LOL SPYRE!!! FUNNY ASS SIGNATURE

At 1/10/03 04:10 AM, Spyre wrote: i saw the tittle of the post, jumped straight to the last page and was greated by a discussion about the postman. What the hell happend?

Have you seen The Postman? I thought it was terrible.

At 1/9/03 07:19 PM, Shrapnel wrote: Waterworld.

Holy shit did that movie suck.

It's a perfect example of a movie where a lot of time and money was spent creating a total flop.

Holy shit, i loved that movie (seriously). I bet you didnt even watch it, you tasty shankasaurus.

I think for the voting system you should be able to vote thumbs up or thumbs down, BUT keep the "blow the whistle" thing, and use that to flag movies. Have Wade watch them, cause he has nothing else to do, then have him decide if the flagged movie should be deleted.

Or just fuck voting altogether. Just keep blow the whistle to remove autovoters, stolen movies, and pop up spawners. Like he said earlier, any crap movie will just sink to the bottom of the portal, no harm in that. Rank movies in the Top 50 by reviews.

I like my 2nd idea better.

The Postman was horrible, so dont think i like Kevin Costner or anything. I wonder if i can get Waterworld on DVD for like $3.

OH YEA

Experience would be obtained just by logging into your account and depositing. Still 10 a day. Its not like voting on movies gives you additional XP or anything.

At 1/10/03 04:05 AM, b_repay wrote:

At 1/10/03 03:58 AM, Shrapnel wrote: Dude, do you even know how gills work?

I do not know how gills work, no.

That's ok.

Now tell me, what the fuck is that kid in the movie?

Is it a girl or a boy?

If Dennis Hopper rapted it, we'd know cause we'd either see a penis or no penis.

At 1/10/03 04:27 AM, TannerCenterwall wrote:

At 1/9/03 07:19 PM, Shrapnel wrote: Waterworld.

Holy shit did that movie suck.

It's a perfect example of a movie where a lot of time and money was spent creating a total flop.

Holy shit, i loved that movie (seriously). I bet you didnt even watch it, you tasty shankasaurus.

!
There just wasn't enough shooting and killing and stuff. There was just so much more they could've done in that movie.

It was like Dragonheart... a big disappointment.
An ok movie but an entire fantasy world that wasn't explored enough.

Maybe if Kevin took off his clothes to reveal he was hung like a dolphin and then jizzed all over Jeanne Tripplehorn's bare breasts... then it would be an awesome movie.

Haha, this thread straight got HIJACKED.

At 1/10/03 04:30 AM, Shrapnel wrote:

At 1/10/03 04:05 AM, b_repay wrote:

At 1/10/03 03:58 AM, Shrapnel wrote: Dude, do you even know how gills work?

I do not know how gills work, no.

That's ok.

Now tell me, what the fuck is that kid in the movie?

Is it a girl or a boy?

I think that thing was Tina Majorino. She was also in Andre. Arf Arf Arf

At 1/10/03 04:41 AM, HAQnSPITT wrote:

I think that thing was Tina Majorino. She was also in Andre. Arf Arf Arf

Oh man, I completely forgot about that movie...

THANKS A LOT.

hey, uh, what... about... my... post... no one has mentioned it **cries**

At 1/9/03 03:58 PM, Valz wrote:

From :
Wade Fulp <wade@newgrounds.com>

To :
valz

Is there a reason you gave the Monkey Island game a 0? If you continue to vote down quality submissions your account will be terminated.

Regards,



Wade Fulp

thats fucked up

At 1/9/03 04:04 PM, Shrapnel wrote: I smell spoofed e-mail.

I don't see why Wade would do that.

Umm he did i got that too!

whoa whoa whoa, back the train up...Postman sucked and waterworld was merely ok, but drangon heart was a sweet movie, come on sean Connery is awesome

oh yeah, and the whole point with the voting 0's...I think we all see his point, its a very valid point, but the threating of banning is a little much, maybe even a lot much, if you tell people how to vote, your a dictator and there should be no voting, but the counter point is, look at all you bastards voting zero's on good flash animations, what is he to do?

