything etc.

As a critic of a film, which I have watched, I've actually worded it as if to say that the director could have done this, an actor could have done that and so forth. They aren't going to read it, but I still put in what I'd like to see differently.

How is your style different from YouTube comments?

Do you read other people's reviews? Just a thought, as I rarely do - the only time I read reviews, aside from when I'm modding is when I read the reviews I receive for my works.

I do actually, I'm fascinated by the reviewing on this website, sometimes I read a page or two when I update the list. I also have a penchant for lurking through the top reviwer's reviews. :P

Rulestick - Ultor. Don't write reviews like that. That's the best conclusion I can give you :P

At 8/16/10 04:53 AM, Aci6 wrote: But these flash are old as, the author isn't likely to read my review six years or so in the future and say 'hey that's a great idea I'm gonna implement it'.

I disagree. Of course, we don't have stats but I would certainly appreciate a review of ANYTHING of mine - far more so if it had insightful constructive criticism. I like to think I've advanced as a game designer and an animator but if you write about how a specific part of a level frustrated you or how a specific spot of animation fell flat, it's far more likely to give me new insights - and is probably more interesting and useful to the 'bystander viewer' - than if you just quickly say it was great/terrible.

At 8/16/10 04:53 AM, Aci6 wrote: But these flash are old as, the author isn't likely to read my review six years or so in the future and say 'hey that's a great idea I'm gonna implement it'.

I once reviewed a flash that was 7 years old. And guess what? The author responded to me. He said: "I appreciate that, even after 7 years." :)

At 8/18/10 10:45 AM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/17/10 09:03 AM, Coop83 wrote:

At 8/16/10 04:53 AM, Aci6 wrote:

How is your style different from YouTube comments?

I don't go on YouTube that much but when I do its normally stuff like "Yeah, check out part 1:23... WOW" or "Awesome video".

Exactly - what we refer to as spam in the later case, but not in the former, as it actually makes a valid point... just.

Why would you even ask such a question when you've clearly probably (I assume) have checked out my reviews during the process of this conversation and noticed they are nothing like YouTube comments.

I know that your reviews aren't spam, otherwise I would have hefted the banstick long ago. I merely wished to see your opinions on this, as I like to see some sort of feedback of my moderating.

Call it reviewing my review modding, if you will.

If you write length reviews - do just that, but let me do my own reviews and leave it at that instead of opting for superiority which is the interpretation I'm getting from you.

I'm not seeking to get into a popularity, quality control or any other sort of contest with anyone regarding reviews, except for the volume of them. You have me beaten, but I'm here for the long term, so I might have a chance to catch someone at some stage :P

At 8/18/10 03:17 AM, Haggard wrote:

At 8/16/10 04:53 AM, Aci6 wrote: But these flash are old as, the author isn't likely to read my review six years or so in the future and say 'hey that's a great idea I'm gonna implement it'.

I once reviewed a flash that was 7 years old. And guess what? The author responded to me. He said: "I appreciate that, even after 7 years." :)

That's pretty cool.
I don't really get much reponses from authors lately...

One reason why you may not receive responses as quickly for older things is that authors don't get notifications of reviews and they're more likely to check newer flash for reviews since those are the ones more likely to be reviewed.

I respond to every review I receive but since I don't check my submissions incessantly, I might not know for quite a while that I've gotten another. If you review many submissions from a single author and want to notify them straight away, I think it's ok to PM them. Not if you've only written one though. Of course, it depends on the author.

Personally, if someone had written an in-depth review of something of mine, I wouldn't mind at all (and would probably appreciate) a quick PM letting me know.

Hey I plan on dominating IceDragon64 by the next update, maybe Michaelangelo to become
the 7th best Canadian on Newgrounds. Anyways, good luck everyone, I don't think I'll be in
the top 5 Review Gainers this month.
PS: Some honorable Mentions
Aci6
I think he's doing awesome for a guy with no time to review! He should be writing alot now
that Ericho's hot on his tail this time around.
Sixflab
He can write so many reviews for considering how long they are he really in inspirational.
Ericho
He has lots of time on his hands and can write a couple hundred reviews per week. He's
amazing and is propaply the fastest reviewer nowadays.
Iluminate
Very inspirational the most constructive (him and Wayne) in reviewing and can get alot done
when he wants to.
~X~
Amazing guy been the top reviewer since 2001 I think, my inspiration (and illuminate) can get
alot done, surprising how much he can write with a busy job.
Coop83
Really good guy can get alot done considering what he has to do, mod, audio reviews, art
reviews and pretty much any stat list he has to work on so he's doing awesome with keeping
up with the pack.

