the left won the moral argument decades ago,now a small cadre a shrieking harpies has taken over to....ok..i don't know WHAT they are trying to do,because everytime i try to speak to one of those snowflakes,they spray me with pepper spray,call me a rapist and run to their safe space.

or they tell me that i am not entitled to an opinion,because i am a hetero-white-male.

not saying a discussion with someone on the ultra right fares any better.either they want to share their adoration of their corporate jesus..joel olsteen..or they are constantly trying to berate me with neo-fascist literature,and show me just how patriotic a super patriot like them REALLY is,and then tell me why they couldn't join the military due to horrible bunions.

and of course one mention of muslims and they wet themselves.getting sick of loaning out my extra clothes because their bladder gets weak at the mere mention of brown people.

for years we have watched the left lose their way,and get lost in an ocean of rhetoric and faux outrage,and the same has happened with the right.

the extremes have taken hold of the megaphone,and are trying to shout each other down with their own sanctimonious self-righteous moralizing.

so the left is in the corner picking boogers and the right has gone fucking insane.

i'm telling you guys...
trump is not the disease...
he is a symptom.

our country is very very sick right now.

and i fear it is only going to get worse.

i predicted when trump won that he would rival bush in his ineptness and bungling buffoonery.well here it is a month into his presidency and i think i can say with some conviction:i was wrong..it is going to be so much worse than bush.

i need a drink...

@bareboards2
pure and utter sophistry.

and i resent the fact that you slyly attempt to imply that i will just sit back and remain silent to injustice.

when i feel quite confident my records on this site prove the exact opposite.i have vociferously and aggressively taken on those who would bully,berate and belittle anyone who would voice their opinion.

i believe i have come to YOUR defense on more than one occasion.

what i found disturbing in your comment and maybe i should clarify is this "As Homeland Security says, if you see something, say something."

this is LITERALLY what was posted on almost every open venue in east germany.

and for you to tacitly excuse this statement by dismissively stating that "the stasi operated in secret".as somehow being evidence of your own righteousness belies an ignorance of just how oppressive and fearful those people were living in those conditions.

so you are morally superior because you openly called to out,and i quote "benevolent dictator with a light touch",and did not do so in private?
THIS is your justification?
THIS is the evidence you present to me to...what? exactly?

if you truly feel that you have somehow struck a blow for justice and taken a stand for moral integrity,then i submit that you have no clue what free speech really entales,nor do you understand the implications when we,as a community,start calling in the big daddy in the sky every time someone writes an offensive potty/racist or bigoted word.

and just LOOK how you consumed @gorillaman 's comment.
you made no reference to his salient point,but rather focused on ONE thing:nigger prince.

now was this appropriate?
taken singularly i would have to agree with you.
no..it is not appropriate.

but when we take our understandings of @gorillaman,who has been a contributing sifter for over 10 years,and consider his humor..which is dark and incredibly dry (like sahara dry),then with this context added to the mix,we can conclude that he was probably making a joke...you are certainly within your rights to find that joke in poor taste,and with this community,you are also within your rights (and even encouraged) to take @gorillaman to task for his poor taste.

but instead you called for big daddy in the sky to bring the hammer of justice down,and punish this dirt potty mouthed racist.his crime?
racist verbiage.

no consideration of who was writing it.
no consideration of his history on this site,which you openly admitted is a community.
you just..focused..on..the..word.

and then you preen like a peacock thinking somehow you have struck a blow of righteousness?

please sister.....you accomplished nothing except to put dag in an awkward position,and came across as a self righteous moralizer.

when you simply could have done what other sifters here actually DID.
you downvote his comment.
and if you felt so inclined,and it appears you ARE so inclined,directly call @gorillaman out for his poor choice of verbiage.

look BB,
i actually find you to be a sweetheart,with a huuuuge propensity for empathy and compassion,but every time i engage with you my sphincter tightens up like it is preparing for a colonoscopy.there is this ever-present apprehension that my words will not be taken with humanity that they are written,or the open honesty i am trying to convey.

i am sure that if we were actually sitting in a cafe,sipping that delicious coffee you guys are so proud of, i would not experience this anxiety when engaging with you,but it seems EVERY time i disagree with something you post,or an opinion i may take issue with,i offend you in some manner.

you ..and i am sure this is not done on purpose..make it incredibly difficult to disagree with something you post,because i always feel i have hurt your feelings somehow.

real or imagined...i am just being honest here.i always approach any interaction with you as if i am walking on eggshells,underlined with landmines.

i am simply disagreeing with you here.
calling for a ban on gorillaman because of a joke made in poor taste,while simultaneously disregarding his contributions to this site,and taking his personality into consideration,is simply an over-zealous reaction and in no way deserves the attention of dag.

because if gorillaman deserves to be banned for an offensive phrase,than i should be banned as well.

free speech is just that...free.
of course we are free to ridicule that speech.
yaaay free speech!

