You start by introducing yourself, probably with the words "excuse me miss" first. if you think that the best way to meet new people is to straight up going for "daammmmmn", you have a lot of courtesy to learn.

Of course this all looks incredibly invasive to me. I'm from Finland, from Ostrobothnia. We do not talk to strangers and even less in this part of country. You can have 60 people in the same room with no one is talking to each other. It is considered rude, why would i talk to a stranger that i have never met and i'm never gonna meet again, i have nothing to say except empty small talk that is actually just a nervous tick, not actual communication... Just shut up, sit straight and mind your own business.

Probably poor judgement on the part of the videographer. I think the atmosphere of all the other comments, day in and day out, weighs on most women to such an extent that those innocent courtesies, and any other comment from a man, have simply eroded the patience of those who are sensitive to living in such environments.
It will stop, someday, but what kills my spirit is understanding how the passage of time, the record of history, and knowing the calculation of both of those respective of whatever your experience you struggle with, means you'll likely have to exist in that world for the duration of your life within it.
I have struggled with things my entire life that, to this day, aren't things that will be recognized, let alone rectified, by the time my life is over, and knowing that while looking toward the future you have here is nearly unbearable.
Didn't mean to bring the whole thing back to a personal element. Just meant to express that I understand the cycles of human progress and the frustration of having the foresight to endure them.

Can't stand CultOfDusty.

So we have one asshole screaming at another asshole. I watched about 36 seconds and remembered I have better things to do with my life.

If you're going to make an argument, don't start out from the premise that everyone already agrees with you.

edit: Ordinarily I'd downvote this utter bollocks, but if I was going to do that, I'd have to give it the courtesy of watching the whole thing first and this has done nothing to convince me it's worth my time.

Personal information is still personal.
There isn't a new or separate set of rules, this is true with almost anyone with any set of information that is personal.
It's called common courtesy.

Mr. Charles Darwin to the white courtesy phone . . .

@Trancecoach holding a doctorate doesn't make you capable of understanding the scientific literature. If you held a bachelor's degree in one of the three sciences you'd stand a lot better chance of being able to understand the literature than someone who had a doctorate in say Art History. I would actually refer back to the Dunning Kruger effect and suggest that holding an unrelated qualification might lead you to overestimate your abilities.

And for someone who says that they *are* capable of understanding the scientific literature (and therefore the scientific method and approach), you dismiss "scientific consensus" as not being "scientific evidence". I don't understand what you mean here, but i think that's because you don't understand what scientific proof is.

I think it's a fundamental mistake that you're making. Scientists propose theories. Those theories that most accurately describe the situation and are most rigourously investigated are the ones that are accepted as being the case, and when things are found that are not correct, adjustments are made to the theory or other theories are proposed. There is never ever, ever.... EVER.. absolute evidence of anything in the way in which you request it, and that's your fundamental error, and stems from you not understanding the scientific method.

We have a lot of scientific consensus about gravity, but we do not have "scientific evidence" in the way you describe it. The evidence is ALL of the science that is done, ALL of the experiments ALL of the conclusions, positive and negative, and the consensus of the scientific community is reached and refined based on that research and ongoing research. There is no one document anywhere that constitutes "proof" that gravity is how we think it is. Not even all of the documents do that. They merely indicate to us what is most likely to be happening according to all of the knowledge and ingenuity that we've built up over the years.

I don't appreciate the scatter gun method you've used by posting all those links. You said in your latest post here that people try to confuse the issue by redirecting your request for "evidence" - the type that doesn't exist - towards other issues that you deem contentious. Yet you have almost drowned me in what appears to be about 15 different links to pages that seem to show singular examples of individuals that deny climate change. (Again, there are so many, and so many quotes, and no actual specification of what you are disagreeing with me about, that i can't rightly assess any of them.)

