MAKING RMN MORE ORGANIC & SEXY (MAINLY ORGANIC)

I have actually been thinking about this for quite some time, but in light of recent events, I feel that this is an appropriate time to bring it up.

The idea I am proposing will shake up how submissions work around here. Yeah, it'll require some more coding and all that fancy hooplah, but I think it has the potential to bring RMN closer to what people envision it to be.

Correct me, but from what I've always understood, it was a goal for RMN to be an organic site that more or less runs itself. That's why the staff don't have shiny names anymore, the amount of shiny people has gone down, and why those who are shiny don't flaunt that they're shiny. The idea I'm proposing would take this a step further and make RMN even closer to being "user-run," while (hopefully) reducing the amount of Blockland incidents around the site.

This idea is stolen borrowed inspired by another website that's really badass: Newgrounds. They have a submission format that works and could be a great feature for our site as well. Keep in mind that this is not my proposed plan, but the way Newgrounds runs it. Certain factors I feel would need changing and there's probably junk I'll completely overlook. (That's where your feedback comes in.)

For those of you who aren't familiar with how Newground submissions work, let me break it down:
- Users submit their shit in and it enters the submission queue, much like how it goes here. Difference is, the queue is public, so everyone is going to see the new submissions as they roll in.
- Other users check out the submission through this special queue. After reviewing the submission, the user gives it a rating based on its merits.
- After a submission receives a number or ratings, it is accepted or rejected based on its score. Anything that receives a decent score is accepted. (Honestly, I haven't been frequenting the site much recently, so the details on this part are probably fuzzy.)
- Users are able to comment on the submissions at this time, as well, so ratings don't go without some wordsy feedback.
- Finally, and possibly most importantly, users who are dipshits with their ratings and downvote or upvote everything they come across will slowly lose voting power. Basically, if you're too nice or too mean, it will reflect in your voting power based on what happens to the submission (accepted or rejected). This encourages users to really vote based on its actual merits instead of lame shit. This voting power is public on a user's profile, so everyone knows if your definition of quality work is screwy.

I believe that covers pretty much all there is to the system, as far as I can tell. Thing is, RMN is not Newgrounds and what works for NG will not necessarily work for us. Changes will have to be made to make sure this system suits the site and the community, otherwise it'll just be a detriment to the goals we have.

Changes/Alternatives That Have Come To My Head As I Typed This Up:
- Ratings can be kind of arbitrary at times. I know some people are not a fan of the star system attached to reviews, so it may be more appropriate for games in this queue to have a different format. Instead of a star rating, users could either vote "Accept" or "Reject" with the option of attaching a comment to their vote.
- With Newgrounds, the game's creator and score is completely public. With the goal of making people vote as fairly as possible, it may be a good idea to make submissions anonymous and to keep the games current submission score/comments hidden.
- Even though this will make the site more organic, I'm not suggesting the elimination of staff. Having staff around to keep an eye on things is still a good idea. One of the modifications I would make to NG's system to accommodate our site's standards is having whoever still messes with the submission queue just look over submissions, make sure they meet the bare minimum (three screenshots, one paragraph, whatever that shit is), and send it to the public queue for judgment.
- Going along with the staff thing again, it might be a good idea for them to review the more "deviant" submissions that receive an excessive amount of good or bad scores. They would basically make sure that 20 jerks didn't get to the game at once, preventing its chance at a fair judgment. If the deviant submission is really worthy of whatever judgment it received, though, the staff would just clear it off their list and whatever happens happens. If there is a chance that the submission did just have shitty, shitty luck, the game could be kicked back into the queue for another chance. (Obviously, limits would have to be put into place to prevent staff from potentially abusing this extra life for submissions.)

I believe that just about covers everything I wanted to suggest. It is pretty late, though, so I may change this post to add/fix shit as I figure it all out. Have at it.