http://videosift.com/video/Japanese-Precision

Here is the full routine. Wild. [edit] not a dupe -- blankie's is a short excerpt. short attention span theater.

It's marching band for people who hate marching bands.

Big Upvote!
I replayed it three times looking for a half-step or somebody pausing--perfect.

Me watching this.

>> ^bareboards2:

http://videosift.com/video/Japanese-Precision
Here is the full routine. Wild. [edit] not a dupe -- blankie's is a short excerpt. short attention span theater.
according to http://videosift.com/faq-en.php

A duplicate video is one which contains content already on VideoSift in a published, queued, personal queued, or dead video submission. Minor changes in content, like a few additional insignificant seconds of video or alternate background music, will still be considered dupes. The only exception to this is if the change in audio makes a significant difference to the video content.

I disagree. This video is just over a minute long, the original is over 8 minutes long, hardly "a few additional insignificant seconds of video".>> ^mxxcon:

>> ^bareboards2:
http://videosift.com/video/Japanese-Precision
Here is the full routine. Wild. [edit] not a dupe -- blankie's is a short excerpt. short attention span theater.
according to http://videosift.com/faq-en.php

A duplicate video is one which contains content already on VideoSift in a published, queued, personal queued, or dead video submission. Minor changes in content, like a few additional insignificant seconds of video or alternate background music, will still be considered dupes. The only exception to this is if the change in audio makes a significant difference to the video content.

pft, should of been doing calculations at the same time, they set the bar so low.

Actually, they are doing a very easy version of cross through. I was in the band at Texas A&M and we did this without removing a rank. This was the easy drill (putting two people in one spot). The "hard" one was when we did our 4 way cross (basically putting 4 people into one place).

Here's a sample.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiF1Yad-ZaQ&feature=related

I disagree. This is a dupe. It's a smaller segment of a larger clip.

However, if the smaller clip was sifted first then the longer one was sifted later, the longer one would not be considered a dupe because it would be adding a significant about of content to the "table".

For example, if someone posted a clip from a Louis CK routine that featured one particular bit that lasted 1-2 minutes long then, a month later when his whole routine is available for public viewing and is sifted here that is 15-20 minutes long, then there would be no dupe. But if that whole process where to be reversed and the 15-20 minute routine were to be sifted first then someone came along and started sifting bits and pieces of his whole routine then they would all be considered dupes.

Sorry, as I always hate it when I have a duplicate of my own, but this is, in fact, a dupe.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Japanese-Precision

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by brycewi19. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

http://videosift.com/poll/What-is-a-dupe

This poll was taken of the community and it was overwhelmingly decided that dupes are exact dupes. 33-8. The community spoke loud and clear.

@lucky760 -- @brycewi19 is completely in error by duping this vid. . Sure would be nice to have *notadupe to stop a dupe in error from being committed. If someone comes along and gets an itchy trigger finger, this vid goes bye bye with no recourse except your direct involvement.

This issue just keeps coming up over and over. Dang.

*naughtadoop

Bite my head off, will ya?

Quoting @lucky760

"If the entirety of a submitted video's content is contained within an existing submission, it shall not be considered a duplicate if and only if the existing submission is at least 15 minutes long and its total length is at least 300% that of the newer submission."

in that context, this does qualify as a dupe. This may be less than 300# length of the original, but the 15 minute mark isn't reached (original is 8 minutes)

Well, now I can look for short versions of clips which are already on the sift, sift them and earn the points!! Wow, that is a nice way to deal with quality.

I'd say it is a dupe contentwise. The original video even starts at about the same time. But I'm not foolish enough to take it upon me to i s d u p e it.
*discuss @dag @lucky760

This video is being sent to Sift Talk for discussion - discuss requested by DerHasisttot.