My point here is twofold - 1) don't try to be confusing like you accuse your opponents of, i.e. throwing as many links as possible to extend the argument to other points and 2) if that isn't what you were doing, could you perhaps condense your 15 links and selected quotes into a smaller point; that point being what it is about my previous posts you disagreed with?

Here are my points for you, simplified:
1) Scientific consensus does not mean "THIS IS HOW THINGS ARE" - it means that, on balance, according to everything we know and the opinions of those that are in the know, this is how we think things are until we know better.
2) There is no such thing as "scientific evidence" in the way you use the term; the only absolute proof is the one Descartes spoke about; the only thing you can know for sure is that your consciousness exists.
3) It is very easy to be misled by articles such as the one you linked from "the libertarian republic" website. This is also true of the last link you recommended for my research; you used that book to support your opposition to my assertion that human-caused climate change is not a matter of debate in the scientific community. Yet the same author was involved in the Copenhagen Consensus which lists as 6th most worthy of investigation (for the benefit and future of mankind), i quote; "R&D to Increase Yield Enhancements, to decrease hunger, fight biodiversity destruction, and lessen the effects of climate change"

I think that out of courtesy you should select one link which backs up whatever it is that you wish to refute, because it's not a good use of my time to have to go through each individual link, find out what you disagree with me about, and then spend time looking into it.

So, we disagree on one of the following:
1) The scientific consensus is that human-caused climate change is real, and that consensus represents the best of our current understanding as a species.
2) "Proof" in the sense you use it doesn't exist, the correct term is scientific evidence. The more evidence and the more convincing it is, the more firm the belief in a theory.
3) The article you linked from the libertarian website was unfairly representing its argument in relation to the paper it was referring to.

Please let me know. Remember - nothing is "beyond scepticism" in your words. I am sceptical about everything, including gravity, which i have an incredible amount of evidence for. However i am still sceptical about our understanding of it - i am always looking for differences. That doesn't mean that our understanding isn't the best one we have, and we should use it for our own advantage and safety.

I also note that you seem loathe to have a proper discussion with me. Our discussion could have been either about the scientific method or about the article you linked, but to throw all these links at me makes me feel you're unwilling or incapable of challenging your own opinion based on evidence. You don't even refer to the assessments of the article that i offered; you immediately discarded the article from your argument and linked me to other people that may or may not be misrepresenting the argument.

I'm in favor of allowing people to carry firearms, and at the same, I don't see any reason why a person carrying a firearm shouldn't be cooperative with the police. Police have too much power, this is true, but if you're going to let everyone know you have a gun, of course it is going to freak people out and the police will get called. I think the police officer was being fairly reasonable and was just trying to do his job, whereas the gun owner wouldn't even give him the courtesy of a first name.

Here's the cherry on top: a 31 year old member of our foreign intelligence service was arrested on charges of espionage two days ago. Supposedly, he supplied reports about the parliamentary investigative committee to an unnamed US intelligence agency...

Just one though, not the entire service. Who is going to believe that it's just one guy who hands information over to a US intelligence agency? They work so closely hand in hand that I'd be surprised if the CIA didn't get a proper recording of every meeting on the same day. courtesy of our own intelligence service, free of charge.

Maybe not free of charge. They probably use it as currency to buy something else from your intelligence agencies...

Edit: As if that wasn't rediculous enough, check out this tweet by Jess Radack: https://twitter.com/JesselynRadack/status/485009501796696064

Thugs on the loose again...

Am I the feminist you had a bad exchange with?

I am happy to meet you in the lounge and talk about it. I think others will vouch for me that I am not like this angry woman. I promise you a respectful conversation. (Not a lecture from me, a conversation between the two of us.)

I think she was arrested because she probably interacted with the cops in a way that they didn't like. They also probably wanted to get her away from that situation for her own good.

Very disturbing video that shows the lack of common courtesy in discourse when there is a difference of opinion.

Meet me in the lounge? PM me?

I've confessed already, as a courtesy to the umpteenth (checks thrift-store dictionary) who happened to pass in the night here, not a fucking underpass-toll-taker, either....Again, labels.

