*NSFW *controversy

This video has been flagged as being Not Suitable For Work - declared nsfw by Hybrid.

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by Hybrid.

I think this video could use a *graphic content* warning somewhere.

Syria to send army to town after scores killed

well thats a nice scene , certainly something to be happy over.

U would hope humans would have moved on from litraly acting like chimps with machine guns.

*snuff?

*discuss

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

>> ^KnivesOut:

snuff?
discuss


WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR PROBLEM? WHY DID YOU DISCUSS THIS, DBAG?

Just kidding. That's normally the response on here, isn't it? I'm still sipping my 1:00pm morning coffee so I don't have the stomach to watch it. I haven't eaten yet either. I like Froot Loops though I haven't had a bowl in probably a decade. My feet itch. Sometimes so bad I scratch 'til they bleed at the top where the foot meets the ankle. I'm curious if it's not mites. I've never owned a nice pencil sharpener. Always those cheap ones you have to twist yourself that tend to nick the lead in weird ways that makes grooves in it. You know? Seems to weaken the lead so it always breaks when applying normal pressure while writing. I drink my coffee out of cups that always allow it to cool too much before I'm done. I've put it in the cups that keep it warm longer, the ones with the lids, but somehow I always feel the coffee doesn't taste as good in those. I know it's not true, but it's comparable to eating a $50 entree on a McDonald's burger wrapper. That would seem like it would make my whole eating experience less enjoyable. Anyhow, this has been the inane musings of blankfist.

I guess I should have been more specific in what I thought needed discussing.

>> ^FAQ:

Please do not post pornography or "snuff" films (which we define as the explicit depiction of loss of human life displayed for entertainment).

Note: The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera.

I believe the recent consensus on this has been that as long as it's vaguely newsworthy and/or "important" (i.e. something that's happening now), it's okay on the sift. This seems to fit that criteria, but I think a couple more people should probably weigh in.

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/medicines/100004724.html

Not even kidding. Like taking crack.

>> ^blankfist:

>> My feet itch. Sometimes so bad I scratch 'til they bleed at the top where the foot meets the ankle. I'm curious if it's not mites...Anyhow, this has been the inane musings of blankfist.

It's note-worthy I guess, but its not really news. There's no context, it's just gore.

Just being newsworthy isn't enough. It has to also be a "limited portion of a lengthy" informative news report. This video is only 1:20 long. This is definitely snuff.

"Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip..."

This video is 21 seconds away from getting a "brief" tag. Absolutely not "lengthy".

Not to mince words, but it's not snuff. A "snuff" movie shows the actual death or murder of the individual. Definitely *gore though, and worthy of an addendum to the FAQ. And on that note, I'm gonna go barf...

It's snuff by the definition here on the sift. This isn't about the dictionary definition, it's how this site defines it.

"The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

>> ^burdturgler:

It's snuff by the definition here on the sift. This isn't about the dictionary definition, it's how this site defines it.
"The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."


I've mentioned this a few times before, but the "snuff" rule is ambiguously written, and essentially makes it so that there has to be a new debate every time a video like this is posted. The snuff rule also states "Please do not post pornography or "snuff" films (which we define as the explicit depiction of loss of human life displayed for entertainment)." This clip is not "displayed for entertainment", so by that definition, it should be okay.

There was the clip of the girl dying on the street in Iran, which on its own lacked any sort of context but was still decided to be okay to stay on here. But then there have been similar videos which have been removed, so who knows. Like I said, it's an ambiguous, contradictory rule. I feel like it should be rewritten to be more clear, but the consensus seems to be that it's better to debate these things on a case-by-case basis than to have a clear-cut rule one way or the other.

This video is not "News worthy" in this instance as this is not a "News story."
A News report, identifying the story, highlighting the circumstances of the massacre, telling us who may be at fault, getting the story from family members, bringing forward political implications and what ever else that's pertinent to the story makes something newsworthy.

This is just amateur video of dead bodies just for the sake of gawking at dead human life and nothing else. Sure, a story may exist but that's not part of this video or what is being presented here.

My opinion is leave this to Liveleak.

"Our definition of "snuff" does include (...) any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

also from the FAQ

"Please do not post pornography or "snuff" films (which we define as the explicit depiction of loss of human life displayed for entertainment)."


Sorry burd, but you're still wrong. The site has properly defined snuff, but you are extending its meaning to include gore, mutilation, corpses, post-mortem imagery, what-have-you. I agree this shouldn't be on the Sift, but first and foremost stand for the proper use of language used to enforce such rules. A change is required to the FAQ to eliminate any misinterpretation. Per Sarzy, it needs to be re-written.

This is snuff. It simply displays bloody corpses for sheer shock/gore factor, despite that it may be related to a newsworthy event.

*discard

Discarding this post - discard requested by member lucky760.