Sorry to say, but to me a shorter clip (submitted later) from a longer video (submitted earlier) should be considered a dupe. At least within reason, and (according to Sheppard):
--
"If the entirety of a submitted video's content is contained within an existing submission, it shall not be considered a duplicate if and only if the existing submission is at least 15 minutes long and its total length is at least 300% that of the newer submission."

in that context, this does qualify as a dupe. This may be less than 300# length of the original, but the 15 minute mark isn't reached (original is 8 minutes)"
--
Sorry if I sound grumpy on this, but I've had some stuff dupeof'd on those grounds, and also there are TONS of stuff I'd love to sift (short clips) but are already here because of a 'mashup' or something.

But if the shorter clip not altered - like making a mockup, adding subtitles, etc. - I'd consider it is a dupe. Like I said,I'd CONSIDER it as a dupe. Just to see what the higher powers say.

Sorry, didn't mean to be so abrupt.

It's just this has been such a struggle for so long. Do a search for "dupe" and look at all the sift talk posts over the years. It is such a confusing issue.

I know it is just videos. But clearly we get wound up about this.

@Shepppard, could you give me a link where lucky said that 15 minute stuff? I never saw that before. I must say though, I find it frustrating that we say we are a community, and the community votes very clearly about something and then that vote is ignored? What the heck? Are we or aren't we a community? I mean, the vote wasn't even close.

Of course lucky is the arbitrator of whether or not to do programming -- that notadupe request has been made many times, and he doesn't want to do it. Fine. I respect that.

@mintbbb, I'm sorry that you have been duped in the past. I have watched many dupes that weren't dupes go down. It is frustrating for me as an observor (hasn't happened to me that I remember, a dupe in error). I like to see folks have fun and succeed with fun/interesting/poignant vids.

And it is just videos. We'll all survive.


>> ^brycewi19:

Bite my head off, will ya?

@bareboards2 same thread you linked

>> ^lucky760:

Perhaps we should modify the dupe guideline as follows:

If the entirety of a submitted video's content is contained within an existing submission, it shall not be considered a duplicate if and only if the existing submission is at least 15 minutes long and its total length is at least 300% that of the newer submission.

@Shepppard, thanks.

No one agreed to that. That was just lucky's idea.

It's too arbitrary, don't you think? A 14.5 minute video isn't a source for a dupe, but a 15 minute one is?

We can use our own judgment, can't we?

Honestly, who amongst us has watched a 90 second vid because it was short, but skipped past an 8 minute vid as being too long? I do it ALL THE TIME.

http://videosift.com/search?q=dupe&t=t&pg=1 Here's the search of Sift Talks about dupes. 137. Not all are actually about duping, but many of them are.

@bareboards2

To be quite honest, I watched the original 8 minute version of this when it was sifted. I don't think we need a smaller version of the same thing.

Lets use a different example, there's the Maru videos. The ones of the cat that just jumps into boxes. Usually, he spends about 5-20 seconds running and jumping into a box, and then the video is edited to show him jumping into another (or the same) box. What's to stop people of posting each and every little clip of Maru jumping into a box, just not edited together in the 3 minute video?

It's another example of the 300% time limit that lucky was thinking about.

You can see the exact same clip in the 3 minute version, and we don't end up with a million different videos of "Maru jumping into a box" making finding a specific one near impossible.

That's a fairly similar situation to what's going on here, it's just not small clips of walking edited together, it's one continuous video of the Japanese walkers. Why do we need just one specific part of it when you can just go see the original 8 minute version?

This doesn't give it new music, this isn't even a different angle. It's just a small part of the original video, if you wanted to see one specific part, why not just go find the original and jump to the 1:45 second mark, instead of sifting a whole different video about it?

@Shepppard, I see what you are saying.

[edit - However] I don't see it playing out this way. The community will shame someone out of being a dick like that. Besides gathering en masse and duping those annoying vids out of existence.

90 seconds is significantly shorter than 8 minutes. More people will watch 90 seconds than will invest 8 minutes.

I linked the original video to this one so that IF someone was interested in a MUCH longer version, they could click through. I wonder how many did?

Because 90 seconds is waaaaay shorter than 8 minutes.

