3 x 17 minutes = 51 minutes minimum to not be a dupe.

51 minutes > 47 minutes, therefore it's a dupe!

(You're allowed to employ a quad-dramatic equation and a log o' rhythm, but you are required to show your work, otherwise it's a dupe.)

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

That sounds good to me. The only tricky bit will be the calculation. OK, everyone I have a 47 minute video, and a 17 minute excerpt. Acceptable or not? Go! >> ^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.

How about a 7 minute excerpt that shows up at minute mark 8 on a 17 minute long TED vid?

I was recently called as a dupe under these circumstances.

It was a snippet that talked about an experience with door to door Mormon missionaries, within a larger talk/stand up about religion in general.

The dupeof and isdupe is to allow for differences of opinion -- it takes two to agree that a dupe is a dupe.

Unfortunately, there is extreme disagreement about the definition of dupe. That is what this poll is about.

Some feel that any part -- ANY PART -- is duplicated, then they are free to dupe. And there is no going back, or at least, I wouldn't bother dag or lucky or whoever to fix a "wrong" dupe. They already work hard on this site -- the heartbreak of an ill called dupe is really nothing, in the grand scheme of things.

Written rules provide guidelines and avoid kerfuffles. Hence this poll.

Please vote to allow excerpts.




>> ^thegrimsleeper:

I wouldn't consider a 10 second clip of a two hour movie a dupe but I would consider a 10 minute part of a 15 minute video a dupe.

Commercial break starts at 17 minutes. Skip ahead to 18:50 to hear the rest of the interview.

And here's her original radio broadcast that started this controversy.

>> ^jimnms:

This one was posted one day before yours, so you post is the dupe.
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> tedbater said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/t/tedbater-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">I give up...
This is a dupe: dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Motivational-Speaker-has-made-a-Believer-out-of-Me
</div></div></div>

Yep, http://videosift.com/video/Motivational-Speaker-has-made-a-Believer-out-of-Me 3 days 13 hours 17 minutes ago while this one is 4 days...

@Fade:
pssst, magic isn't real.



Pssst. Magicians aren't actually trying to do real magic.

anyway you bringing up magic is meaningless in this context. This was a stunt. Nobody but you is claiming that this was magic.



It's quite relevant since Blaine gained fame through his magic specials, and his stunts are often televised along with his magic performances. Besides, you're not the only one to engage me in this conversation about magic in this thread. But I agree, Blaine has morphed into more of a stuntman lately.

@gwiz665:
And to me holding your breath for 17 minutes means you're in league with some dark forces for certain.



The problem I find with all these stunts is that when David Blaine does it, he gets huge publicity because he is a celebrity, and when other people do bigger and better things, nobody gives a f*. For example, Tom Sietas beats Blaine's record not long afterwards. Does he get a TED talk even though he's been breaking static apnea, static apnea w/ O2, and dynamic apnea records for years? There's so many feats of human accomplishment out there. Do they all need David Blaine to make an attempt before they get some recognition in the media?

Maybe I'm just too cynical about our celebrity obsessed culture.

I did indeed. I tried to respond to that whole "is this magic" argument that was going on, and I couldn't very well call David Blaine "technology"

And to me holding your breath for 17 minutes means you're in league with some dark forces for certain.

In reply to this comment by mentality:
>> ^gwiz665:
Any sufficiently advanced feat is indistinguishable from magic.


I hope you're misquoting Arthur C. Clarke deliberately for the lulz, and not actually trying to be serious =P

>> ^mentality:
>> ^Fade:
>> ^mentality:
When did feats of endurance, like staying in a box for 44 days, become magic? Or for that matter, entertaining to watch?

when people died from not eating for 44 days or from staying underwater for 17 minutes. duh.

Maybe you think holding your breath is magic, but psssst: it's not. But hey, maybe you also think the Guinness World Records is a book of magic tricks. Duh.


pssst, magic isn't real.

>> ^Fade:
>> ^mentality:
When did feats of endurance, like staying in a box for 44 days, become magic? Or for that matter, entertaining to watch?

when people died from not eating for 44 days or from staying underwater for 17 minutes. duh.


Maybe you think holding your breath is magic, but psssst: it's not. But hey, maybe you also think the Guinness World Records is a book of magic tricks. Duh.

>> ^mentality:
When did feats of endurance, like staying in a box for 44 days, become magic? Or for that matter, entertaining to watch?


when people died from not eating for 44 days or from staying underwater for 17 minutes. duh.

"police taser sitting man" got me to a blog of someone who says they called police and asked about the story:

http://theflashscoop.tumblr.com/post/163105431/excessive-use-of-force-in-folsom

"The officers were called to the scene by a neighbor. The man who was tased apparently spent the entire morning on his front lawn screaming racially charged remarks at the top of his lungs. Among the things he yelled were: “White Power!” and “Heil Hitler!” The officer was not sure what ethnicity the man was, but he informed me that his name appeared to be of hispanic origin. He was not a black man, contrary to some reports.

The first officers arrived on the scene. These were a mixture of different races (black, white, and hispanic). The man on the porch screamed racial slurs at them. Furthermore, he screamed “Shoot me motherfuckers!”, “I bet if I had a gun you would shoot me, maybe I should go get my gun!”, and other variations on this theme.

The officers identified this as a mental health issue but also realized that he seemed imbalanced enough that he might be dangerous. They called a negotiator to the scene to try to subdue him. The negotiator tried to talk him into calming down for 15 minutes to no avail. The commanding officer on the scene then decided that it was in the interest of the public’s welfare and the man’s own welfare to take him into custody and get him medical attention.