Another satisfied customer

"If you are experiencing technical difficulties, please stand in the motorway."

@tommirror, Yeah don't feel too bad mate, you'd most-likely have been dissatisfied with the likes of the most active of users here who've experienced the pain of their own existence who'd rather let you develop full-blown syphilis than to afford you the courtesy of the directions to the free penicillin...

Don't misconstrue (or misunderstand) my words.

I said it's ignorant to just blindly state everyone who circumcises is barbaric and misinformed and that otherwise everyone is only possibly motivated by religious or aesthetic reasons.

The bottom line is we were not sure about doing it one way or the other, but we decided to give our boys what we know is the best chance against contracting HIV (heterosexually) among other things.

Finns probably have a lot less disease to worry about spreading around.

Yes, like everything in life, there may be valid reasons that could convince anyone to do it or to not do it. In my case, we made an informed decision that the foreskin isn't necessary and the only real consequences of it removed would be beneficial. Others don't feel that way, and that's fine. I'm not going to shove my opinion down everyone else's throat or call them names for disagreeing.

It would be nice to be afforded the same courtesy.

newtboy says...

In reply to Chingalera:
And more ranting, insistence that you control others, insistence that YOUR issues are others issues, not yours, and completely ignoring of the fact that it is Ching that is the unwanted, vulgar, insulting, and always angry poster here, that instigates fights with anyone not in lock step with his insanity, and constantly and vulgarly insults all those that won't capitulate to his outrageousness. Too bad buddy, it's still not working for you, and it pushing others towards actual ACTION rather than simple cajoling. Is it not true you've been banned 5 times already Choggie?
Is there anyone NOT on the ching shit list? Sounds like a badge of honor from where I sit.
It's astonishing that your lack of self examination allows you to spout such insanity as " It is YOUR actions against me and the entire site's users," which was not an English sentence, and the sentiment you were attempting to state is 100% backwards. It's YOU who is outrageous, vulgar, insulting at every turn, and completely lacking respect or honor. I have never had trouble with another user on this site...you have trouble with at least 3 right now that you've listed by name, and far more that I know of right now, and at least 10 more in the past if you've really been banned 5 times (as I think you have). D'oh!
Really, were you really trying to lure a 13 year old girl alone from over seas to your home for 'vocal training'?!? Just plain OMG! That's what your post seemed to have said you wanted, I went way back to read it. D'oh!

For the sift, and perhaps @dag, is it time for at least hobbling here?
I have tried to ignore this user, to no avail. We agreed together to no longer 'private message' each other on our profile page long ago, an agreement Ching was wholly unable to fulfill, as he constantly posts outrageous, insulting, vulgarity filled private messages to my profile (and in public in response to most of my comments, which he seems pathologically incapable of not insulting or degrading with outrageous vulgarity and vitriol). Sometimes he realizes he has gone way too far and tries to edit away the vulgar insults before they're immortalized, which is at least in part what hobbling is about right? Ching is unable to not personally insult, personally attack, or to be reasonable or respectful for more than one short post at a time (followed by at least a day of ranting insults, attacks, and vulgarity).
I often do comment about Ching's behavior/posts, but not his person. I don't know him, I only know his actions here.
I've also been a sifter since near the onset of the site, and I've never been banned! I just didn't sign up for a membership for years while I 'lurked'. I don't see how that makes a difference, this is about behavior. Ching's behavior is far beyond site guidelines....until now I've let that slide with only my words to him in response. Because he is now ramping it up again, any further "private" message, or trolling my comments will have me begin a push for actual action against Ching. He's just getting out of control and his vitriol is building. He alone is making the sift a far less pleasant place for many.
Consider this, I or others may be on the autism spectrum, is ridiculing the mentally challenged with vulgarity and personal insult proper or respectful?
I'm still really wondering how on earth Ching was allowed back on the site after being banned 5(?) times!?! Second chance...OK, 5th chance and still doing his best to be annoying and vulgar to all, WTF?!?
I made a promise to no longer private message Ching...I am a man of my word, and I intend to never allow his rantings on my profile to remain private....you, ching, are well aware of this, it was at your request, and you've been reminded repeatedly, so your whining about it is called out as the completely fabricated BS that it is. If he doesn't want to hear from me about his insanity laden cursing fit's of posts, publicly, he could just as easily stop making them directly to or about me and he would be ignored by me, but that is not happening.