Besides, WE TOOK A POLL. The community has already decided. There is no need to discuss this so soon after that poll was done. If this were a year or two in the future, I'd say re-do the poll. But it has only been a couple of months.

I share your concerns about clogging up the Sift with ridiculous mini-vids. I don't want that either. If it happens, I'll be the first to dupe it, I promise.

*return

It's past time to return, yes?

Returning this video from Sift Talk - return requested by bareboards2.

Asians do everything better.....even walking.

I think there should be some limits on shorter clips, at least. Something along the lines of what lucky proposed as quoted above, but maybe simpler.

Maybe something as simple as a video's got to be "long" before excerpts are allowed and an excerpt can't be more than 25% of the original. That still seems overly complicated. Maybe excerpts need to be "brief", though that would probably not fly with the pro-excerpt crowd.

Allowing a 50 minute "excerpt" of a 60 minute documentary seems really crazy to me. Why not just get rid of the dupe rule all together at that point?

@mxxcon @brycewi19 @luxury_pie @DerHasisttot @mintbbb

You're all 5 months late to the party.

Seems to me this definitely is a dupe. If it's allowed, then it means anyone can take a short excerpt of a short video and submit it as new content, and that's not good.

Unless there is any further compelling testimony, I'll come back and isdupe this.

@bareboards2
I can't agree on the whole "no time to watch long videos" thing. If I have only a couple of minutes to spare, I just browse some of the longer videos and if I see something interesting I can use the bookmark to watch it later.
If the sifter on the other hand wants to point out some part of a longer video it could be done in the description.

So what the community voted on doesn't matter? 33-8? Overwhelmingly?

That's not good either.

Well, it's not a perfect world.

And it's just videos.

So can you make up a rule, Lucky? And please update the guidelines so we all know what is going on? It is really silly to keep revisiting the same topic, yeah?


>> ^lucky760:

Seems to me this definitely is a dupe. If it's allowed, then it means anyone can take a short excerpt of a short video and submit it as new content, and that's not good.
Unless there is any further compelling testimony, I'll come back and isdupe this.

If this kind of "sifting" is allowed then I think I will go search for some whole Chris Rock, Ricky Gervais, Louis CK, and Jimmy Carr routines, find smaller clips of them and cash in on all the pretty, pretty votes.

This is not what sifting should be. Duplications clog things up. It sucks, I know. I've been on the receiving end of many-o-dupes in the past. You get excited that you're posting something original then you get the equivalent of..."The Simpsons did it"!

33-8.

>> ^lucky760:

Seems to me this definitely is a dupe. If it's allowed, then it means anyone can take a short excerpt of a short video and submit it as new content, and that's not good.
Unless there is any further compelling testimony, I'll come back and isdupe this.


A couple compelling points. First, it was voted on 33-8 and so it has popular opinion going for it.

Second, Zifnab makes an excellent point here where he says "Part of the dupeof process automatically makes the duplicate embed a backup of the original video." So you'd be adding a 1 minute video as backup for an 8 minute video. This will make the accuracy of VideoSift's dupe invocation very sloppy.

Third, we've set precedent on this site that shorter videos stay. We'd have to be consistent and duped the other ones too. Which will lead to a lot of backups that are much shorter or longer than the original.

And lastly, Ron fucking Paul!

There has to be some guidelines on what clips of existing posts are allowed to be re-submitted. It'd be a bit much to allow each 1 minute portion of the synchronized walking video to be submitted by 8 different people.

As far as dupeof goes, that is absolutely correct. It should not be used on videos that are not a reasonable replacement of the original post.

The Posting Guidelines have been updated for what are not dupes and what dupes should or should not have dupeof invoked.

I'll let @dag be the final arbiter on this post.

I'd like to throw my 2 cents into the whole "33-8" vote that keeps getting thrown around.

This site has more than 41 sifters. And to be honest, I didn't even know that poll existed. Most people don't look into the blogs or posts, so unless it was fronpaged it was NOT a community vote.

