Your video, Toxicity (System of a Down) Halloween Light and Fire Show, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Congratulations! Your video, Brass Against - Toxicity (System of a Down Cover) ft. Cunio, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 83 Badge!

Your video, Brass Against - Toxicity (System of a Down Cover) ft. Cunio, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Wedding reception rocks to Toxicity by System of A Down, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 455 Badge!

Your video, Bohemian Rhapsody in the Style of System Of A Down, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 9 Badge!

I knew some of this stuff, but not that. But that seems ... problematic.

Cobain's lyrics were pretty famously difficult to understand. I had no clue what most of the lyrics to Smells Like Teen Spirit were until like 20 years after I first heard it when I was 10. Weird Al's parody of the song directly jabs at this, which a whole verse being:

"It's so unintelligible
I just can't get it through my skull
It's hard to bargle nawdle zouss???
With all these marbles in my mouth"


Considering all of that, if you're listening to "Polly" or "Rape Me" but only hearing half of the words, is it any surprise that people might not fully grasp the message? Might even interpret the songs as being pro instead of anti?

I love Nirvana. I agree with the intended messages of their music (at least, to the extent that I understand them). But any time that a band thinks that they don't want fans who don't agree with their "message", I tend to think it is just pointless.

Lots of bands take very clear political / ethical stances in their music. I can like the music without being fully on board with those messages. Even if I'm utterly opposed to them. I can like Rage Against the Machine without fighting the system. I can like System of a Down without being ... psycho? You might be a registered Republican who likes NOFX, or a registered Democrat who likes Kid Rock or Brooks and Dunn.

Basically, if I like what you're doing musically I don't give two shits about what your message is. The extent to which it might make me like you more or less is very negligible.

@enoch

No, no, no, man, I would never downvote something because the speaker held an opinion about a certain topic that I disagreed with. Rather, I downvoted this because the subtext of the video is clear: you don't have to listen to what SJWs say because they are self-important blowhards who were coddled as children. Doesn't matter what the argument is that they are proposing. They are SJWs and therefore their ideas cannot be worth listening to.

And more specifically, if you pay attention to the images he is showing as he narrates his stance: you don't have to listen to what Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, etc. say about games (he's showing their pictures while decrying SJWs).

This is classic GamerGate tactics. Rather than actually debate the issues, which are the representation (or lack thereof) of women and other minorities in video games, he wants to dismiss the argument out of hand. You see it all the time in GamerGate supporter comments:

"Anita is a con artist looking to scam Kickstarter supporters out of their money."
"Anita is the feminist equivalent of a TV evangelist."
"Anita has hijacked feminism."
"Anita isn't even a real feminist."
"Anita's not really a gamer."

And so on.

They are desperate to get people to dismiss Anita's criticisms out of hand, mostly because even the most ardent haters can't deny there are problems with the representation of women and other minorities in ALL media, some of which are specific to video games.

It's all a big distraction from the issues. So what if everything GamerGate supporters allege is actually true? So what if she were stealing kickstarter money? So what if she is pushing some kind of feminist agenda in games? So what if she has appointed herself as a spokeperson for feminism?

Even if it were all true, the only important question is whether her arguments about the representation of women in games are valid and well-founded.

So, I downvoted this because essentially the author is advocating judging arguments on the basis of the arguer's reputation (for example, as an SJW) rather than on the merits of the argument itself. I see it as more blatant GamerGate propoganda trying to justify attacking the argument makers rather than dealing with the argument itself. Fuck that noise.

SJW is such a useless label at this point. It is now used purely as a cop out these days, a pejorative that supposedly gives you a free pass to ignore what someone is saying because clearly they are an coddled idiot (otherwise they wouldn't be an SJW).

I absolutely agree with you that justice, freedom of speech, freedom of dissent, etc. are important. And it is troubling that people in recent days are abusing the system to shut down dissenters. But this is the world we live in now and it really only reflects the political situation in Washington that has been going on nearly a decade now--lines drawn in the sand and ideas shouted down merely because they were spoken by someone on the wrong side of the line. I guess it isn't surprising that public debate is mirroring what we've been seeing in the capitol, only with the anonymity of the Internet allowing people to take it to a whole new level with doxxing, swatting, etc.

Don't understand why you are asking that question? The video is the answer, and it's summarised for you in the description. The answer is that they were handed a piece of paper that did not have any current (at the time) American law on it - but were misled by someone into thinking that it was. I hope that's clear enough and i've highlighted it so you can see it easily.

