I've seen a few summaries on YT that were just as deserving of attention as the video itself. I'd hate to see a hard-line rule mean we didn't get to see those. But they're pretty rare, so I'd likely never really notice.

>> ^Stormsinger:

I've seen a few summaries on YT that were just as deserving of attention as the video itself. I'd hate to see a hard-line rule mean we didn't get to see those. But they're pretty rare, so I'd likely never really notice.


I am with you there mate, I'm certainly not trying to ask for a rule change or a hard and fast rule, just wondering what people's thoughts are

We're not all as witty and original as you a_c.

*sob*

>> ^gorillaman:

We're not all as witty and original as you a_c.
sob


Can't argue with that g'man. Just as most of us will never know the depths of cunt you master <3

I'm lazy. However, I sometimes change it and/or add my two cents.

I think it depends how good the original write-up was. If it reads "No description", then you either need a really good title and tags or chances are people will pass the vid by anyway. On the other hand, I have posted vids where the original description already said what I would've said, just leaving tags and channel assignments to be done.

I have seen one sifter in particular experiment with this, with descriptions along the lines of "zzxydfw" It didn't seem to hold the vid back, either, but the title, tags and channels were all spot-on.

If the original description says what needs to be said, I see no point in trying to reinvent the wheel.

>> ^oritteropo:

I think it depends how good the original write-up was. If it reads "No description", then you either need a really good title and tags or chances are people will pass the vid by anyway. On the other hand, I have posted vids where the original description already said what I would've said, just leaving tags and channel assignments to be done.
I have seen one sifter in particular experiment with this, with descriptions along the lines of "zzxydfw" It didn't seem to hold the vid back, either, but the title, tags and channels were all spot-on.

>> ^dotdude:

If the original description says what needs to be said, I see no point in trying to reinvent the wheel.


That coming from an artist whose recurring spark of imagination has been firing dots for the past half century....( < there's a few more for ya!)
A combination of laziness and a creative decaying orbit brought on by societal demands on the psyche. Not everyone can be funny, clever, entertaining with words, or enthusiastic for life when free-will be continually usurped and wage-slavery robs energy and time.

Pay your taxes, obey the laws, and microwave your dinners, copycatz!!!

'Only been doing dots regularly in the last decade. I have ventured into many art genres over the years.
>> ^chingalera:

>> ^dotdude:
If the original description says what needs to be said, I see no point in trying to reinvent the wheel.

That coming from an artist whose recurring spark of imagination has been firing dots for the past half century....( < there's a few more for ya!)
A combination of laziness and a creative decaying orbit brought on by societal demands on the psyche. Not everyone can be funny, clever, entertaining with words, or enthusiastic for life when free-will be continually usurped and wage-slavery robs energy and time.
Pay your taxes, obey the laws, and microwave your dinners, copycatz!!!

DD, an advocate of the sarcasm button....I dig pointillism man, you know that!

Voting for this poll ended with the majority of users voting You should try, but it's not of paramount importance.