heh, if you think that's a long post to make a point, you should see my discussion with SDGundamX under this video http://videosift.com/video/Sam-Harris-on-the-error-of-evenhandedness

In reply to this comment by smooman:
if only it didnt take so many words to make the point =P

rambling is my curse

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Very well said.

In reply to this comment by smooman:
if i may divulge in a bit of an embarassing story:

a few years back i had the cops called to my apartment on a domestic disturbance investigation. I was playing an online game and, as a hardcore gamer, i get into it and, often times, too much into it. I was frustrated and, like a mature adult, decided to punch out my living room furniture and curse and scream. about 20 minutes later i had two cops knocking on my door. i stepped outside and politely conversed with the officers who explained that they had a domestic disturbance call and asked me some questions, namely if i lived alone (i did) and if they could search my apartment. I politely refused consent without a warrant which they then asked me to stay there (outside) while they went to speak with the "witness". after that they came back down, sternly told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. I aggressively voiced my disgust but complied (more on this in a minute). they cuffed me, sat me down, and searched my apartment, inevitably finding no one else in the house at which point they came back outside, stood me up, uncuffed me, apologized for the inconvenience, explained to me the situation (the "witness" swore she heard a womans voice), gave me a card with their sheriffs number should i have any more questions and kindly left me to video gaming nerddom.

now my point is this: when they came back down and ordered me to turn around and cuffed me, i complied because i knew why it was necessary. From their point of view, theyve received a domestic disturbance call of a lot of yelling and banging around and a womans desperate pleas for help (thats the story they got from the dumbshit "witness"). As officers of the law and keepers of the peace it is not only their duty but their obligation to fully investigate. So they arrive to the place, where the suspect comes outside, refuses consent (as is his right) so they move to the next manual bullet: get a sworn statement from witness that would make a no warrant search permissible, which, they did. Now at this point, for all they know there is a woman inside who could be battered and bruised, unconscious, or even dead, and given the context of the investigation, the suspect is a perceived threat. This makes their detainment of the suspect not only necessary to continue the investigation but fully justifiable not only for their safety, but for the suspects own safety and the safety of the neighbors.

now put yourself in the officer in this videos perspective. He's doin a routine stop: crooked license plate whatever, he's gonna give him a hand and fix it, write him a ticket, or just warn him about it so he could fix it at his earliest convenience. But as soon as the driver pulls over, he immediately gets out of his car and approaches the officer hand in pocket. this has now just become a stop that is anything but routine, even tho some of you would insist it is, and as such the officer escalates to protect not only himself, but the driver and anyone else that may be on the road or vicinity (although it appears to be quite isolated, which if thats the case would make for a more vulnerable situation for both the officer and the driver).

TL;DR: any attempt to make a martyr out of the driver and demonize the officer in this particular scenario is misguided at best and retarded at worst

if only it didnt take so many words to make the point =P

rambling is my curse

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Very well said.

In reply to this comment by smooman:
if i may divulge in a bit of an embarassing story:

a few years back i had the cops called to my apartment on a domestic disturbance investigation. I was playing an online game and, as a hardcore gamer, i get into it and, often times, too much into it. I was frustrated and, like a mature adult, decided to punch out my living room furniture and curse and scream. about 20 minutes later i had two cops knocking on my door. i stepped outside and politely conversed with the officers who explained that they had a domestic disturbance call and asked me some questions, namely if i lived alone (i did) and if they could search my apartment. I politely refused consent without a warrant which they then asked me to stay there (outside) while they went to speak with the "witness". after that they came back down, sternly told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. I aggressively voiced my disgust but complied (more on this in a minute). they cuffed me, sat me down, and searched my apartment, inevitably finding no one else in the house at which point they came back outside, stood me up, uncuffed me, apologized for the inconvenience, explained to me the situation (the "witness" swore she heard a womans voice), gave me a card with their sheriffs number should i have any more questions and kindly left me to video gaming nerddom.

