Thanks for pushing my Beckham vid to the front page.

Incredibly so, definitely worth the promote. Hope it helps

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
Thanks. I was kind of surprised when no one liked it at all. I think it is quite powerful.


In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
Jesus christ, that is some kind of ad. Fair play to Emma T, love that woman

Thank you! I am very happy to see you are back. Femme Power!!!

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
Congrats! I love me some Issykitty!

Thanks!

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
*promote

http://www.videosift.com/talk/Gratefulmom-Hits-GOLD

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
I'm sorry I dupeof-ed your fine video. I know you can't have known because it had a really obscure title and tags. Took me a while to find it.

No worries, would have done it myself. Odd it didn't show up when I posted, I even searched for "jet fly low".

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
thanks!

In principle, I agree with you. I've tried many times to see that rule/guideline enforced, and failed every time. Despite my admonitions to dag that having the FAQ entry provides zero legal cover if there is copyrighted material on VS, he has never supported removal of any sift when it comes up. I've never gotten a straight answer from him on it, but I think he wants the FAQ entry so as to discourage new(er) users from regularly posting up every new Simpsons episode, etc. If/when VS starts to see a large number of full length movies or television episodes posted, I suspect dag will start to enforce the rule.

On a side note, Dr. Strangelove presents an interesting example of the failure of copyright laws. The whole point of copyright is to encourage new ideas by providing knowledge creators with some exclusivity over their works for some time. Given that Kubrick and Peter George (author of the original novel) are both dead, there is no reason for Dr. Strangelove to still be under copyright. But the law allows for copyright term to last for as long as 70 years(!) after the death of the author. And in this case, the copyright is owned by a corporate entity, extending the copyright term to as much as 95 years after publication.

I could write endless pages of text on this subject, so I better stop here before I get carried away.

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
Hey, it seems to me you are on my side in this:

http://www.videosift.com/video/Dr-Strangelove-94-mins

dang, i'm watching the stephen fry kingdom stuff. really good so far!!! !!!!!

Thanks, I'll take care of it.



In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
I voted yes. Just FYI, though, this is currently in the dead pool (under dotdude).

I apologize. I was being defensive.

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
I don't care about most of that at all. I was just telling you I liked your writing. That's all.

I discovered that after I voted yes on the siftquisition. All I had to see was publicly viewable "conduct unbecoming" and I was in favor of a temp ban. Others weren't. If anyone asked me, I would vote the same way for BT.

I have nothing against you. I have no personal feelings about anyone here: I apply very clear standards about publicly viewable stuff that you are correct I wouldn't have cared about at all if BT hadn't shoved it in my face, but having it placed there, and seeing it was public, that's the way I will always vote. I'm one voice, and that's one incident. I have no problem seeing that my opinion of what's right is not what happens.

I"m not trying to rag on you at all. You did something--easily understandable or not--doesn't matter to me. I don't judge. I have no preconceptions about you or what you do in the future. I hope to see more of you, that's all. I was moved to tell you, not because I seek to bludgeon you into any behavior, but because I feel like telling people when their words charm me. It doesn't happen that often.

It was a small thing.

I'm not trying to "self-destruct." I haven't discarded anyone's videos or made whiney SiftTalks.

I wasn't even trying to make thepinky shit a matter of public discourse. That was burdturgler. As for the argument of profile's being public, how many were aware of the spat until burdturgler aired it, honestly.

We can all wish for peace, but that is an alien and impossible concept. If you don't think that's true, look around you.

I don't pander to anyone's idea of the image I should portray. I just am.

In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
I haven't been around during the time you've been here. I wasn't here when the drama between you and pinky started. I'm way behind and out of touch, and honestly, not all that interested in catching up--I can't follow feuds without getting bored (honestly, even when I am one of the participants I have trouble keeping interest long enough to track).

...but... I just spent some time reading your blog, and I like your style. I might not approve of some of your forms of communication, but you are smart, and interesting, and I hope you stick around and don't self-destruct.

No reason you should care what I think: you probably know even less of me than I know of you.

But it's just a fact: I look forward to reading your words again, though I would certainly prefer that the point-to-point between you and pinky morphed into a dissipating mucous-scented fog.

It's Oxie! What a breath of fresh air.

Thanks for that... I know! But, hey, what can you do... people come here for a myriad of reasons, the largest, I'm sure, is to be entertained, so whatever rocks their boat...


In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
Man, this should never have needed a beg or a promote! This should be top 15, and instead, we have people voting for stupid point to point posts yelling fellow sifters. sigh.

Welcome back!

dupeof is the long asked for "merge" command. If you find a duplicate video, you can invoke dupeof in a comment on the duplicate like this:

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Original-Video

All of the votes from the duplicate will be transferred to the original. Be careful though - it's irreversible. There are a couple of safeguards in place, so for instance siftbot won't do it if the "duplicate" video is older than the "original".


In reply to this comment by oxdottir:
Could someone please explain dupe or dupeof or both to me? I've been gone a while, and I find dupes frequently. What is the thing to do now?