At 8/20/10 03:26 PM, tyler2513 wrote: Hey I plan on dominating IceDragon64 by the next update, maybe Michaelangelo to become
the 7th best Canadian on Newgrounds. Anyways, good luck everyone, I don't think I'll be in
the top 5 Review Gainers this month.
PS: Some honorable Mentions

Sixflab
He can write so many reviews for considering how long they are he really in inspirational.

Thanks!!! It's more about pacing than anything. Set goals and standards and it makes it just a little easier to do. They could always be longer but not everyone likes walls of text.

At 8/20/10 03:26 PM, tyler2513 wrote:

iIluminate
Very inspirational the most constructive (him and Wayne) in reviewing and can get alot done
when he wants to.

thanks buddy ^_^

Hey... I'm from Canada.. lol

I added Illuminate on PSN, are there any other people with PSN accounts that I can add?

I have a PSN account dude, redhottree. Yeah I know, noobie name.

At 8/7/10 01:46 AM, Aci6 wrote:

012.) 3707 ||+297|| Ericho FRENZY PACE!

Frenzy Pace? That's awesome, I like it :)

At 8/23/10 11:32 AM, Frenzy wrote:

At 8/7/10 01:46 AM, Aci6 wrote:

012.) 3707 ||+297|| Ericho FRENZY PACE!

Frenzy Pace? That's awesome, I like it :)

LMAO.

And my PSN name is even worse:P

At 8/22/10 08:05 PM, Aci6 wrote:

At 8/22/10 06:13 PM, rune-hunter wrote: I added Illuminate on PSN, are there any other people with PSN accounts that I can add?

Maybe sometime in the future for me. I only have LIVE on Xbox.
Sorry about the update people - new laptop with no documents, its all on my friend's external hard drive and she's refusing to give it to me -_-. So update possibly in the next few days when I can my hand on those review files.

Hopefully she will come to her senses and just let you use the stuff on the hard drive. She can't be using it 24/7.

I've created a calendar for this list with many special events and awards. Don't worry
you guys won't have to be involved these are just suggestions that I'll be examining
I don't even know why I decided to post this.
World Reviewers
Date: October 1st
Event: Adding stats seeing the best country and their respresentatives
I'll only be showing that stupid list every OCtober 1st don't worry I'm not
taking advantage of an extra unnecessary list just a cool stat to look at.
Knockout
Date: August 30th-October 30th
Knockout will be an event where I'll choose 10 contestants (and no you don't have to do anything) based on the top Review gainer appearances and every update I'll eliminate the user with the least amount of Reviews gained no people, not another unneccesary piece of crap just a boost to keep and help you guys get going.
Contestants: XwayneColtX, Illuminate, Aci6, Ericho, Wegra, Coop83, Sixflab, MayorMccheese, Haggard, Tyler2513.
Awards
Date: December 30th
This is the end of the year awards where we can announce winners and yes I'll have a poll shown on December 20th the top nominees (top 5-) for the award these awards include:
Rookie Of The Year
This award is based on the rookie of the list who's ranked the highest but haggard still has a big chance of surpassing me
1. Tyler2513
2. Haggard
3. ???
4. ???
Updater Of The Year
Based on the best updater or who updated the list the most
1. Aci6
2. illuminate
3. ???
4. ???
Top Reviewer
Based on who got Most Reviews gained most times
1. Ericho-4
2. Sixflab-2
3. illuminate-1
4. XWayneColtX-1
Ultimate List Update
Based on user who's won the most Updater of the year awards
2005-Auz
2006-Auz
2007-Auz
2008-Metal Therapy
2009-Metal-Therapy
2010???
1. Auz
2. Metal Therapy
3. Aci6
4. ???
Review Champion
Based on the user who's rank is highest on the list
2005-XWayneColtX
2006-XWayneCOltX
2007-XWayneColtX
2008-XWayneColtX
2009-XWayneColtX
1. XWayneColtX
2. KWAS71KCK
3. illuminate
4. Cyberdevil
Remember these are suggestions I know your all going to say "great idea but unecessary and to off topic"
just putting it out there. BUT THE AWARDS THING I REALLY WORKED HARD ON I LIKE THAT IDEA!!!!

i'm gonna kick some *ss and swallow some bubblegum.

Knockout sounds great. Just make sure you include me sometime soon. :P

At 8/27/10 01:03 AM, Dew wrote: Hah! Look at all you young wippersnapper reviewers. Back in my day I could review with the likes of any of you, these days it's easy to be on the top of the list. I remember weeks where Cyberdevil would put up 500, and I'd put up 200 thinking It'd be enough to be the top on this list.