Are you trying to make a point, or did you not get that from the seventeen different ways it was said in the video and description?

Additionally to that point, i strongly suspect that in the professional legal industry, mistakes like that simply do not happen by accident. They are at the very top some of the most important legal decisions being made in the entire world, and i'm supposed to believe that they accidentally overlooked something that had been decided over 30 years ago and entirely changed police policy? Whoops i just printed off a 30 year old law, and i thought it was the present day one? Do you think the members of the jury didn't think, "Hmmm, are you sure it's legal to shoot random people as long as they're running away? We don't see that very often anymore.... Odd!" And when they ask that they're told, "Well there's the law right there for ya, i'm as surprised as you but i won't double check the modernity of it!" Only to be told days before the decision that perhaps maybe parts of the second bit of the bit i gave you earlier might not be valid, but we don't want to get into technicalities here, don't worry about it.

It's fucking corrupt, someone's (more likely to be many people) pulled a fast one... but worse still, someone's pulled a fast one on a HUGELY important case and had the arrogance to think they'd get away with something that simple. When you think of the protests in Ferguson and many many people showing support, how could they be so flippant? It doesn't just point towards racism, it confirms every racist suspicion that you might have had about the American legal system. It's not a one-off when it happens at the very top of the pyramid, that's how the best of the legal eagles in America deals with the problem of a white policeman killing a black man.... it was his fault, he's bad, he deserved it.

They were right under the microscope here - are you racist? And what did they do? Surely this is evidence of a system that lets down black people, and therefore it urgently needs to be fixed... and what about past offenders? I'd be pretty angry, if i were a black American. It's not just a let down, it's a dupe.

Your video, Halloween Light Show 2014 - System of a Down - Chop Suey, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

So this is "Sergical Strike" not System of a Down eh?

Cool video.

>> ^Shepppard:

>> ^harpom:
>> ^Shepppard:
>> ^harpom:
>> ^conan:
This is not a piano. It's an electronic keyboard. If it has a plug it is NOT a piano.>> ^harpom:
Excellent, amazing and brilliant. I love how the song translates to the piano so well.
Chop Suey is a hard kick ass song, yet it plays so well on the piano. Sounds like a cross between Mozart and Beethoven.


LOL. Whatever. The instrument is made to sound like a piano. Sad that you have to go through life taking everything so seriously.

Everyone has their pet peeves, mine is calling pieces of music songs (which she actually does). When people are raised with a musical background minor things like that are just little quirks that make us who we are.

See response to conan. Also last time i looked Chop Suey was a song by SOTD.

And when it's played on piano without anyone singing, it has no words. When it has no words, it's not a song.

Again lol. Don't try and tell me when you listened to the song you were not hearing the lyrics in your head.

>> ^harpom:

>> ^Shepppard:
>> ^harpom:
>> ^conan:
This is not a piano. It's an electronic keyboard. If it has a plug it is NOT a piano.>> ^harpom:
Excellent, amazing and brilliant. I love how the song translates to the piano so well.
Chop Suey is a hard kick ass song, yet it plays so well on the piano. Sounds like a cross between Mozart and Beethoven.


LOL. Whatever. The instrument is made to sound like a piano. Sad that you have to go through life taking everything so seriously.

Everyone has their pet peeves, mine is calling pieces of music songs (which she actually does). When people are raised with a musical background minor things like that are just little quirks that make us who we are.

See response to conan. Also last time i looked Chop Suey was a song by SOTD.


And when it's played on piano without anyone singing, it has no words. When it has no words, it's not a song.

>> ^Shepppard:

>> ^harpom:
>> ^conan:
This is not a piano. It's an electronic keyboard. If it has a plug it is NOT a piano.>> ^harpom:
Excellent, amazing and brilliant. I love how the song translates to the piano so well.
Chop Suey is a hard kick ass song, yet it plays so well on the piano. Sounds like a cross between Mozart and Beethoven.


LOL. Whatever. The instrument is made to sound like a piano. Sad that you have to go through life taking everything so seriously.

Everyone has their pet peeves, mine is calling pieces of music songs (which she actually does). When people are raised with a musical background minor things like that are just little quirks that make us who we are.

See response to conan. Also last time i looked Chop Suey was a song by SOTD.