Congrats newbie! Almost exactly one year to a diamond. That's pretty impressive.

Way to go Newbie!

Thanks and thanks! Also, I am definitely still a newbie to most of the Sift tools

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
As silver stars, we can add a thumbnail to any video which doesn't have one using the "update thumbnail" link above the embed. findthumb can help, since if it fails it can remove the thumb and let us add the thumbnail as above.

For our own videos, we can update the thumbnail of any embed using the modify video link... but for this one, your best bet is to put the link in a comment to bb2 with a "hey, please take my excellent thumbnail image for your video" note.

Of course, as a fellow newbie(edit, I take that back, you've been around a while even if you've only had a star for a short time), my understanding is probably only slightly ahead of yours.

Also, congrats on the silver
In reply to this comment by hpqp:
*findthumb=[http://www.prankies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/action.jpg]

edit: bummer, I still don't get how the thumbing works

As silver stars, we can add a thumbnail to any video which doesn't have one using the "update thumbnail" link above the embed. findthumb can help, since if it fails it can remove the thumb and let us add the thumbnail as above.

For our own videos, we can update the thumbnail of any embed using the modify video link... but for this one, your best bet is to put the link in a comment to bb2 with a "hey, please take my excellent thumbnail image for your video" note.

Of course, as a fellow newbie(edit, I take that back, you've been around a while even if you've only had a star for a short time), my understanding is probably only slightly ahead of yours.

Also, congrats on the silver
In reply to this comment by hpqp:
*findthumb=[http://www.prankies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/action.jpg]

edit: bummer, I still don't get how the thumbing works

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
You know, someone has tried that excact clip, and only got 5 votes - http://videosift.com/video/Sesame-Street-Elmos-Song

Other Elmo ones have got as many as 135 votes - http://videosift.com/video/Elmo-Interviews-Ricky-Gervais

You'd be surprised what will do well here sometimes

Your two PQ'd on 9 videos would probably sift if you ran them through beggar's canyon on a Thursday or Friday (to get the weekend traffic), and then you would only need to post a handful more to get bronze (says the newbie to the long standing member!). If you renew your membership, a promote would be even better.

On re-reading your comment below, I'd like to clarify that I only ever meant to ban self promotion during an anonymous week contest, not in general, and it's certainly quicker to promote than to go out vote whoring the hard way.
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
Ahhh, that explains it, mine aren't old enough to like anything but "Elmo's song" yet. Doubt that would get many votes.

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
We might not quite be on the same page, but I think we're in the same chapter. I agree with everything you said here, except the part about changes being required to get there

I can confirm that children are no impediment to success here. In my case, I've had more success with ones my children like (or that I looked up for them) than the ones that I posted just because I liked them. They are usually only demanding until they're asleep

I'm quite surprised that BT and FA followed us here for this conversation too, even though I hang out in their corner of the sift. Perhaps they read the recent comment stream?
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
Sounds good. At the end of the day I don't think video quality voting should be based on personal loyalty. You must have made quite an impression already to have a couple really great guys (BT, FA) on the sift upvoting your personal comment to some random dude.

If you're willing to take the time to make yourself an integral part of this community the perspective of favoring loyalty votes and disallowing self promotion will work well for you. On the other hand, I'm in favor of measures to empower those who don't devote much time to the site but enjoy it and the people just as much. (i.e. me; my kids are demanding) I would also argue that it would be healthier for the site and the community as a whole to welcome such measures since the attitude of person-to-person loyalty will endure regardless of the obstacles placed in front of it. The last thing I think you really want here is an echo chamber despite how appealing it may seem at face value.

I agree with that statement. Additionally, that bastard Elmo is riding Ricky Gervais' coattails.

You know, someone has tried that excact clip, and only got 5 votes - http://videosift.com/video/Sesame-Street-Elmos-Song

Other Elmo ones have got as many as 135 votes - http://videosift.com/video/Elmo-Interviews-Ricky-Gervais

You'd be surprised what will do well here sometimes

Your two PQ'd on 9 videos would probably sift if you ran them through beggar's canyon on a Thursday or Friday (to get the weekend traffic), and then you would only need to post a handful more to get bronze (says the newbie to the long standing member!). If you renew your membership, a promote would be even better.

On re-reading your comment below, I'd like to clarify that I only ever meant to ban self promotion during an anonymous week contest, not in general, and it's certainly quicker to promote than to go out vote whoring the hard way.
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
Ahhh, that explains it, mine aren't old enough to like anything but "Elmo's song" yet. Doubt that would get many votes.

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
We might not quite be on the same page, but I think we're in the same chapter. I agree with everything you said here, except the part about changes being required to get there

I can confirm that children are no impediment to success here. In my case, I've had more success with ones my children like (or that I looked up for them) than the ones that I posted just because I liked them. They are usually only demanding until they're asleep

I'm quite surprised that BT and FA followed us here for this conversation too, even though I hang out in their corner of the sift. Perhaps they read the recent comment stream?
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
Sounds good. At the end of the day I don't think video quality voting should be based on personal loyalty. You must have made quite an impression already to have a couple really great guys (BT, FA) on the sift upvoting your personal comment to some random dude.