I would love to see people be more active but too many inactives on the list causes little movement most of the time. I very rarely take days to do 50+ reviews anymore so I don't see myself going anywhere near those record paces.

At 8/26/10 02:47 PM, tyler2513 wrote: Knockout
Date: August 30th-October 30th

Interesting concept you have here to encourage people to squeeze in more reviews in their spare time. I like it as sort of a side contest and RRC stuff would supply me with a good pool of submissions to stay competitive.

REIVEW NOTES
I know, no links I'm just updating a short no link one.
Top 100 Reviewers Update #1
1.19087||--17||XwaynecoltX
2.15430||--8||KWAS71KCK
3.8760||+33||Illuminate
4.7060||--8||CyberDevil
5.7959||--4||Milinko959
6.5082||+8||Yoink
7.4866||-00||M14-REAL-2001
8.4455||-2||RyanAn
9.4271||-00||Hamy-Jamy
10.4129||-4||M-A-R-C-U-S
11. 4044||+357||Ericho
12. 3941||+297||Aci6
13. 3306||--3||j00bie
14. 2808||--8||El-Syd
15. 2720||--2||bezman
16. 2329||+102||Wegra
17. 2364||--2||iamweird33
18. 2243||-00||Violent-AIM
19. 2008||-00||thepromaster
20. 1978||-00||artificial
21. 1926||--5||DUDE4U
22. 1893||--3||Dew
23. 1850||+36||Frenzy^
24. 1840||--2||Compdude
25. 1822||+137||sixflab
26. 1775||+10||Coop83
27. 1757||--00||Afrounderscore
28. 1735||+1||iscrulz
29. 1621||--3||SeizureDog
30. 1607||--3||RemRulzz
31. 1604||+14||reddeye5
32. 1570||--7||chris-the-stick2
33. 1553||--1||jonthomson
34. 1476||--1||2good2b4goten
35. 1474||--1||Aznime
36. 1466||+6||Zouk
37. 1457||--3||wizardman
38. 1440||-00||Antigravity
29. 1433||--2||daedo-the-mofo
40. 1432||-00||MAYORMCCHEESE
41. 1425||-00||darkside7000
42. 1396||+86||Tyler2513^
43. 1392||+39||Icedragon64^
44. 1389||-00||MegaGold
45. 1368||-00||DevaStato-R-da-X
46. 1375||-00||SK
47. 1365||-00||Michelangelo
48. 1299||-00||Evil-C
49. 1290||-00||Chris-Aldin
50. 1261||+41||evil-iron
51. 1243||-00||zeppelinstel47
52. 1239||-00||ramagi
53. 1239||-00||Archile
54. 1237||-00||bahaumut
55. 1233||+3||dazmi
56. 1201||+2||Ray80
57. 1098||-00||sumidiotdude
58. 1189||+2||emanhattan
59. 1187||-00||archmetaknight
60. 1174||-00||livecorpse
61. 1158||+2||BMX2007
62. 1127||-00||bila
63. 1117||-00||emauhnus
64. 1104||+1||VelvetDarkRocks
65. 1103||-00||TigerChick
66. 1098||+5||Mindchamber
67. 1097||+1||OrgGladiator
68. 1085||--1||hongkongexpress
69. 1079||-00||badazz5001
70. 1071||+53||rune-hunter^
71. 1035||--2||HeReTik
72. 1028||--1||freelance-magician
73. 1013||--1||GAMECUBICLE
74. 1011||-00||Fro
75. 1000||-00||angstdrillhead
76. 1000||--6||TheRandomDot
77. 960||-00||JeffShaw
78. 957||-00||Static^
79. 957||--2||kospas
80. 951||-00||camelhadinosaur
81. 947||-00||drkpower
82. 941||-00||Nylo
83. 939||-00||Xalyx
84. 921||-00||darklilangel23
85. 912||--1||trixiaoyu
86. 912||+2||TheBoogley
87. 902||--1||CorpseGrinderClock
88. 897||--1||ReneGadeGirl
89. 884||+6||Faires
90. 883||--0||U-Frontin
91. 883||--1||kupaman
92. 883||+1||StarBerry
93. 876||--1|ornery
94. 860||--1||axolotl1
95. 863||+1||Ultor
96. 851||+4||Haggard
97. 838||+1|MY
98. 842||-00||Th-E
99. 1841||--1||sk8tergirl13
100. 836||-00||BlackPlastic
Top 5 Gainers
5. Tyler2513=86
4. Wegra=102
3. Sixflab=137
2. Aci6=297
1. Ericho=357
Top 5 Losses
1. XwaynecoltX=17
2.KWAS71KCK=8
3.CyberDevil=8
4.El-Syd=8
5.chris-the-stick2=7