At 9/25/18 02:04 PM, Dangerous-D wrote: @TomFulp

quick question is the restart time still the same on the voting for each day, mine was around 9pm when I first started voting back in 2000

It's still midnight EST, so if you're on the west coast it's 9pm. For the first day after this update, it was changed to allow you get 10XP in any 24 hour window but we realized there would be some big headaches there and it got changed back.

Gosh! There is a lot that been overhauled, and once again I'm having mixed feelings, both very positive and negative.

Merging the review and the voting bar under one voting bar that is based on the "5 star" format of the review score is kind of genius, especially with the updated Tankman face that encompasses a fuller gamut of emotions than Pico did. I can just vote according to how I felt.

Sometimes I honestly did not truly hate the movies I voted to blam, nor did I truly like the movies I voted to save. I usually voted based a mixture of how I felt about them and their objective quality. It was also strange occruance when a movie got high vote bar scores but low review scores.

I also like that the exp gain has been expanded to include art and music. Now if I'm having a short day, I can just browse the art section for some quick exp. But then there's the problem.

Newgrounds is under the threat of irrelevancy, this is not the days when it made small news headlines, nor is the days when the Behemoth launched the console version of Alien Hominid. Sites like Youtube and instagram are eclipsing Newgrounds, and the thing keeping Newgrounds afloat is a dedicated fanbase, a history of popular flashes and nostalgia factor, and the fact that this website is purely dedicated to art, animation, music, and games. When Newgrounds was brought up in conversation between my friends, my friends say "who still goes to Newgrounds?" and I gently say "I do..." It is possible for Newgrounds to go under fast if the site does not rake in enough money to buy more server space and hard drives in order to continue cataloguing the billions of flash files it has accumulated. Files need to be blammed in order to avoid a potential overload, and files are blammed and kept in check because the dedicated userbase would take time out of their day to vote of flashes, saving only those that are worthy of salvation. Fortunately has said that the big problem is large files, not necessary just bad flash since bad flash is mostly tiny.

Still, if most users will go to the art portal, the flash portal will remain unchecked. This is why I would suggest giving users five votes for each category rather than five votes for all categories. That would make a max of 50 points each day, but a 10 point cap per category.

The reason I get that there is a limit to voting is so that people don't cap early, and be granted godly voting power when they aren't worthy of it. That way, their exp is genuine experience, and high level users will have seen their fair amount of gems and crap. Having a limit of five votes for each category would ensure that each category(The art, audio, games and movies portals) would get checked.

I noticed other changes including the ability to edit one's previous reviews, with privacy and anti-harassment measures in mind I think. I don't quite agree with this. Back then, the things you said were permanent, and you would be subject to a degree of mockery if you said anything that may have been embarrassing. Suffice to say, people do change over time, and I can speak for myself that there is a lot a media here that I feel differently about now than I did back then, but the thing is that those etchings I have made, are landmarks in a way. They are a snapshot of who I was back then, and to go back and change those things would be a tad, Orwellian to say the least. Instead, I suggest allowing users to change their scores and reviews, but keeping a "faded" version of the original with the new score and review at the bottom.

(Please delete this post lol )

Is the dialog for how much xp we need to get to reach the next level going to be returning for when we vote on our fifth submission of the day?

At 9/20/18 04:06 PM, TomFulp wrote: @liljim just rolled out our big voting and review overhaul!

Here is what has changed:

3) You can now edit both your score and review. You can delete your review, too.

I can't see this being exploited at all for malicious purposes.

4) You still have to score a submission in order to review it but you can now hide your score if you aren't into that sort of thing; we've talked to a lot of artists who aren't.

What's even the point of combining review scores with vote scores if you can just hide the big fat goose egg you left behind a smarmy facade of giving a thumbs up to someone's work?

5) You can now react to reviews with emotes, in place of the old +/- system.

Yes, brilliant, now ratings for reviews no longer reflect their usefulness to the author, but how the reader feels about the reviewer instead.

Take it for a spin and let us know what you think!

I have and I think it blows.

If you've been lurking NG and never signed up, this would be a great time to make an account and start engaging with all the cool people here.

Why should they when all of their input will either be ignored or undone when someone decides it doesn't kiss enough ass?