chingalera said:

FOR CHICCHOREA, NEWTBOY, AND BONEREMAKE (TO A LESSER EXTENT):

"IF THERE'S ONE THING I'VE LEARNED ABOUT MYSELF FROM MY TIME HERE AT THE VIDEOSIFT since the place was about 4 months old, for anyone who hasn't that fact plugged the fuck into their meat yet (THE HARD WAY), it is this:"

I AM NOT ONE TO LET PEOPLE WHOSE AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER LEANS TOWARDS THE FAR RIGHT END OF THE SCALE TAKE THEIR COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND SHOVE IT UP MY ASS WITH A FREE PASS IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEIR GOAL BE TO FUCK ME UP OR DISCOUNT MY 'RAMBLINGS' AS SOME FORM OF EVIL OR PERSONALITY MALFUNCTION.

Take that fellas, to yer private little shat-parties, and play with yourselves all-day-long, and if you can stand to admit your own failings, we may very well get along some day.

Until then you are all on the standard choggie shit-list. That fucking clear enough for the sycophantically bewildered whose best-interest if it be in mind would be to get a clue??

I'd also reiterate for the slow and cumbersome, that I do not ignore rather, I engage. It is YOUR actions against me and the entire site's users, that I remind the accused of these facts.

This is the LAST public statement on the matter I will post here, and again, I'd ask these users to respect my wishes that any future comments y'all feel so compelled to make in response to my interaction with you be marked "PRIVATE" on my personal profile, as I extend to ALL the same courtesy as a matter of course. These users have gone the opposite direction to their own detriment and embarrassment, and it is for this that I am the most empathetic towards them, and where my sympathy and heartfelt desire for their healing resides.

FOR CHICCHOREA, NEWTBOY, AND BONEREMAKE (TO A LESSER EXTENT):

"IF THERE'S ONE THING I'VE LEARNED ABOUT MYSELF FROM MY TIME HERE AT THE VIDEOSIFT since the place was about 4 months old, for anyone who hasn't that fact plugged the fuck into their meat yet (THE HARD WAY), it is this:"

I AM NOT ONE TO LET PEOPLE WHOSE AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER LEANS TOWARDS THE FAR RIGHT END OF THE SCALE TAKE THEIR COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND SHOVE IT UP MY ASS WITH A FREE PASS IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEIR GOAL BE TO FUCK ME UP OR DISCOUNT MY 'RAMBLINGS' AS SOME FORM OF EVIL OR PERSONALITY MALFUNCTION.

Take that fellas, to yer private little shat-parties, and play with yourselves all-day-long, and if you can stand to admit your own failings, we may very well get along some day.

Until then you are all on the standard choggie shit-list. That fucking clear enough for the sycophantically bewildered, whose best-interest if it be in mind would be to get a clue??

I'd also reiterate for the slow and cumbersome, that I do not ignore rather, I engage. It is YOUR actions against me and the entire site's users, that I remind the accused of these facts.

This is the LAST public statement on the matter I will post here, and again, I'd ask these users to respect my wishes that any future comments y'all feel so compelled to make in response to my interaction with you be marked "PRIVATE" on my personal profile, as I extend to ALL the same courtesy as a matter of course. These users have gone the opposite direction to their own detriment and embarrassment, and it is for this that I am the most empathetic towards them, and where my sympathy and heartfelt desire for their healing resides.