I don't think file size should be a criterium.

Just take a look at this movie...it's tiny yet funny!

The Bar

God wade you make us feel like we're raping your children lol.

At 12/6/04 08:15 AM, Pilot-Doofy wrote: God wade you make us feel like we're raping your children lol.

More like he's asking people to stop acting like children.

At 12/6/04 12:33 AM, FatherVenom wrote:

And for people who don't use the BBS? If you haven't noticed there's a lot of them.

A person doesn't have to rummage through the BBS to find
announcements like that; it's on the front page of the site (which
is where i saw it first).

At 12/6/04 02:31 AM, WadeFulp wrote:

People will go to the Portal, see 5 under judgement Flash entries, right click on all 5 titles to open them in a new window, then go through and vote, vote, vote, as fast as they can, and never watch a single entry.

BTW, any chance something can be done about the person or
people who seem to do nothing but vote 0 in the audio portal?
I'm not expecting folks to give a 5 to a sound file they don't like,
but it doesn't seem reasonable to me to give a 0 to a file just
because the music isn't to their taste, either.

BTW, any chance something can be done about the person or
people who seem to do nothing but vote 0 in the audio portal?
I'm not expecting folks to give a 5 to a sound file they don't like,
but it doesn't seem reasonable to me to give a 0 to a file just
because the music isn't to their taste, either.

I agree, but that falls under any categorie, If you don't like silly movies despite how well they are created, one should give it a fair score based on the skill it took to make it. I don't like country music but I know talent when I hear it.

At 12/6/04 02:33 AM, Xeofox wrote: Same old, same old - "all talk no action". No offence Wade, i really do appreciate you taking some action, but you keep posting these "from this point forward don't be naughty or we'll GET YOU", and then seem to be doing nothing, because not less than six months down the line... along comes the same old message again.

Well, it's hard for somebody to report the fruits of his actions if they are IP banned...

I'm also sure that Wade wouldn't be one who would post all the people he has banned/reprimanded. Also if you are one of the idiots who lost points then you don't want to go around advertising about it.

So you guys know I'm watching Hentai flash all day long even before I vote a 5 on it? !!!? That's amazing.

Would it be fair to say I only watch about the first minute of a bad movie? For example, if the first minute is filled with sticks catching on fire & fighting with freballs & then they have secks I can tell the movie sucks & should be blammed. While I respect your right to like these type of movies & even though you may get off on them I don't think they are of the quality NG's portal should waste space on.

So would I be threatened for such behavior?

At 12/6/04 12:54 AM, -Kyle wrote: What if one of those Piconjo Day events happen again? Is it ok if vote 0 on all of the submissions that are supposed to spam the portal? Of course I wouldn't vote wrongly on all of the good submissions. :)

Watch the movie before you vote. Don't vote based on the artist's reputation and than leave.

At 12/6/04 07:52 AM, nXXt wrote: I don't think file size should be a criterium.

Just take a look at this movie...it's tiny yet funny!

The Bar

Very funny stuff. A perfect example of why people should watch at least the first twenty seconds of a movie despite it's file size.

At 12/6/04 06:56 AM, alexsmolik wrote: I have to admit that I sometimes do that. So do most people I guess.

You have actually shown up on our radar for some time now. I have even emailed you warnings more than once. Have you ever gotten them? I know you're a regular here so I've cut you some slack, but let it be know I have sent you warnings to your NG validated email address.

At 12/6/04 10:27 AM, WadeFulp wrote: You have actually shown up on our radar for some time now. I have even emailed you warnings more than once. Have you ever gotten them? I know you're a regular here so I've cut you some slack, but let it be know I have sent you warnings to your NG validated email address.

Do you send warnings to everybody on the 'radar'? The reason I ask is because I believe I have been offending (obviously stopped now) but I've never gotten a warning. Am I on the list?

Hey Wade, how about a NG criminals list with all those naughty voters on it... that would be something to be ashamed of and it might deter...

It seems some people still aren't clear how much of an entry they need to watch to not get caught, which is sad.

You need to watch enough of the movie to make a fair vote! I leave that up to the voters to decide how long that is. Some movies it maybe 5 seconds, some movies it might be a minute.

I know I have seen many entries that start off poorly, more as a joke, and then kick into something really good! If people judge the whole movie on those first 5-10 seconds and vote 0, and then it passes judgment with a 4.25, that's not going to look very good when we're reviewing their history. I'm not saying we'd base a decision on a single vote, but if we see a pattern of this behavior, then we'll look into penalties.