We are now ignoring the "anonymous" vote data from 2000-2015.

Welcome to Neuturgrounds, where we change the rules and discard the score board we used to use because we don't like the results.

As a result, we have old submissions with lower vote totals and high scores that might not best reflect community consensus.

Now would be a GREAT time to browse the Best of All Time rankings and give some honest scores to the submissions you see. We expect everything to self-correct with time.

No, fuck you, fuck whoever supports this, fuck whoever came up with it, I'm not doing that. I already put in the time voting the way it used to be for a decade, if a good game now has a shit score because you threw out the old ratings system in favor of letting shitty reviews determine that game's score, the author of that game can take a long walk off a short cliff for all I give a shit, it's not my fault the upvotes I gave from back then are being thrown in the trash.

At 9/20/18 05:03 PM, TomFulp wrote:

At 9/20/18 05:00 PM, GeoKureli wrote: @tomfulp I think this could be more clearly laid out to users. Many people see the voting strs and the review field and assume you must write a review in order to vote. People may decide not to vote at this point, so I recommend hiding the "Share your feedback" field entirely until a star rating is selected. I may be in the minority here, so I'd like to hear the opinions of others.

This was being considered during dev and still might be the best way to go... so that may change.

Perfect, let's hide an integral part of user feedback to authors behind another, because more labyrinthian design is what this site needs.

At 9/20/18 05:56 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 9/20/18 04:06 PM, TomFulp wrote: Ok so to explain our voting system... Prior to 2015, you could vote on the same entry every day if you wanted to and keep driving its score up or down (this is where the term zero bombing started). We logged the votes but we didn't keep any long-term logs of who had cast the vote.

I miss those days, the fact that I used that to exploit with my high voting power with the artist scouting system in the Art Portal to get so many people pruned from being scouted at one point I think I managed to get 1/4 of all scouted artists pruned. see if someone scouts (scouter) someone and the scoutee gets unscouted the scouter and any one the scoutee scouted along the branch gets unscouted as well.*evil laughter*

And that is exactly why the scouting system was always motherfucking stupid.

"Hey guys, instead of just creating a portal with a Judgment phase where shitty submissions could be culled purely through voting, let's make a Jenga tower hierarchy where pulling out the weakest link topples the whole tower, because that's a smart idea!"

At 10/1/18 04:17 PM, IoTheEternal wrote: When you go to respond to a review by clicking your little "bell" notifications and you click the reply arrow to a review, it currently does nothing. This sorta makes sense now why people are just reacting to reviews, or reacting first, then clicking the actual song to respond to it on the page. Can this please be fixed?

What browser are you using? It appears to be working on Chrome.

Can they bring back the box that stated the exact time and day when you voted on a submission? I found it very useful when looking at older submissions.

At 9/22/18 04:57 PM, Lambtaco wrote: Feature request: Delete forum activity based on a date range. Or just prior to a selected date.

Regarding this..

At 9/26/18 08:29 AM, Alter-native wrote: I noticed other changes including the ability to edit one's previous reviews, with privacy and anti-harassment measures in mind I think. I don't quite agree with this. Back then, the things you said were permanent, and you would be subject to a degree of mockery if you said anything that may have been embarrassing. Suffice to say, people do change over time, and I can speak for myself that there is a lot a media here that I feel differently about now than I did back then, but the thing is that those etchings I have made, are landmarks in a way. They are a snapshot of who I was back then, and to go back and change those things would be a tad, Orwellian to say the least. Instead, I suggest allowing users to change their scores and reviews, but keeping a "faded" version of the original with the new score and review at the bottom.

...this sums up my views here perfectly. Flattering or no, the past is what shapes you; lets you grow. It's humbling. Forgetting your history seems to be the one mistake humanity does over and over, and it always ends up having diastrous consequence. In this case: it'd just be a shame. I feel like all of us are involved in this great cultural legacy that is NG, and that goes for both the good and bad, the refined as well as the naive/edgy and entertaining. It's all chapters to the story of not just the user but the community as a whole.

