Whoa...I hate to pull the *snuff card but somebody's gonna do it if it's not me...

This was pretty graphic and unexpected considering sift guidelines. I'm not necessarily a pansy when it comes to things of graphic nature, but considering I'm on the "disney" of internet video aggregators I was caught way off guard by this...

*discuss (sorry vairetube)

this is an ancient internet video. weird to see it just be sifted.

This video also applies to Internet video.

Why can't they have a standard in viewing video, but no every site has to have there fucked up way to do stuff. Thinking is original.

Its like youtube saying they have HD video now, its not fucking HD its just slightly better. Its just a turd with perfume on it. Its not even fucking 720p.

Or you get the ass ads on the video. Or websites that direct you to websites that autoplay video crap so when you are reading or watching another video that window is in background playing some fucking "Congrates you won a Ipod" sound.


Give me a fucking website that has fucking video that does not have fucking ads in it, if i like your fucking site I will glading pay $1 a month to visit your fucking site, if your site fucking sucks you think "learn how to whiten my teeth for $10" ads is going to make me want to click it?

Lots of sites i visit are ad free and fucking live on since the 90s still cause they fucking get donations from people who like the fucking site.

>> ^Drachen_Jager It looked to me like the bullet exited pretty well, it's hard to say whether his shot worked out or not.


Wow. Did you seriously just claim that the bullet could have made a straight flight path? Or that you could SEE the fucking bullet leave the barrel on a shitty internet video?!?!

>> ^EDD:
Obvious self-link and spam, which is against the rules.
ban


Agreed *ban

One other thing...

Is there a way to adapt Varo CMS into a Microsoft Outlook plug-in so that Siftbot can send a message to notify all my friends and family that the "funny / amazing internet video" that they forwarded was seen by me two freekin' YEARS AGO on VideoSift?

That'd be great, and SO useful. Thanks.

Of course, the best way to restore one's dignity is to make an internet video of yourself in a bathing suit, making comic references to non-existent beaches.

Why haven't I thought of it first?

I can't agree with you at all.
I'm tired of people feeling like society needs to respect them or understand their differences. Should we all be this way? Kind and understanding? YES. But wake up and smell the sh t cause it's not smelling any better.
When you place yourself in the public eye you are asking for the world to judge you, whether you want it that way or not. And I apply this to all schools of thought not just about people with certain mental disabilities. Hell I hate it when people make fun of people who go LARPing (Ex: Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt!) because that actually looks like FUN to me. But do I complain about it? No!
My friend told me the other day he was at a BDSM expo and they had a Burlesque show where anyone could sign up and dance. He told me the majority of women that signed up were plus sized women. This falls into the same bracket. If you are ok with the fact that you are plus sized, mentally challenged, developmentally disabled, whatever, that is GREAT. I love the fact that people can see what society says about them and give them (society) the middle finger and not care.
But you also have to respect the fact that society ISN'T going to change its views just because you think highly of yourself. When you step up onto the stage of life (which arguably is YouTube right now) to give your "burlesque show" (internet video), the majority of that audience is just going to see something to make fun of.


I do understand the point you are making, but i think as reasonable people we ought to differentiate between the case of someone overly confident of themselves (the fat dancing women) and someone who has a scientifically diagnosed mental illness.

Laughing at the fat women dancing may deter them from doing it in the future from the shame they feel, but i doubt our ridicule is doing this fellow a favour. He reminds me of someone in elementary school, kids laughted at her antics and yet she continued to do her antics in the future because she just couldn't make the link that the other kid's laughing was AT her and her antics were socially unacceptable.

>> ^osama1234:
I tried downvoting this, unfortunatley i'm not a bronze member.
I feel terrible at the fact that people are making fun of this, just watching the video i could tell this man clearly has a mental illness. Upon further reading the comments, it seems that my suspicions were true.
Come on seriously, dont vote this up and stop the jokes. You're making fun of someone's disability, it's just not right.


I can't agree with you at all.

I'm tired of people feeling like society needs to respect them or understand their differences. Should we all be this way? Kind and understanding? YES. But wake up and smell the sh*t cause it's not smelling any better.

When you place yourself in the public eye you are asking for the world to judge you, whether you want it that way or not. And I apply this to all schools of thought not just about people with certain mental disabilities. Hell I hate it when people make fun of people who go LARPing (Ex: Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt!) because that actually looks like FUN to me. But do I complain about it? No!