The man on the porch was advised ahead of time that he would be tased. Finally, we got what we saw on the video. Immediately after the tasing, the man was transferred to the hospital where he was treated for minor injuries. The police then transferred him to a mental institution. The entire incident lasted 17 minutes.

Finally, according to Folsom Police, the taser was set at a non-lethal level. According to Folsom Police, officers are tased several times in training, and that, in their opinion, there was no excessive use of force in this incident."

>> ^visionep:
I'm surprised they didn't get Joe Rogan to participate.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1742125/

Or George Lopez. I would love for there to be video of George beating the crap out of Carlos behind the Comedy Store, after he found out that Carlos had stolen 17 minutes of his act.

Not if it's in his or her PQ. It still belongs to them. But the discard pile is like the junkyard, i.e., if you find something there you like then you can take it, and if you manage to make a tidy profit from it no one can legitimately complain. Those are the rules. I don't make 'em. And I am absolutely incapable of uttering a falsehood. Except to my boss.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
I think that "moved to discard because it failed to receive enough votes" equals PQ by my logic.

So, can I submit a video that someone else has in their pq?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
I know you said that you want to let this go, and I'm cool with that. However I just want to point out that PQ does not equal discard pile. Anything in your discard pile is fair game for anyone to post again, regardless of whether it got discarded before or after the PQ was introduced. Trust me, but if you think I'm wrong then ask dag or lucky. I'm not saying I know everything, but I'm pretty ding-dang sure about this one. Ding-dang sure. Serious Elvis knows how much that means.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Okay, just so I understand...

The last time Pushkill begged his video was July 3. That means it was back in his PQ by say July 4th or 5th.

I promoted Abducted's on July 23, and it published while Puskill's was still in pq with 9 votes (the tenth being yours).

So, if we agree that promote=save=requeue, and discard pile=Pq, then Pushkill's had been "requeued" and returned to his PQ midearly July, and Abducted's had been "requeued" and sifted while Pushkills was expired and in his pq in late July.

What am I missing?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
If you promoted it out of his discard pile and NOT his personal queue, brother schmawy, then this would be the dupe. Once something is discarded and then later resurrected with a * promote, it's new queue date is all that matters. The original queue date no longer matters at that point, unlike how it would be if it had been sitting in a PQ.

Pushkill queued his 3 weeks 2 days ago, while this one was queued (with your * promote) only 18 hrs and 17 minutes ago. Therefore this one must be discarded. Sorry you wasted a promote, bro.

*discard

I think that "moved to discard because it failed to receive enough votes" equals PQ by my logic.

So, can I submit a video that someone else has in their pq?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
I know you said that you want to let this go, and I'm cool with that. However I just want to point out that PQ does not equal discard pile. Anything in your discard pile is fair game for anyone to post again, regardless of whether it got discarded before or after the PQ was introduced. Trust me, but if you think I'm wrong then ask dag or lucky. I'm not saying I know everything, but I'm pretty ding-dang sure about this one. Ding-dang sure. Serious Elvis knows how much that means.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Okay, just so I understand...

The last time Pushkill begged his video was July 3. That means it was back in his PQ by say July 4th or 5th.

I promoted Abducted's on July 23, and it published while Puskill's was still in pq with 9 votes (the tenth being yours).

So, if we agree that promote=save=requeue, and discard pile=Pq, then Pushkill's had been "requeued" and returned to his PQ midearly July, and Abducted's had been "requeued" and sifted while Pushkills was expired and in his pq in late July.

What am I missing?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
If you promoted it out of his discard pile and NOT his personal queue, brother schmawy, then this would be the dupe. Once something is discarded and then later resurrected with a * promote, it's new queue date is all that matters. The original queue date no longer matters at that point, unlike how it would be if it had been sitting in a PQ.

Pushkill queued his 3 weeks 2 days ago, while this one was queued (with your * promote) only 18 hrs and 17 minutes ago. Therefore this one must be discarded. Sorry you wasted a promote, bro.

*discard

I know you said that you want to let this go, and I'm cool with that. However I just want to point out that PQ does not equal discard pile. Anything in your discard pile is fair game for anyone to post again, regardless of whether it got discarded before or after the PQ was introduced. Trust me, but if you think I'm wrong then ask dag or lucky. I'm not saying I know everything, but I'm pretty ding-dang sure about this one. Ding-dang sure. Serious Elvis knows how much that means.

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Okay, just so I understand...

The last time Pushkill begged his video was July 3. That means it was back in his PQ by say July 4th or 5th.

I promoted Abducted's on July 23, and it published while Puskill's was still in pq with 9 votes (the tenth being yours).

So, if we agree that promote=save=requeue, and discard pile=Pq, then Pushkill's had been "requeued" and returned to his PQ midearly July, and Abducted's had been "requeued" and sifted while Pushkills was expired and in his pq in late July.

What am I missing?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
If you promoted it out of his discard pile and NOT his personal queue, brother schmawy, then this would be the dupe. Once something is discarded and then later resurrected with a * promote, it's new queue date is all that matters. The original queue date no longer matters at that point, unlike how it would be if it had been sitting in a PQ.

Pushkill queued his 3 weeks 2 days ago, while this one was queued (with your * promote) only 18 hrs and 17 minutes ago. Therefore this one must be discarded. Sorry you wasted a promote, bro.

*discard