At 9/20/18 10:01 PM, TomFulp wrote: We're planning a bulk delete depot where you can bulk delete specific categories of site interactions, most likely based on this mock-up:

...which is why I really real don't like this feature-in-planning. Artists and users deleting their history at whim; shaving away large chunks of community culture with it... not to mention potential hacked accounts getting raided, abandoned accounts taken over by others, and such...

If this feature does come to be I really hope you've introduced two-factor authentication (via email would be nice) before. And I wouldn't mind that 'Request Account Deletion' button, or whatever button this feature brings in, hidden away a bit more. Visiting the Account Settings page now always holds a small fear that I might accidentally click it.

Really hope that action has to be confirmed via email too.

I understand the want for freedoms like this, but I still really don't like the idea of it, or for removal to be such a simple process if it has to exist. I'd rather there was some clause every time you write or submit something (or create your account) that says it'll stay there forever no matter what - unless it's infringing, malicious or personal in a way that it actually merits removal. These terms could be added in retrospectively, too.

Shouldn't sacrifice the whole for the wants of a few, IMHO. Especially when people's posts and reviews continually get dragged along with the topics and bits of content other users choose to have deleted.

At 9/21/18 01:31 PM, TomFulp wrote: Have been considering this... We've also been considering auto-collapsing the author comments beyond a certain number of lines, the way we do to forum and blog posts in user feeds. I'm not really a fan of how heavily YouTube collapses commentary but there might be a happy medium, like six lines before you gotta click for more.

This sounds useful.

At 9/21/18 01:37 PM, IoTheEternal wrote: Also I'd love to see some sorta sound made when we click a star - esp. like a glass shattering sound for 0ing since it's got that cool broken glass look to the 0 star, or maybe a gunshot resulting in broken glass or something..

This sounds fun! :D

At 9/20/18 10:11 PM, TomFulp wrote: No promises but I'd like to give users the option to choose their vote mascot, so you could replace Steve with a variety of other characters. There are higher priority items at the moment though.

This too! Potential Supporter perk maybe?

At 9/21/18 08:50 AM, TomFulp wrote: We'll have to think on whether we reintroduce a status notification in the view page, since we're trying to keep it more streamlined.

How about adding it as an option you can toggle on your account? I'd like to see those messages again.

At 9/21/18 01:51 AM, Ganon-Dorf wrote: A popup on the first submission you access explaining the new voting system would be a great addition to this!

Agree with this! An introduction to the whole voting system still seems hard to reach. New users aren't really brought into how everything works; incentivized to start doing stuff.

At 9/21/18 11:51 AM, ZJ wrote: Let’s say a quick prayer for these Uberkid voting icons that never got to be used.

Gotta stash these away somewhere hmm... if alternate voting skins ever become a thing maybe they could become a part of those. :) Potential Supporter perk alternative and/or unlockable secret?

At 9/20/18 10:13 PM, Zhon wrote: Okay, cool and whatever, but any chance we can get the old icons available to download?

Here you go. :) The unofficial one above's included too.

At 10/28/18 02:38 PM, Cyberdevil wrote: Here you go. :) The unofficial one above's included too.

MVP. We should hold a contest for "most helpful user" and just award you 1st place in the first post. Thoughts?

Overall really enjoying these new changes! Was curious to see if top submission scores would really even themselves out, but at least on the Portal it seems like things are going OK. Still dubious as to if new submissions will be able to overtake some of the old classics though. I hope they do. It's a shame some previous greats (from recent years) were kicked away entirely with this change, though, and considering their votes probably don't number nearly as many as the reviews on older submissions (now getting all the more exposure when they top the list) these recent greats might never get back there again...

At 9/20/18 05:34 PM, TomFulp wrote: It will be based on your score at the moment judgment ends. There’s some new blam art too if you blam something.

Nice. :D Looking forward to seeing that. Some day. On that rare occasion...

At 9/20/18 05:36 PM, Xuvero wrote: 1-Are the blam and save rules still the same? bacause I noticed that the tankman turns red when hovering over 0.5 and 0, and that seems to imply that these are the blam votes. (Note that I don't really think this is true, I'm just pointing out what they imply).

Seems this one was already answered. Yes, they're the same. As for the rest...