At 1/10/03 07:40 AM, TheHoggle wrote: oh yeah, and the whole point with the voting 0's...I think we all see his point, its a very valid point, but the threating of banning is a little much, maybe even a lot much, if you tell people how to vote, your a dictator and there should be no voting, but the counter point is, look at all you bastards voting zero's on good flash animations, what is he to do?

He could always just quit worrying about it and let people bitch like they have always done.

If it is a small group of people like he said in his post on NG's front page, then it should not be that hard to go get them and ask them to please review the movies. I think if he were to take an hour or two and compile a list of everyone voting all zero's and post it in an "NG's hall of shame" or something, it would be no big deal. I actually feel that if he is going to do all of this that he should consider doing the same thing for people who vote all 5's on shitty flash as well as people who vote all 0's on good flash.

And whoever posted this pic earlier, that is sweet.

but what about good flash that gets blammed because of all the godless pricks that don't care and just want blame points?? perhaps the judging limit should be raised or something

After reading all 5+ pages here, I forgot who asked me about the "cheating" error. In short: I open my list of favorite submissions, and vote 5 on them. Most of the time I get the following: "Error: Stop trying to cheat the system!"

On the other hand now, I'm afraid to vote 0 in case I get banned for it.

So instead of voting 5 on high-quality favorite movies and voting 0 on low-quality crappy movies, should I now have to vote 4 or 1?

¿Ña?

At 1/10/03 10:24 AM, Freakapotimus wrote: In short: I open my list of favorite submissions, and vote 5 on them. Most of the time I get the following: "Error: Stop trying to cheat the system!"

Are you still getting that error? I was sure I'd fixed it a couple of days ago...

I wouldn't worry about voting 0s or 5s on movies - the people who are to be punished for this sort of thing are people who persistently vote 0 on every single entry.

Most of the people who have reacted negatively to these posts are people who don't need to worry anyway - there are just a select few users who repeatedly vote down everything. They don't appear to have anything positive to contribute and one has to wonder how much enjoyment they're actually getting from the site if they're of the opinion that everything they see is absolute crap! :)

At 1/10/03 03:41 AM, b_repay wrote: Speaking of shitty Kevin Costner movies,

I liked The Postman.

omfg I like the postman too :) :) :)

At 1/10/03 03:50 AM, humantarget52 wrote:

they had gills because aparently if humanity is around water long enough, mutation will occur or something
although I thought the gills should have been around the neck (like in an episode of the outerlimits) and not behind the ears

At 1/10/03 10:41 AM, liljim wrote: Are you still getting that error? I was sure I'd fixed it a couple of days ago...

OK, I just did some voting, and I didn't get the error. I was afraid to try again!

I wouldn't worry about voting 0s or 5s on movies - [ snip explaination ]

Thanks, liljim. {{{huggles}}} I feel much better now.

Ok...

GrandmasterJ post was really awesome.

Waterworld was okay but just not memorable like a movie like LOTR or Braveheart are.

The Postman totally sucked. Not only was it boring but hokey to boot.

Wade, you ARE an ass. You could have just stopped after admitting you were wrong in emailing Valz but nooooooooooo. You had to try to rub in that you were right and that no one is allowed to vote 0 on movies you deem "good" or that make certain lists. You sir are a complete idiot. If voting zero on all the good movies is a problem then follow one of Tanner's two suggestions. They both seem pretty good. As far as banning people that only vote 0. What about people that like to go through the portal and mostly or only vote 0 and all the crappy movies? What about bad days when there are no quality submission on the portal?

The thing is, everyone wants whats best for the site. Its just everyone is being snippy and extreme (Like Vin Diesel in XXX, omg) with their replies. Like Wade could have explained that users voting habits will be looked at and all that, and not been like 'you will be banned for voting 0' and Superabound could have left out the 'i hate you and hope you die, Wade' parts of his posts. I swear no one can have a discussion today without getting all pissed off. Im shocked that no one has been called "gay" in this thread. Im doubly shocked that no one has posted that godamn "How about a cup of STFU?" pic thats been posted 1200 times.