If you're willing to take the time to make yourself an integral part of this community the perspective of favoring loyalty votes and disallowing self promotion will work well for you. On the other hand, I'm in favor of measures to empower those who don't devote much time to the site but enjoy it and the people just as much. (i.e. me; my kids are demanding) I would also argue that it would be healthier for the site and the community as a whole to welcome such measures since the attitude of person-to-person loyalty will endure regardless of the obstacles placed in front of it. The last thing I think you really want here is an echo chamber despite how appealing it may seem at face value.

Um, the "rules" about the definition of a dupe have changed over the years.

Dupe if you want to. I won't isdupe, under current guidelines.

It's nice to have these conversations, though. Poor newbie bloodytongue might be confused as all get out, though. What a way to be introduced to the Sift!

Hang in there with us, bt. The Sift is awesome because it is self-regulated -- the Sift is also confusing and a tad overwhelming at first for the very same reason.

Sounds good. At the end of the day I don't think video quality voting should be based on personal loyalty. You must have made quite an impression already to have a couple really great guys (BT, FA) on the sift upvoting your personal comment to some random dude.

If you're willing to take the time to make yourself an integral part of this community the perspective of favoring loyalty votes and disallowing self promotion will work well for you. On the other hand, I'm in favor of measures to empower those who don't devote much time to the site but enjoy it and the people just as much. (i.e. me; my kids are demanding) I would also argue that it would be healthier for the site and the community as a whole to welcome such measures since the attitude of person-to-person loyalty will endure regardless of the obstacles placed in front of it. The last thing I think you really want here is an echo chamber despite how appealing it may seem at face value.

>> ^oritteropo:

I think the nice thing about the sift is that the people here are generally nice! I don't necessarily agree that anything much needs to be done, since the senior sifters are mostly nice to newbies and will freely hand out advice and the odd promote for worthy vids.
During anonymous week, I really missed seeing who had voted up my vids and the ones I voted for. I didn't personally miss the lack of promotes, but I think that if the contest is repeated it could be changed to only no self promotes (and, in fact, I wouldn't object if that was the standard rule!).
I don't even agree that newbies have to be aggressive to stand out, just posting lots of cool vids is enough (or, in my case, just posting lots of vids ) and making lots of comments.
Perhaps we should just agree to disagree?
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
I know what you're saying, but I think someone needs to be done about the loyalty associated with individuals. It makes it much harder for non-aggressive "newbies" to make a dent in this community. That said, I really like 90% of the people on the sift... I think the main reason I think this way is that I find myself doing the same thing you have argued for and I'm not quite comfortable with it. Perhaps totally anonymous wouldn't be the way to go, but I do wish some sort of incentive were there to draw attention to those that don't get it because of their name.

I think the nice thing about the sift is that the people here are generally nice! I don't necessarily agree that anything much needs to be done, since the senior sifters are mostly nice to newbies and will freely hand out advice and the odd promote for worthy vids.

During anonymous week, I really missed seeing who had voted up my vids and the ones I voted for. I didn't personally miss the lack of promotes, but I think that if the contest is repeated it could be changed to only no self promotes (and, in fact, I wouldn't object if that was the standard rule!).

I don't even agree that newbies have to be aggressive to stand out, just posting lots of cool vids is enough (or, in my case, just posting lots of vids ) and making lots of comments.

Perhaps we should just agree to disagree?
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
I know what you're saying, but I think someone needs to be done about the loyalty associated with individuals. It makes it much harder for non-aggressive "newbies" to make a dent in this community. That said, I really like 90% of the people on the sift... I think the main reason I think this way is that I find myself doing the same thing you have argued for and I'm not quite comfortable with it. Perhaps totally anonymous wouldn't be the way to go, but I do wish some sort of incentive were there to draw attention to those that don't get it because of their name.

I know what you're saying, but I think someone needs to be done about the loyalty associated with individuals. It makes it much harder for non-aggressive "newbies" to make a dent in this community. That said, I really like 90% of the people on the sift... I think the main reason I think this way is that I find myself doing the same thing you have argued for and I'm not quite comfortable with it. Perhaps totally anonymous wouldn't be the way to go, but I do wish some sort of incentive were there to draw attention to those that don't get it because of their name.

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
Well sure, but I was talking about the unsifted queue, and I think the others were too. This is just about how some newly submitted videos get preferential treatment based on the poster.

I try to treat each video on its merits, but was describing a situation where that doesn't always happen.
In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
>> ^oritteropo:
If I have 5 minutes to watch a video or two, and can choose between one posted by someone who usually posts interesting stuff, or J. Random Sifter, which one am I going to choose?
Or, even worse, given a third choice of someone who usually (but perhaps not this time!) posts things I don't enjoy?
I'd argue that's what the voting & channel systems are for.