2-Are creators going to get notifications when someone edits a review in one of their submissions, as they do when someone posts one? This came to my mind because editing a review can mean completely different feedback and score.

@TomFulp don't think this was answered before?

I'm also curious what happens if a co-auther responds to a review on a submission you've made: will you get notifications for this as well?

3-If I change the score I gave to a submission a day later, does that count as a new vote? Or if I delete my review and make a new one?

No, the new vote will take over; count as your one vote on that submission. If you delete a review I assume the score will remain.

4-Are we getting XP for voting on audio and art now? I forgot to check it out.

Yes.

At 9/21/18 04:16 AM, Necroionutwiz wrote: wisle status is pretty much useless nowadays ....my best advice is to get rid of it mine has been stuck on garbage and hasent changed and probably its broken / not even worth seein and i give good reviews to ppl and dont get any credit for it so why keep it?

You don't get whistle points for the reviews you write though, just for the ones you flag. Gotta be sure ones you flag are really abusive though or you'll lose points for flagging incorrectly instead. Maybe this would be a useful read. It's not impossible to get up to Diety, it just takes a long time these days. :) And flagging abusive content is still as important today as ever.

A few users have kept lists of abusive reviews before, alerting a group of users when new ones were discovered so they could all get whistle points by reporting them, but I don't think any of those are currently active. Good way to find abusive reviews though: skim through reviews on either really popular and/or really unpopular content. There's often at least a few ones there.

At 9/20/18 07:15 PM, TailsPrower wrote: this is amazing and all but I need literally 1 point to make my exp 11,111

My dream is still beyond my grasp....

But why not exceed that first and humble goal a bit? 22,222 is within reach! Double or nothing?

At 9/26/18 08:29 AM, Alter-native wrote: Having a limit of five votes for each category would ensure that each category(The art, audio, games and movies portals) would get checked.

Though I like this idea it also feels a bit much to start checking all four categories every single day (of course you'll want to do that if you care about the stats). I think the B/P system still provides pretty good incentive for people to keep checking the original content forms though, even if Art's a constantly growing category. Audio might be the one with the least incentive, as it's not as quick or easy a content form for all to enjoy, and there's nothing that keeps users from just voting on Art instead...

At 9/20/18 05:08 PM, jonthomson wrote: God damnit my non 0/5 xp ending figure is no longer a sign I'm here forever

But now I can be here forever too! ;)

At 10/28/18 02:50 PM, Zhon wrote: MVP. We should hold a contest for "most helpful user" and just award you 1st place in the first post. Thoughts?

I do like the sound of that! :D Though humbled as I am: a lot of other users deserve a mention too.

Really gotta bring back those forum awards tho.

But now I can be here forever too! ;)

hmm imo i think nobody really does that anymore and to search throw reviews to find bad ones that seems like a waste of time for something they dont even care about ... so if i have garbage wisle and i can spam the flag review no1 will take that into account cool now i can flame other peoples reviews without even them knowing thanks Cyber best news i had in a while and they dont care about garbage wisles Hehe

At 10/28/18 03:13 PM, Cyberdevil wrote:

2-Are creators going to get notifications when someone edits a review in one of their submissions, as they do when someone posts one? This came to my mind because editing a review can mean completely different feedback and score.

@TomFulp don't think this was answered before?

I'm also curious what happens if a co-auther responds to a review on a submission you've made: will you get notifications for this as well?

Right now a review edit won't bump the old review in your feed. Co-author responses should appear in your feed as they happen.

At 10/29/18 08:26 AM, TomFulp wrote: Right now a review edit won't bump the old review in your feed. Co-author responses should appear in your feed as they happen.

Good to know, thanks!

At 10/29/18 04:27 AM, Necroionutwiz wrote: hmm imo i think nobody really does that anymore and to search throw reviews to find bad ones that seems like a waste of time for something they dont even care about ... so if i have garbage wisle and i can spam the flag review no1 will take that into account cool now i can flame other peoples reviews without even them knowing thanks Cyber best news i had in a while and they dont care about garbage wisles Hehe

Hah, yeah you can abuse the abuse feature as much as you like, but with the garbage whistle somebody else (with a normal whistle or higher) has to flag the same review too for it to have any effect - flags done with garbage whistles don't have any effect on their own, they're simply registered internally, and points are awarded later on if they were done correctly. So there is a countermeasure in place for that. ;) Higher level basically means mods get alerted faster.

