So we are updating the faq, to modernize the no snuff rule. Basically we have the rule because we don't want to be "faces of death sift." That said there are some things that should be available for debate. With that in mind we are going to revise it to allow death from reliable news sources as well as from documentaries.

The faq won't say this explicitly but we will still probably remove anything REALLY graphic, even if fox / cnn / whomever thought it was appropriate to air.

Military escalation would only be viewed as an expansion of the forces, you do forget that while here in the west we put up with rhetoric, Iraqis are the ones who see massive military bases established in the Iraqi green zones. It would only drive more people into militias and various insurgent forces, the American presence creates this, there is a common enemy to attack by all sides.

From our perspective it looks like we are helping them out, but you forget that Iraqis were welcoming coalition forces in 1991, only to see them stop, pull back impose sanctions and empower Saddam to the point that you had to be in support of him or face certain death. Saddam is gone, the Americans are sticking around, Haliburton is making billions, while we are losing valuable voluntary troops. What's more sickening is that military presence is now little based on honor or duty, but economic reasons, going to small cities and communities to people who have nothing and hunting them down to recruit them into the army. Blackwater and other PMCs run around Iraq with no Army R.O.E. oversight or rules, they can take up any offensive position against Iraqis, the rules of the army don't apply to them.

More forces, more bullish positions would only strengthen and create the very Islamic army against the west. The only reason the American goverment will never pullout or do anything on it's own within this administration would be admitting defeat in their eyes, working multilaterally seems like such a horrible idea. However the fast pace of global economic interlinking must force the American people to reconsider their position, there is a chance now for a possible turnaround, but it will not happen, it takes a certain man to try and recover what has happened and that man is not in the White house. Nor has any candidate really proven themselves so much either.

*nauseous* stopped at 1:28 ... i don't have the stomach for this stuff anymore ... (this coming from the girl that has seen several autopsies and 'faces of death')

> Where does this fit in with the 'no death' videos?
I haven't actually watched this one yet, but I'm guessing it doesn't show the actual shooting/deaths. That policy is not intended to prevent the posting of videos related to events where someone died, but videos depicting persons being killed, e.g., Faces of Death style gore fests whose main purpose is to entertain through fatality.

In the Saddam discussion, dag made a point about the original intent of the no-snuff rule. It was to prevent VS from becoming a clearinghouse for beheading video and faces of death-type crap. I would argue that a video has to depict persons being killed or committing suicide to qualify for the no-snuff and that the killing/suicide has to be the main focus of the video.

This video only shows a spaceship disintegrating. Of course, we all understand that a crew of persons were inside the spaceship and that they all died. It does not, however, graphically depict the interior of the spacecraft and the persons in the act of dying. So it is arguably not a VS snuff rule film.

It is a close call. I still think that we should be able to post scenes of war and/or tragedy so long as the context is something greater than "Saddam Gits PWNED!"

However, I think that the 'history' loophole is far too large and would swallow the rule. The beheading of Daniel Pearl and the hanging of Hussein were historical acts and I still don't want to see them here.

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

Deano - you have a good point, perhaps we're misusing the term snuff. I don't want this to spin out of control, but I can only tell you what James and I were thinking, "way-back-then" when we put together the posting guidelines.

Our thoughts were that there are already so many sites that cater for the lurid, prurient human side that we all have. We wanted to make a zone that was free of porn and "Faces of Death" type content that you might see someplace like Somethingawful.com or stileproject.com or even Fark.com.

So maybe it's not "snuff" but we just don't want videos that show actual people dieing on the camera. IIRC, hostage beheading videos were showing up around the time that the Sift started, and it might have been a partial reaction to that. I'm glad we made that decision.

We were probably wrong in bending the rules for the Kennedy assasination, it is historically significant, but it also documents a real human being dieing in front of your eyes, which is something we have chosen to exclude from the Sift.

okay, first off i don't know if the embed was changed, but you NEVER SEE SADDAM HANGED (in the posted video). you see him up to the point where they place the noose around his neck, and then THAT'S IT!! *HOW* can this be considered a snuff piece?!

second, if the entire vid WAS posted, i STILL fail to see how it's a snuff film! in bad taste, perhaps... but certainly not snuff. maybe if someone posted 'faces of death' then sure... but until then, leave it alone. exceptions have been made for 'porn' in the past due to [sarcastic quote] historical context [sarcastic unquote]. i don't understand why something such as this shouldn't fall into the same category. granted, it happened just the other day, but if it happened an HOUR ago, it's still history!

History is information about the recorded past. [ Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_%28disambiguation%29 ]

Happy New Year indeed. My New Year's resolution is 1280x1024. The Way of the Snake isn't looking so bad lately.

I don't think you need to worry. What we are watching in the video is a bus tumbling over. The 'no snuff film' policy is for 'Faces of Death' style videos where we view a person dying. This is fine.

*return

You know if I was facing near death everyday, sitting out shooting the 50. cal overhead open to all kinds of sniper fire, hoping my humvee won't go over an IED, walking point in the mazes of streets, having locals harrass me, knowing that my vechile probably wouldn't withstand a RPG, seeing oil truck drivers and private merc forces like Blackwater make more then me per day then I get in a month.... hell...

I'd do stupid shit to get my mind off it too.

I'm with dag. We have been pretty heavy handed with the no snuff rule largely because of a desire to prevent turning the Sift into "Faces of Death." We have however kept some military footage, and there are certainly other views of this on the Sift as well. I personally vote that it should stay, but will defer acting till some more people way in.

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

I think I remember seeing this on an old "Faces of Death" video tape.

Bastards. Now it will take me another month to get to 100.

The queue was far too fat, though. And the quality is suffering on the front page, unless you love Faces of Death.