That's like going to a single town in the state of Texas, getting a tally of 70% democrats to 30% republicans, and declaring the entire state of Texas democrats.

Please, stop throwing that around. 51 people do not decide the fate of 2300+. You're only further hurting your argument of "It's what the community decides" when it's basically the exact opposite until a thorough survey is taken.

I do feel like this is a dupe, but then again this doesn't really qualify as a backup for the full 8-minute video, so for that reason alone I won't *isdupe it.

The question then: how do we shame blankfist out of being a dick?
>> ^bareboards2:


[edit - However] I don't see it playing out this way. The community will shame someone out of being a dick like that. Besides gathering en masse and duping those annoying vids out of existence.

For those who don't want to go searching, here is what lucky has put in the guidelines (emphasis is mine):

"Search the site before submitting to see if your video is already posted.

A duplicate video is one which contains content already wholly available on VideoSift in a published, queued, personal queued, or dead/deadpool video submission. Minor changes in content, like a few additional insignificant seconds of video or alternate background music, will still be considered dupes. The only exception to this is if the change in audio makes a significant difference to the video content.

If a newer submission's video is a clip of content found within an existing post, it will be considered a duplicate unless it meets both these criteria:

The original post is at least 15 minutes in length
The original post is at least 3 times longer than the clip

If a duplicate cannot adequately be considered an exact or reasonable replacement of the original, it should be *discarded.

Otherwise, instead of *discarding, privileged members may invoke *dupeof on a video that is a duplicate. This invocation will kill the dupe, transfer its votes to the original, and add the duplicate embed code as a backup to the original post. A duplicate video may have *dupeof invoked on even if it has been discarded, so such votes may still validly be transferred to the original video."


So blankfist, you have to discard this video under these new guidelines. The way I read it, the only way someone can discard it for you is to get you banned first. [silver star privilege: *discard - remove a post submitted by a banned user]

One thing -- there shouldn't be as many arguments about what a dupe is.

Only the original submitter of a post may discard it unless the submitter is banned - ignoring discard request by bareboards2.

Synchronized Salary Men, if it becomes an Olympic sport the Japanese will crush everyone.

DUPE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is WAY obviously INSTANTLY apparent

dupe or not, I've seen it already.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

It's pretty dupey - and in my books not the highest quality sift because of that - but let's leave it. If these kind of extractions become common, we'll have to revisit the rules.

Lucky has already rewritten the rules, dag. See quote above.

>> ^dag:

It's pretty dupey - and in my books not the highest quality sift because of that - but let's leave it. If these kind of extractions become common, we'll have to revisit the rules.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'japanese, synchronized, walking, wow' to 'japanese, synchronized, walking, wow, foot drill' - edited by calvados

I'm very late to this party, but IMO this is a dupe of the longer video, and shouldn't be on this site.
If we were voting, I'd say it deserves a discard.

Blankie, maybe we should have another poll. @Shepppard doesn't trust the last one because there weren't many votes.

I know the polls don't carry water with those in charge of the site, but at least we would know for sure how the general populace feels about this hot topic. I would help direct folks to site to vote, if you want to post a new poll.

What I find most amusing about this whole kerfuffle is how irate folks get over a perceived dupe and the fear they have about what MIGHT happen, even though it has NEVER HAPPENED. This site is loaded with all sorts of crap videos that barely get sifted. Here you post a vid that gets close to 100 votes (and that is after spending 20 hours in discuss mode) and that is more upsetting than puerile, obscure, bad quality, strange, specialized, or just plain odd videos that are everywhere.

One thing I like about Lucky's rules -- at least we wouldn't struggle over this topic anymore. Personally, I think the site would be the poorer for these draconian rules -- 14.5 minute video can't spawn a 60 second excerpt under these rules, which is a dang shame. But hey. At least we wouldn't revisit the same territory endlessly.



>> ^SlipperyPete:

I'm very late to this party, but IMO this is a dupe of the longer video, and shouldn't be on this site.
If we were voting, I'd say it deserves a discard.