Also, everything we're discussing here applies to entries that are UNDER JUDGMENT. Not entries that have passed judgments. If you think the Daily Feature sucks and want to hit it with a big fat 0, be my guest.

However, we have to hold the votes cast on UNDER JUDGMENT entries to a higher level. This is a critical phase for an author's submission. It really deserves a fair vote.

I don't like telling people how to vote, but I think a good guide is something like this (again, for under judgment entries)

0 - The movie is complete crap, just submitted to waste people's time.

1 - The movies is really crappy, but the author was probably trying to do his best, but really has a lot to learn about Flash.

2 - The author put effort into the entry, it's not that bad, but you just don't care for it. This would be if you heard a Country song that sounded well done, but you hate Country music. It doesn't deserve to be blammed, but you don't think it should win an award. Currently I feel many people are voting 0 on entries like this, when they should cut the artist some slack and give them a 2. Keep in mind if someone's Flash entry passes judgment, and it's score is like 1.80 or 2.33 it isn't going to win an award, and it isn't going to do any harm, but it encourages the author who submitted it to stick with Flash and someday that author maybe submitting truely great Flash.

3 - The entry was well done and you enjoyed it, but you're not running around telling everyone you know to check it out.

4 - The entry was above average, it stood out, and you might recommend it for other people to watch.

5 - The entry was fantastic! You enjoyed it very much, and you wuold probably tell people to check it out.

I know a lot of people either vote 0 or 5 to improve their chances of a BLAM or a SAVE. This is almost like a thumbs UP or thumbs DOWN. If you feel you must vote like this, then if you felt the entry was probably a 2 according to my list you should vote 5, rather than 0. Even if an entry comes out of judgment with an inflated score, it will keep getting votes and if people see the score is to high, they will vote to lower it until it has a score it deserves.

Again, I'm not telling anyone to vote this way, it's just a guide.

Don't be to quick to BLAM Flash that doesn't break any rules if you see the author may have potential. Remember, even great Flash artists like Tom Fulp started off with pretty basic stuff.

You do know people are still going to mass vote right?

At 12/6/04 10:44 AM, WadeFulp wrote: It seems some people still aren't clear how much of an entry they need to watch to not get caught, which is sad.

You need to watch enough of the movie to make a fair vote! I leave that up to the voters to decide how long that is. Some movies it maybe 5 seconds, some movies it might be a minute.

Don't be to quick to BLAM Flash that doesn't break any rules if you see the author may have potential. Remember, even great Flash artists like Tom Fulp started off with pretty basic stuff.

Ok someone posted this soemwhere else. I think it may be a valid question.

If the author submits a bad flash, you watch it. Vote to blam it. Then the author resubmits the same flash again. Do we have to watch a majority of it again To vote on it?

Also if the same person creates another account to submit the same flash. DO you wish us to watch and blam or to whistle at this point?

Also I know some users are still whistling Free Blam Point movies, even though you want us to blam them so the author will get banned form submitting such movies.

At 12/6/04 06:15 AM, liljim wrote: What do you expect? A daily report on the front page of who has been reprimanded?

Wade makes these posts every now and then so that when people start to lose points, or even their accounts, it doesn't come as a complete shock to their system.

Haha, that was more of a joke then a serious calling out. I'm quite certain you keep logs. Not sure how serious you are with your threats though :)

PS: A daily report could be pretty hilarious. Perhaps some content for the baren NGmag that's seemingly fallen apart.

At 12/6/04 10:44 AM, WadeFulp wrote: a funny little voting guide.

It's hilarious that you don't feel your users are mentally equipped to grasp the concepts of a 0-5 voting system.

Maybe you should change the voting system to a simple "EETS GUD!" / "DATS BAD!" to help your average user get his head around it all...

Some flash entries really only take about a minute or less to understand that it's good enough to be saved. If the graphics and background music is good then it will sometimes be saved...

but if someone has really poor graphics... no one would want to vote over a zero anyway...

Sometimes i'll vote on flash but then a day later i might review that flash, when reviewing i might even view the flash twice and have two reviews in one review. heh. i like that new review feature.

At 12/6/04 10:44 AM, WadeFulp wrote: However, we have to hold the votes cast on UNDER JUDGMENT entries to a higher level. This is a critical phase for an author's submission. It really deserves a fair vote.

Oh yeah, though I should point out the flaw in your system's logic here, since.. you know.. My opinion is always right.