Hah, yeah you can abuse the abuse feature as much as you like, but with the garbage whistle somebody else (with a normal whistle or higher) has to flag the same review too for it to have any effect - flags done with garbage whistles don't have any effect on their own, they're simply registered internally, and points are awarded later on if they were done correctly. So there is a countermeasure in place for that. ;) Higher level basically means mods get alerted faster.

I got over it in any case i came to the conclusion that WS is useless feature and totally not even worth flaging so its not my job to do mods jobs so let them do something instead of letting people do it for them >:C

I finished Ronan Farrows latest book, War on Peace.

Was a good read, shed a lot of light on a democrats outlook on US foreign policy in current times.

At 9/25/18 01:06 PM, jpuroila wrote: For the most part I like this update, but I really just... don't get the reaction choices. When is "meow" ever a good reaction to review? What's wrong with having choices along the lines of useful/informative, agree, disagree, useless, misleading, etc? Is it just because it's hard to conveniently portray them as emojis? Am I supposed to react to 2 word reviews with "angry" "WTF" or "zzz"(report abuse is presumably not the right choice, although IMO any review shorter than a full sentence should just be automatically removed as it cannot possibly fulfil the definition of "review")?

Quoting this because the forum doesn't have upvotes yet. Seriously, a thumbs up and thumbs down would be infinitely more useful than kitty face.

At 10/28/18 02:33 PM, Cyberdevil wrote:

At 9/22/18 04:57 PM, Lambtaco wrote: Feature request: Delete forum activity based on a date range. Or just prior to a selected date.

Regarding this..

At 9/26/18 08:29 AM, Alter-native wrote: I noticed other changes including the ability to edit one's previous reviews, with privacy and anti-harassment measures in mind I think. I don't quite agree with this. Back then, the things you said were permanent, and you would be subject to a degree of mockery if you said anything that may have been embarrassing. Suffice to say, people do change over time, and I can speak for myself that there is a lot a media here that I feel differently about now than I did back then, but the thing is that those etchings I have made, are landmarks in a way. They are a snapshot of who I was back then, and to go back and change those things would be a tad, Orwellian to say the least. Instead, I suggest allowing users to change their scores and reviews, but keeping a "faded" version of the original with the new score and review at the bottom.

...this sums up my views here perfectly. Flattering or no, the past is what shapes you; lets you grow. It's humbling. Forgetting your history seems to be the one mistake humanity does over and over, and it always ends up having diastrous consequence. In this case: it'd just be a shame. I feel like all of us are involved in this great cultural legacy that is NG, and that goes for both the good and bad, the refined as well as the naive/edgy and entertaining. It's all chapters to the story of not just the user but the community as a whole.

I think you're conflating art with talk here. Or at least inflating the impact and importance people's forum posts by not distinguishing the two enough. Not everything is a culture-defining contribution to humanity, some stuff is just fluff. When you lump in forum posts (and to a lesser extent reviews) with the actual creative works like music, movies, games, etc. it just sounds like undue reverence for inconsequential conversations. Not everything we say needs to be archived for all eternity. The NG BBS is not the Library of Congress.

Like, I have some submissions I'm not proud of from around the same time I made dumb forum posts, and I'm totally cool with leaving those on the site, because they were published works that I intended to remain online forever when I posted them. Those are part of history, however small. But forum posts are just talk. At the time they were intended as conversations between those involved. Having them archived or future eavesdroppers is just weird. (Much more Orwellian for a third party to keep records of decade old conversations than to let people delete their own posts, if you ask me.) Why should everything you said online when you were literally a child need a permanent record that's attached to your current identity? It serves only to embarrass the users. Nobody but the poster cares. Letting someone alleviate that embarrassment is worth the negligible loss to the culture of NG.

Besides, there's such a thing as gone but not forgotten. Erasing the record of a conversation doesn't erase it for the people involved. The people to whom the event has any meaning will remember it, so why is it necessary to preserve it for everyone else to whom it's irrelevant. When you delete a review or forum post, you don't forget it ever existed. If you go through the effort to delete it, you've probably got a reason and you learned something.