At 1/10/03 11:55 AM, TannerCenterwall wrote: Im doubly shocked that no one has posted that godamn "How about a cup of STFU?" pic thats been posted 1200 times.

omfg I had to restrain myself soooo much =0Þ

(/me has never posted that image)

At 1/10/03 12:57 AM, Valz wrote: Again you say you KNEW it was good & didn't deserve a 0, I disagree with you because you LIKED it doesn't mean I have to. There comes a time when personal opinion can cross the line, you have proved this. I very rarely come to NG & if I do I watch the new Clock movies or others that people suggest to me. I do NOT constantly vote 0 & refrain from telling me I'm wrong for voting on the movie that I thought was shitty. Don't let your personal opinion bleed to me because I thought the movie was boring. Even if you have said you're sorry you tend to smear it with a bit of "oh i thought it was good so you're still wrong". I will now vote 5 on everything since I thought it was your job to make sure that movies submitted to NG were up to quality. Then the voting system was introduced, to me that is a sign of laziness on the staff of NG.

SO even if you say you're sorry you still are telling me I am WRONG for voting & that I should have voted 2 because you liked it. Then my opinion means nothing here since you've decided for me.

All I'm saying is if you find something boring, give it a 2. I'm not saying give it a 3, 4 or 5. That's for if you like something. I'm just saying 2 should be the bottom of the threshold if something bores you, but you obviously have the sense to realize the author put a lot of effort into it, and 1 if you think the author didn't try real hard. 0 should only ever be used if it's stolen, or malicious, or a complete waste of time etc, and I don't think you can tell me it was that. I'm just saying consider this in the future. It's okay you did what you did, we're just trying to let people know how the system is supposed to work and protect our submitters.

At 1/10/03 12:12 PM, WadeFulp wrote: 0 should only ever be used if it's stolen, or malicious, or a complete waste of time etc, and I don't think you can tell me it was that.

Do you think going back to the "X" vote instead of "0" might be a good idea? It's gives a certain connotation to the score than perhaps 0 doesn't.

At 1/10/03 11:55 AM, TannerCenterwall wrote: Im shocked that no one has been called "gay" in this thread.

ghey.

At 1/10/03 11:48 AM, ButtBoy wrote: Ok...

GrandmasterJ post was really awesome.

Waterworld was okay but just not memorable like a movie like LOTR or Braveheart are.

The Postman totally sucked. Not only was it boring but hokey to boot.

Wade, you ARE an ass. You could have just stopped after admitting you were wrong in emailing Valz but nooooooooooo. You had to try to rub in that you were right and that no one is allowed to vote 0 on movies you deem "good" or that make certain lists. You sir are a complete idiot. If voting zero on all the good movies is a problem then follow one of Tanner's two suggestions. They both seem pretty good. As far as banning people that only vote 0. What about people that like to go through the portal and mostly or only vote 0 and all the crappy movies? What about bad days when there are no quality submission on the portal?

You're not to bright are you? If you vote 0 on crappy movies then you're not voting 0 on a good movie are you? The problem here is everything here thinks I'm aftem THEM, when I'm not. The people I'm after you probably don't even know. Look at the Daily Top 5, did you vote 0 on every single one of those? If the answer is no, you are in the clear. If the answer is yes, you might want to start being more careful. I'm not saying give 5's, I'm saying give a fair score.

At 1/10/03 12:20 PM, WadeFulp wrote: I'm saying give a fair score.

Im with ya, but you have to make a change as well as everyone else. With the voting bar and system the way it is, you cant just ask people to not vote 0. If they see something and dont like it, they will feel that it has "wasted their time" and look for the lowest score to give.

At 1/10/03 12:12 PM, WadeFulp wrote:

All I'm saying is if you find something boring, give it a 2. I'm not saying give it a 3, 4 or 5. That's for if you like something. I'm just saying 2 should be the bottom of the threshold if something bores you, but you obviously have the sense to realize the author put a lot of effort into it, and 1 if you think the author didn't try real hard. 0 should only ever be used if it's stolen, or malicious, or a complete waste of time etc, and I don't think you can tell me it was that. I'm just saying consider this in the future. It's okay you did what you did, we're just trying to let people know how the system is supposed to work and protect our submitters.

Again you are telling not only me but others how to vote. Is there something you aren't seeing that's wrong with this picture????

Vote as you like but as long as you don't vote below 2. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but to me it seems like you are yet again telling me how to vote.

You are wrong & you know it.