You say this is where a submission really deserves a fair vote, yet this is where users are rewarded for voting one way or another. Now, you've pretty much indicated that you think most of your users are idiots with your voting guide there (and you don't think that, trust me, they are.) On a site where ePenis is everything to most of these morons, you're saying "HAY D00DS, VOTE ON THESE UNDERJUDGMENT ENTRIES FOR MORE EPENIS, BUT DO IT RESPONSIBLY AND FAIRLY," and expecting them to actually vote fairly. Of course they're not going to do it fairly.

But hey, you have fun with that.

Wow, this is cool!

At 12/6/04 10:27 AM, WadeFulp wrote: You have actually shown up on our radar for some time now. I have even emailed you warnings more than once. Have you ever gotten them? I know you're a regular here so I've cut you some slack, but let it be know I have sent you warnings to your NG validated email address.

Oh... well... I guess I should try to be more "fair" in the future then.
I'll change attitude and will pay more attention to the flashes I'm voting on. Not that I don't do it now, but not enough.

When I heard you sent me emails I thought you were mistaking. But then, after looking on my Personal Profile, in the Grounds Gold Menu, I noticed my NG validated email address was erronated, and I had made a typo. The one I had was "alexsmolikuss@hotmail.com", whereas the one I use is "alexsmolikus@hotmail.com".
No wonder I never got your emails... My fault, sorry.
But that problem is now corrected, so I'll receive everything from now on.
To resume, I guess I'll start to change my behaviour as a voter on NG, and will now be able to get your emails.

PS: Thanks for cutting me some slack back then, otherwise, I might have ended up with my account terminated without even knowing why. And man would I be sad if I lost that dear NG account :)

Sometimes there are some flash on the portal in which if i voted a 3 or a 5 it really wouldn't make a diferent because everyone else would vote 0... when i truly believe a certain flash has potential. Too bad we cannot leave comments or some sort of message for people to view the entire flash before voting after the first two seconds.

At 12/6/04 10:55 AM, WTFSNOE wrote: You do know people are still going to mass vote right?

If they want to run the risk, let them. I'll just keep removing their points.

Bout time, I'm sick of seeing entries that are pretty good but when i vote I find they are bordering on being blammed and then a rubbish entry is on the verge of protection.

At 12/6/04 10:56 AM, ramagi wrote: If the author submits a bad flash, you watch it. Vote to blam it. Then the author resubmits the same flash again. Do we have to watch a majority of it again To vote on it?

You should watch it to see if the author made any improvements. However common sense comes in to play here. If it's blammed and the author resubmits it minutes later, he probably didn 't change anything, but you never know if the author was making improvements while his entry was under judgment for several hours, or wahtever. So you should check for improvements. If you keep blamming their stuff, they will get banned for 30 days. If they start up from another account it's probably best to just keep blamming.

Also I know some users are still whistling Free Blam Point movies, even though you want us to blam them so the author will get banned form submitting such movies.

Yeah, they should just blam them.

At 12/6/04 10:57 AM, pythagoras- wrote:

At 12/6/04 10:44 AM, WadeFulp wrote: a funny little voting guide.

It's hilarious that you don't feel your users are mentally equipped to grasp the concepts of a 0-5 voting system.

Some of them aren't mentally equipped! :)

My main concern is people getting into the habit of handing out 0's when they could give the artist a little more slack. Some people vote either 0 or 5, even if something deserves a 2 or 3 they might just hit it with a 0 because they could give a rats ass. We'd like people to be a little more fair.

At 12/6/04 11:22 AM, Bobby_Jenkins wrote: Bout time, I'm sick of seeing entries that are pretty good but when i vote I find they are bordering on being blammed and then a rubbish entry is on the verge of protection.

I have personally tried to vote high on some of those movies If I like them, to help them be saved.

Well maybe this means those who have their friends vote 5, The friend goes ok I don't need to watch this, I'll just vote 5. Might just get what they deserve too.

Uhm, I have a problem, what if a flash is really stupid, am I forced to watch it? I know the difference between a great,good and bad movie. So, am I forced to watch crap movies and go slowly mad?

At 12/6/04 12:09 AM, WadeFulp wrote: They don't watch the entry. They just vote all O's, or all 5's, or they look at the author's batting average and cast a vote based on that, etc. All they want is to rack up the points as fast as possible.

o.0

I usually just give a 0 or 5, because if I don't like the movie I want to try and make sure it gets blammed, and if I like the movie, I want to try and make sure that it gets protected. Guess I'd better stop doing that. (goes to guard blam and protect points)

At 12/6/04 11:28 AM, pukepuddle wrote: Uhm, I have a problem, what if a flash is really stupid, am I forced to watch it? I know the difference between a great,good and bad movie. So, am I forced to watch crap movies and go slowly mad?

Dude, he's already answered this question a billion times already, read the thread