At 9/20/18 10:01 PM, TomFulp wrote: We're planning a bulk delete depot where you can bulk delete specific categories of site interactions, most likely based on this mock-up:

...which is why I really real don't like this feature-in-planning. Artists and users deleting their history at whim; shaving away large chunks of community culture with it... not to mention potential hacked accounts getting raided, abandoned accounts taken over by others, and such...

If this feature does come to be I really hope you've introduced two-factor authentication (via email would be nice) before. And I wouldn't mind that 'Request Account Deletion' button, or whatever button this feature brings in, hidden away a bit more. Visiting the Account Settings page now always holds a small fear that I might accidentally click it.

Really hope that action has to be confirmed via email too.

I understand the want for freedoms like this, but I still really don't like the idea of it, or for removal to be such a simple process if it has to exist. I'd rather there was some clause every time you write or submit something (or create your account) that says it'll stay there forever no matter what - unless it's infringing, malicious or personal in a way that it actually merits removal. These terms could be added in retrospectively, too.

Shouldn't sacrifice the whole for the wants of a few, IMHO. Especially when people's posts and reviews continually get dragged along with the topics and bits of content other users choose to have deleted.

While I agree there should be measures to prevent abuse and accidents, IMO you're the one sacrificing the rights of other for your own wants. I get the impression you're for preserving the culture of NG at all costs, even when that overrides the rights of the artists to control their own work.

If the creator of a work wants that work removed, it should be removed. It's that simple. Unless there's some sort of sponsorship deal, or they sell the rights. When you create something you own the rights to your creation. Especially on Newgrounds, a very creator focused site. Even advertiser/consumer focused sites like Youtube let you delete your own content whenever you want. You can delete your own tweets or facebook posts. Most forums let you delete your posts. It's standard practice for a reason.

The way I see it a "forever no matter what" clause would only serve to discourage posting. Some great stuff has been posted on a lark, and a forever clause would prevent a lot of people from posting these things in the future. "This will be here forever" is a foreboding message. It almost sounds like a threat. A forever clause wouldn't preserve the culture so much as it would prevent the culture from growing.

Sorry if this seems argumentative or contrarian or what-have-you. I just legitimately disagree with most of what you said.

At 11/6/18 10:29 PM, Lambtaco wrote: I think you're conflating art with talk here. Or at least inflating the impact and importance people's forum posts by not distinguishing the two enough. Not everything is a culture-defining contribution to humanity, some stuff is just fluff. When you lump in forum posts (and to a lesser extent reviews) with the actual creative works like music, movies, games, etc. it just sounds like undue reverence for inconsequential conversations. Not everything we say needs to be archived for all eternity. The NG BBS is not the Library of Congress.

I do wish it was. We don't value our contributions enough I think. Be it fluff, it's fluff that molds you into who you are, be it a contribution to the greater whole or simply a step in your personal evolution, it pains me every time someone wishes to clear that bit of their history like that. Feels like they don't really realize what they're doing.

Like, I have some submissions I'm not proud of from around the same time I made dumb forum posts, and I'm totally cool with leaving those on the site, because they were published works that I intended to remain online forever when I posted them. Those are part of history, however small. But forum posts are just talk. At the time they were intended as conversations between those involved. Having them archived or future eavesdroppers is just weird. (Much more Orwellian for a third party to keep records of decade old conversations than to let people delete their own posts, if you ask me.) Why should everything you said online when you were literally a child need a permanent record that's attached to your current identity? It serves only to embarrass the users. Nobody but the poster cares. Letting someone alleviate that embarrassment is worth the negligible loss to the culture of NG.

I feel that anything you post online should be eternal if it's not posted to appear in a more temporary feed, IE a chat. Why treat forum posts any different from other content? Sure some are worth more and some less, but differentiating as to the worth of said content as to if it should stay or no: I don't believe in that. I'm prepared that everything I put up remain here forever, embarrassing or no. Maybe mindset is the problem: people not putting enough forethought into their posts. Maybe the issue is confidence. People not standing for what they say. I don't know, but thinking before you write something generally seems like a good idea, and such a system seems to encourage it. Even if it's possible to have content deleted you can't make anything unsaid. If you're not willing to stand for what you say then why say it? I'd also argue that whatever you posted was relevant to the context it was posted in, so unless posts are continually purged by a set interval of oldness, then just certain users removing their contributions to each topic feels wrong.