So, if you had had quads instead of your one child, I would be in the right to berate you if you complained, felt overwhelmed, or didn't offer your full attention lovingly at all times?
What would you suggest a parent that's only equipped to raise one or two children do when they unexpectedly end up with four? Spartanize them?

Edit: and thanks to a lack of sex ed, no, some don't know how that happens.

It's true, those repairdudes are shitty, uncaring people and they could've at least improved their safety measures after the first accident. They probably didn't do it right in the first place.
But...
those people crashing, they're shitty drivers. That's a 40 miles per hour speed limit on the road, right? That's 64 kilometers per hour. Look where people slide off the road. Look how far away they are from that truck. That's at least 50 meters. It's enough space to reduce your car's speed on a slippery road to make it safe to break for a full stop. But these people are slipping off the road before they're even close enough throw one of those plastic cones at the Comcast douchebags if they had one.
Again, the repairdudes are assholes but they're not causing the accidents, it's shitty driving. The drivers are breaking too hard and too soon on a slippery road to avoid a truck that's too far away to crash into.
Just take your foot of the gas, use your breaks just to reduce speed. If you're not driving an automatic, shift down a gear to further reduce speed when you're slowed down a bit. Once you're slow enough, like maybe 30 kmph or less, you start breaking for a full stop.
Don't stomp on your break 100 meters away from the obstacle. If you start sliding, release the break to regain control of the car, to get out of the slide.
Also, why isn't the actual scene of the accident secured? Why doesn't the guy who slipped off the road secure his own damn car? I don't know about the US but over here I'm required by law to have a warning sign in my car that I have to place 100 m down the road. That would probably placed before the hilltop, where people are unable to see the repairtruck. They would be warned that something's wrong down the road.
The idiot filming puts out more cones (or whatever those things are supposed to be) but her places them by the truck instead of securing his own crashsite. Instead of warning people coming up the hill, he berates the repair-assholes and shoots video of more shitty drivers crashing, doing nothing to prevent a bigger crashsite. Unless he's the Dovahkiin, his yelling won't stop the cars from slipping off the road.
That video is a total douchebagapalooza and their bandleader is the one filming.

and what angle would that be?
YOU said mike ward was "rightly sued" for basically calling a kid ugly,and i asked for you to explain how this is a legal matter.

or is it your contention that because mike ward "punched down" instead of "punching up" IS the legal precedent?

what if he spoke on how ugly patton oswald is?
or ridiculed michael j fox's parkinsons?

would THAT be acceptable?
or would that be acceptable,but just in poor taste?

and you still haven't addressed how this young boys reputation has been ruined.from what i have been reading it was not his reputation,but how mike wards joke had become semi-popular and the kids in his school started busting this young boys balls to a degree where school was becoming an anxiety riddled event for the young man.

why aren't his school mates also being fined?
i mean,if we are going to bring in the state to handle every and all social issues..let us at least be fair.

and what about the people in the audiences that found the joke funny?
aren't they contributing to the continuation of this young mans suffering in school?

see,i think you are viewing this as a bullying situation (my assumption),and you are viewing this young man as a victim.a victim to bad jokes done in poor taste,and maybe you are correct,but jokes are subjective..NOT objective..and there is no tangible evidence that this young mans reputation has been affected.

it is the INTENT of the joke that should be scrutinized,and that is something that is also subjective and an issue we all deal with on an individual basis.the legal system should NEVER be used to decide such arbitrary and subjective material,because now you setting precedent and punishment based on "feelings",and this tactic can be easily abused.

so you may "feel" mike wards jokes are offensive and damaging,and that in your country mike ward should be executed for his crimes (fascist much?).

but remember...that pandoras box door swings BOTH ways,and the abuse can come from a direction that you,and i for that matter,would be appalled in its application.