My friend told me the other day he was at a BDSM expo and they had a Burlesque show where anyone could sign up and dance. He told me the majority of women that signed up were plus sized women. This falls into the same bracket. If you are ok with the fact that you are plus sized, mentally challenged, developmentally disabled, whatever, that is GREAT. I love the fact that people can see what society says about them and give them (society) the middle finger and not care.

But you also have to respect the fact that society ISN'T going to change its views just because you think highly of yourself. When you step up onto the stage of life (which arguably is YouTube right now) to give your "burlesque show" (internet video), the majority of that audience is just going to see something to make fun of.

This may be my favorite internet video. I don't know though... I love everything these guys do.

*promote

I don't believe I ever tried to compare cigarette smokers to marijuana users. Plus, I'll also tend to consider more highly the word of an experienced and capable surgeon over random internet videos.

The sense I was trying to convey is that this video is as biased as the forces that try to block legalisation. And what I want is honest, scientific discussion about the effects of using the substance. If there really is absolutely no negative effect to any amount of use, then fine. But I just don't buy that sorry, even if it is likely less harmful than tabacco.

Should there be a safe, moderate level of use (in the way a glass of red wine can be beneficial), then what is this level? If we are going to legalise it, then people must be shown what is safe, what is excessive and what the harms are for overuse. This applies to all drugs, by the way.

>> ^rougy:
BoneyD, I don't want to be confrontational here at all, but I'm just wondering if you smoke cannabis, or if you have ever smoked it?
I'm very suspicious of what that surgeon told you, because most people (not all, but most) smoke a very small amount per day, or a few times a week.
If you took an average cigarette and pinched off about 1/10th to 1/15th of that, that's about how much it takes for a person to smoke in order to catch a buzz.
I'm not saying there might not be some problems with heavy use, but there is no way to compare pot smokers to cigarette smokers.
And remember, with vaporizers, people aren't even inhaling smoke.
Oh! And cannabis can be consumed orally in candies and elixers.

>> ^AceOfKidneys:
>> ^ChosenOne:
This video.. so old. Makes me feel old.

If a internet video makes you feel old. Your not.

You're (not) or maybe you are. You're certainly not Your.

>> ^ChosenOne:
This video.. so old. Makes me feel old.


If a internet video makes you feel old. Your not.

the current system sifts out the bottom 50% of internet videos really well (shitty technical quality, totally boring, youtube flotsam, snuff, these things die in the queue)

The other 50% is just kinda thrown up in the air to see who salutes.

The number of videos on here has increased dramatically, and the popular stuff has been subsidised even more, creating a feedback loop that hides the more obscure stuff that less people like (but they like it A LOT). Videosift is set up as a popularity contest so the "bias" here is "towards popular". That's what you get when you try to be egalitarian, you suppress the obscure.

The top 15 is indeed useful but skewed towards "things that a lot of different people agree is upvotey". This predictably leads to a lot of comedy, cats and CCTV. It's useful as a "Channel One" for the internet, but you don't always want to watch channel one.

Also: titles, tags and categories are screwed so you can't rely on search.

Anyway in answer to the poll, i don't think 10 or 12 would make any difference. The site is set up so that "most things sift" and unfortunately that means that "gems are missed". But the vote threshold is not the thing to fuck with, unless you are going to index it to the number of voting members, and i think if you did that we would have to increase it to 30.

The only change I would find useful in the queue would be some kind of algorithm that removes the time zone bias.

The underlying problem is that people sift stuff for popularity, rather than from their love of sharing video. The incentive system here is not conducive to "good" sifting. We've all posted crap we wouldn't normally post but we know it's going to get upvotes, and we've all suppressed good stuff that isn't worth sifting because it's so obscure, or been disheartened when something super interesting is buried under a pile of lolcats. Do people really love lolcats this much? or is it partly because we made a biased reward scheme specifically for short videos that make you smile?

I don't think raising the bar to 12 will solve the subjective underlying problem of lower quality videos being sifted, only lower the amount of videos getting sifted. The taste of videos changes over time with the community getting newer members and losing older ones, and the more members you get the more mainstream youtube/internet videos will be submitted/sifted. That's unfortunate for the members who came here long ago while the paradigm was different, but unless we turn the clock back we won't see the same kind of videos being sifted no matter if we've got 10, 12 or 25 votes to get something sifted.