Oh. Maybe I'm just showing myself off as a newbie again - it wasn't obvious to me that it would matter.

I think the "no quality/promotes" part of the contest sucks, since it changes how the queue works, and only in a bad way.
>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^oritteropo:
They will keep until next week, surely?>> ^Sarzy:
I think it's kinda lame that we can't quality other people's videos. I just watched a pretty awesome video which was pretty much begging for a quality. I really hope it doesn't get lost in the shuffle now.


Sure, but it'll be too late for the top 15 by then.

Heh. I don't know if it's my browser (IE8) or what, but loading this comment thread effectively locked my browser for about four minutes.

Tip to self: don't try and view this thread over a slow wireless connection.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll draw a possible parallel to another site that I was a very active member and informal "leader" on for some time. Eventually the leaders got bored with the sameness and tried to mix it up a bit. In that case, they actually and actively listened to the population of the site, as long as those members of the population had been around long enough to have some experience behind their opinion and didn't troll or abuse the privilege of being heard. As things like real life occurred, some of the leaders have since moved on to other venues and been replaced by others. The site remains very well run and fresh, but that's because it always remained true to its original spirit of encouraging a high level of discourse and creativity in its discussions, tried to educate rather than ostracise newbies for the first few times when they didn't understand the written and unwritten rules and embarrassed themselves, and was consistent in its policies when "senior members" bent the rules a bit. It's that consistency that was so fundamental to the effective running and executing of the site, and even when traffic fell and things got really quiet, was instrumental in creating a new audience.

TL;DR: If things have really changed since earlier days here, that's a problem. If they're the same and it was always obvious, no reason to complain.

From Eli Sanders' blog entry about this vid:

For those who appreciate a table of contents: Hutch's opening prayer (0:02); Seattle Pacific University sinners called out (0:38); the Hutch solution for SPU, and what happened to Hutch's sex life when he met Christ (0:48); Hutch's "conquer women" look (1:24); a masturbation exploration (1:28); introducing SPU Professor Stepehen Newby (1:53); "Where are the African Americans?" (2:11); So very happy to meet Eli (2:55); on leadership (3:14); Cienna asks: "How many students a year are disciplined for having sex on campus?" (5:20); Does Dean Jordan know these guys are meeting with The Stranger? (6:08); Pizza, pizza, pizza (6:22); Hutch doesn't want any gay groups at SPU (6:36); Hutch's very special ring tone (6:52); Dominic gets a lesson on human evolution (7:06); why Eli needs to get Jesus (8:31); and a closing prayer (9:17).

Enjoy! And all praise to Kelly O for the camera work and co-editing.

>> ^Chaucer:

you probably sucked at soccer which is why you couldnt perform a scoop properly. anybody that is halfway decent at soccer can scoop a ball up in one fluid motion without having to start right next to the soccer ball. The only people that had to do that were newbies.
>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^Chaucer:
it wasnt so much as a kick as it was a scoop (or loft in football terms). you're right though, you arent a footballer but you are a fucking idiot fucking brainless.

LOL.. dude, that wasn't a scoop. If you've played ANY football, you know that wasn't a scoop. That was at best a chip, which IS a kick. A scoop, you can place your foot right next to the object and scoop it without ANY impact, merely acceleration.
You are talking out of your arse if you're calling that a scoop. I've never heard such bollocks. Clearly not a footballer, nor anyone with any experience with football. You've heard the term before and thought you'd risk using it here.
I'm not necessarily on the side of the owl (i wouldn't have kicked it), but i just want people to know, you're talking shite.



Hark at the guy using the word "soccer" telling me about how to play football!

Who the hell said you have to stand next to the ball? Even if you do it at full pelt you still have to bring your foot to almost a stop though mate, the objective being that there is virtually no solid impact between your foot and the ball, just a gentle lifting followed by huge acceleration depending on how far you want to send it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is chipping under the guise of scooping, if your foot impacts the ball instead of softly touching it, you're chipping. This guy did not scoop an owl!

Only shining an even greater light on your own ignorance here, move on.

you probably sucked at soccer which is why you couldnt perform a scoop properly. anybody that is halfway decent at soccer can scoop a ball up in one fluid motion without having to start right next to the soccer ball. The only people that had to do that were newbies.
>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^Chaucer:
it wasnt so much as a kick as it was a scoop (or loft in football terms). you're right though, you arent a footballer but you are a fucking idiot fucking brainless.

LOL.. dude, that wasn't a scoop. If you've played ANY football, you know that wasn't a scoop. That was at best a chip, which IS a kick. A scoop, you can place your foot right next to the object and scoop it without ANY impact, merely acceleration.
You are talking out of your arse if you're calling that a scoop. I've never heard such bollocks. Clearly not a footballer, nor anyone with any experience with football. You've heard the term before and thought you'd risk using it here.
I'm not necessarily on the side of the owl (i wouldn't have kicked it), but i just want people to know, you're talking shite.