and to even suggest that this is not a free speech issue is incredibly naive'.
if you think being charged in a civil case,and having to show in court multiple times to defend "joke" with the possibility of even MORE financial hardship,will not affect how a comedian approaches his routine and the jokes he writes,you are simply NOT thinking this whole situation through and the unintended consequences of situations such as these.

this is most certainly a free speech issue.

let me give you a hypothetical,but using the same parameters.

the wesboro baptist church goes to protest an abortion clinic,and are met with counter protesters.

the counter protesters begin to chastise and berate the westboro people.ridicule their stance on abortion and their religion.so much so that one of the younger westboro children becomes distraught,and anxious and begins to cry.someone films the exchange and posts to youtube,and it goes viral.

now the young westboro kid is being harassed in school,being picked on and being called names.the young kid is so vexed and humiliated that he avoids school at every step and is having self esteem issues.

so much so that the westboro church decides to sue the counter protesters in court.

what do you think the outcome should be?
should they even be allowed to sue?
and if so,should the young westboro kid receive damages?
or should those counter protesters receive the death penalty in your country?

do you see what i am saying?
you getting what i am laying down?

because free speech means that you are free to express yourself,but you are NOT free from offense,and offense is subjective.what offends YOU might not offend ME,and vice versa.

free speech means you are free to express every little thought that pops into your pretty little head and share with the world,and i am free to ridicule you relentlessly if i so choose.

and i will.
with gusto.

@bcglorf

interesting how you classify the protesters as angry mob and rioters.

see,
this all on tribal land,owned by native americans,who welcomed this "angry mob" and "rioters" and the police are there NOT at the behest of the tribal elders,but DAPL,a private corporation attempting to push a private pipeline,for private profit,through privately owned land.

DAPL had even hired private mercenaries to keep the landowners off their construction site,who used attack dogs,mace,rubber bullets and worked alongside the police.it got so bad at one point that they had pulled police officers from FIVE states to keep those pesky landowner rabble down!

on a good note,those ancillary officer teams bowed out after a few days,saying that it was immoral and they were unwilling to participate.so the "police" you are referring to are most likely private security.

Funny how the perspective you tell the story from changes it entirely even while keeping to the overall same facts.....and then add some context.

democracynow has been doing excellent work on this situation,as has countercurrentnews:

https://www.democracynow.org/topics/dakota_access

http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/11/north-dakota-becomes-first-u-s-state-legalize-use-armed-drones-police-defend-illegal-pipeline/

http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/10/ohio-swat-state-police-deployed-north-dakota-crack-dapl-pipeline-protesters/

http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/11/sheriffs-leave-standing-rock-saying-completely-unethical/

and if you wanna berate those hiring the private thugs:

http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/dial-a-cop-20161031

Congratulations! Your comment on Mother berated at Target by customer over her breastfeeding has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Meanwhile you crashed into the dirt.

You are the one who couldn't "let it lie." I never left the conversation, but you did.

You wrote "It finally has come to a blessed end" and "I am claiming final word".

But it wasn't your final word. You've broken that twice now.

You're choosing to interact with me and I'm happy to interact back. But the only way it ends for you is when you decide to leave, and nobody dictates that but you.

I noticed you berated someone for assuming you were male. Perhaps you could answer my question about your assumption.

Or maybe you can share another witty (lol) one word post.

Again, feel free to reply.

Come on, get the last word in. I know it'll make all the difference for you. Do it.

Your video, Mother berated at Target by customer over her breastfeeding, 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 59 Badge!

My best friend of 28 years is schizophrenic. He was diagnosed in his early 20's.... late teens. I don't talk to him much anymore, but I want to. It's hard to communicate efficiently. Last I knew he heard voices in his head... and saw lights in the sky. One of those voices were me, and every single one of them were always mad or disappointed in him because he didn't do what they"me" said to do and would berate him.... I feel so bad that my own voice can cause him pain like that. I haven't talked to him in two years... Last I knew he was on meth with some shitwhole 'friends.'

Mad props for dad viewing this the absolute best possible way.

Mild derision for plastering over the Internet, but good that he didn't berate her for it.