But alright, though I don't agree I can respect the differences in demands and wishes as far as posted content goes.The thing that really bothers me here is how one users deletions also affects those of others: if a user is the OP of a thread, then that entire thread is removed when they delete their post, along with the posts of everyone else, who may not have wanted those posts to disappear. Maybe some of them really were worthwhile contributions that'd stand the test of time impressively well. So, I suppose I relate spontaneous and unmerited (as I see them) deletions as something that does hurt the community as a whole, not just the right of that individual user.

Besides, there's such a thing as gone but not forgotten. Erasing the record of a conversation doesn't erase it for the people involved. The people to whom the event has any meaning will remember it, so why is it necessary to preserve it for everyone else to whom it's irrelevant. When you delete a review or forum post, you don't forget it ever existed. If you go through the effort to delete it, you've probably got a reason and you learned something.

Why do we have photo albums, or diaries, or all of these other mementos we keep to remember things that we could be expected to remember? Probably because our memories are a frail thing; we rely on material keepsakes to preserve that which we do not wish to forget. If we learned something from something then all the more reason to preserve it and remind us of that lesson IMO.

While I agree there should be measures to prevent abuse and accidents, IMO you're the one sacrificing the rights of other for your own wants. I get the impression you're for preserving the culture of NG at all costs, even when that overrides the rights of the artists to control their own work.

Your impression does sound about right...

If the creator of a work wants that work removed, it should be removed. It's that simple. Unless there's some sort of sponsorship deal, or they sell the rights. When you create something you own the rights to your creation. Especially on Newgrounds, a very creator focused site. Even advertiser/consumer focused sites like Youtube let you delete your own content whenever you want. You can delete your own tweets or facebook posts. Most forums let you delete your posts. It's standard practice for a reason.

The way I see it a "forever no matter what" clause would only serve to discourage posting. Some great stuff has been posted on a lark, and a forever clause would prevent a lot of people from posting these things in the future. "This will be here forever" is a foreboding message. It almost sounds like a threat. A forever clause wouldn't preserve the culture so much as it would prevent the culture from growing.

Sorry if this seems argumentative or contrarian or what-have-you. I just legitimately disagree with most of what you said.

Hmm well it is pretty contrarian to my own ideals, but I could live with a system like this, as the system is, as long as deletions are isolated events. If one users wants their work gone: let all those who reviewed that work keep their reviews. If a user wants their topic gone: let all users who posted to that topic keep their responses. Unlink the titles but keep them in each user's respective post/review history. If the system were tweaked so that each deletion didn't call forth an avalanche I think I'd be OK with it anyway. I know I'll keep my content forever. If there's a topic or submission I want to remember I still have my own memento from it. It hasn't been purged from existence entirely...

There have been plenty of cases in the past where other users deletion really negatively affected the culture. For example: The User Icons Club topic has been totally wiped out twice, when respective owners decided they were done with the site. A huge amount of contributions went away with those.

I remember working on a collab, where one of the co-authors had started a topic regarding characters NG users could choose to be, the collab took more time than expected, they suddenly decided it was time for a fresh start, cleared their posts, and all references within that thread were gone... had to start contacting users by memory, and probably missed a bundle.

Occasionally a creator, like illwillpress, will decide to just remove all their previous uploads, resulting in broken collection pages, and hundreds of missing reviews if you were a somewhat devoted fan. It happens more often than I'd like.

Other users deletions just clearly affect me, and others, and as such I'm just really adverse to a system that encourages this. Isolated deletions and some serious fail safes in the face of possible abuse would be good. I've had my account hacked in the past too, and that was no fun at all. Fortunately at the time deleting (or editing) posts and reviews wasn't an option, but all other content forms, both private and public: no failsafe. When it's gone it's gone. Without even two-pass to keep accounts somewhat secure: all the more freedom to have stuff removed sounds like a disaster just waiting to happen.