@transmorpher
ha! right on man.

let me start that there really is no argument between us,just a disagreement by degrees is all.

you do not have to refute my claim that "veganism is carried out for the feeling of superiority."

because i never made that claim.
my criticism was specific and focused on a single person @ahimsa,who,if you read his commentary,is most certainly taking a morally superior stance.

if you compare how you were interacting and how ahimsa was interacting.the differences are quite stark.

you were quite open and honest on how you eventually reached veganism.(bravo my friend),but i didnt really see you berate or belittle someone for still eating meat,or being a non-vegan.

oh...you certainly argued your points and exposed weak and facile arguments.you offered new ways of looking at the situation,but you really didn't judge a person for not following your ways of thinking/being/doing.

basically you took responsibility for your choices.shared your reasons for those choices and have allowed people to make THEIR own choices.

how can you not respect that?
which is why i wanted to trade partners.
tongue in cheek of course..that was my way of giving you props and respect.

ahimsa,on the other hand,didnt even respect those he engaged with enough to even use his own words,and instead indulged in presumption,laziness and pretentious twattery.(god,i love that phrase.thank you britain!)

ahimsa approached veganism much the same way a newly born again person approaches talking about their new love for jesus,by proselytizing.

being a man of faith i can understand and relate to someone experiencing a profoundly life changing event,manifested by a serious epiphany and the desire to share that new understanding with everyone you meet.confident in an absolute certitude of righteousness.

but it can be so aggravating to be on the receiving end of such self righteousness,because there has been little time of actual examination and reflection.the newness and novelty cloud all other considerations and ANY rebuttal or deviation is seen as an affront,a sacrilege and blasphemy and therefore should be dismissed...entirely.

i suspect that ahimsa is young and his/her veganism is fairly new and fresh.this would explain the religious quality of his/her arguments.

YOU..on the other hand,have approached from a far more even handed and open way.choosing instead to use humor and wit to make your arguments while not judging those you disagree,allowing for a real dialogue which can lead to understanding.

so good on you mate.

i specifically like the fact you lay out your journey and the reasons why ,but you do not admonish those for not following the same path.which is the correct way to engage.

and what i REALLY dig,is that your argument is basically "this is how i came to where i am,and i am betting that you will to...eventually".

because,at it's heart,you are 100% correct.there really IS no reason to eat meat.

a person who eats meat really has only ONE reason and that is simply "because i want to".now there are cultural and racial reasons,long standing heritage and dishes passed down over generations,and you acknowledge that,because it really is important and is underlying reason why so many still eat meat(and because we want to).

but i suspect that your final argument is more correct than incorrect.meat will eventually go away and be replaced by something better and more healthy.

but that takes time.possibly a generation or two.maybe three.
you recognize this,while ahimsa does not.

i also suspect you may be heading on your way to old fartdom.

anyways,thanks for the dance mate.
you seem a righteous dude.

@WeedandWeirdness

do you identify with a video so strongly as to become offended and/or irritated if someone downvotes?

@chicchorea actually showed respect by stating this video wasn't his deal.many here don't,they just downvote.

to say that chicchorea's original comment was intended to be insulting and rude may be true,but it is a presumption,with zero evidence to support your presumption.

i took it as him being a smart ass and berating himself for lacking the discipline to make it to the end of the video before down-voting.

my claim is also a presumption,based on very little.
which of our presumptions are more valid?

you seem a decent sort,and this is just a misunderstanding.
i am with @chicchorea and @newtboy on their opinions on this band.

i would say punk has changed,but i have been digging these guys for awhile:
http://videosift.com/video/downtown-boys-americas-most-exciting-punk-band

to each their own,all based on their talents and proclivities.i look forward to your video submissions @WeedandWeirdness

Assuming he's not just lying about his dad being the owner, which is more than possible....
I wonder what kind of beating and berating he got after his pops saw this video. I bet dad knows what social media can do to a business...it can get a franchise taken away for one, it can start protests that bankrupt it for another.
I'm not saying either would be appropriate in this case, but it can and has happened for less.
I'm guessing that there was a long talk about respect before he was fired, and another about it being HIS fortune right there, likely ending with something along the lines of 'and now it will never be yours'.

Not really. Griefing is basically causing trouble for other players. It's not so much about berating them as it is about ruining their experience. Typical examples are spawn camping (killing players as soon as they appear) or deliberately sabotaging your own team while pretending to be incompetent.

In this case, the clearly unhinged kid invited the guy making the video into the hole expressly to kill him and steal his shit.