now my point is this: when they came back down and ordered me to turn around and cuffed me, i complied because i knew why it was necessary. From their point of view, theyve received a domestic disturbance call of a lot of yelling and banging around and a womans desperate pleas for help (thats the story they got from the dumbshit "witness"). As officers of the law and keepers of the peace it is not only their duty but their obligation to fully investigate. So they arrive to the place, where the suspect comes outside, refuses consent (as is his right) so they move to the next manual bullet: get a sworn statement from witness that would make a no warrant search permissible, which, they did. Now at this point, for all they know there is a woman inside who could be battered and bruised, unconscious, or even dead, and given the context of the investigation, the suspect is a perceived threat. This makes their detainment of the suspect not only necessary to continue the investigation but fully justifiable not only for their safety, but for the suspects own safety and the safety of the neighbors.

now put yourself in the officer in this videos perspective. He's doin a routine stop: crooked license plate whatever, he's gonna give him a hand and fix it, write him a ticket, or just warn him about it so he could fix it at his earliest convenience. But as soon as the driver pulls over, he immediately gets out of his car and approaches the officer hand in pocket. this has now just become a stop that is anything but routine, even tho some of you would insist it is, and as such the officer escalates to protect not only himself, but the driver and anyone else that may be on the road or vicinity (although it appears to be quite isolated, which if thats the case would make for a more vulnerable situation for both the officer and the driver).

TL;DR: any attempt to make a martyr out of the driver and demonize the officer in this particular scenario is misguided at best and retarded at worst

Very well said.

In reply to this comment by smooman:
if i may divulge in a bit of an embarassing story:

a few years back i had the cops called to my apartment on a domestic disturbance investigation. I was playing an online game and, as a hardcore gamer, i get into it and, often times, too much into it. I was frustrated and, like a mature adult, decided to punch out my living room furniture and curse and scream. about 20 minutes later i had two cops knocking on my door. i stepped outside and politely conversed with the officers who explained that they had a domestic disturbance call and asked me some questions, namely if i lived alone (i did) and if they could search my apartment. I politely refused consent without a warrant which they then asked me to stay there (outside) while they went to speak with the "witness". after that they came back down, sternly told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. I aggressively voiced my disgust but complied (more on this in a minute). they cuffed me, sat me down, and searched my apartment, inevitably finding no one else in the house at which point they came back outside, stood me up, uncuffed me, apologized for the inconvenience, explained to me the situation (the "witness" swore she heard a womans voice), gave me a card with their sheriffs number should i have any more questions and kindly left me to video gaming nerddom.

now my point is this: when they came back down and ordered me to turn around and cuffed me, i complied because i knew why it was necessary. From their point of view, theyve received a domestic disturbance call of a lot of yelling and banging around and a womans desperate pleas for help (thats the story they got from the dumbshit "witness"). As officers of the law and keepers of the peace it is not only their duty but their obligation to fully investigate. So they arrive to the place, where the suspect comes outside, refuses consent (as is his right) so they move to the next manual bullet: get a sworn statement from witness that would make a no warrant search permissible, which, they did. Now at this point, for all they know there is a woman inside who could be battered and bruised, unconscious, or even dead, and given the context of the investigation, the suspect is a perceived threat. This makes their detainment of the suspect not only necessary to continue the investigation but fully justifiable not only for their safety, but for the suspects own safety and the safety of the neighbors.

now put yourself in the officer in this videos perspective. He's doin a routine stop: crooked license plate whatever, he's gonna give him a hand and fix it, write him a ticket, or just warn him about it so he could fix it at his earliest convenience. But as soon as the driver pulls over, he immediately gets out of his car and approaches the officer hand in pocket. this has now just become a stop that is anything but routine, even tho some of you would insist it is, and as such the officer escalates to protect not only himself, but the driver and anyone else that may be on the road or vicinity (although it appears to be quite isolated, which if thats the case would make for a more vulnerable situation for both the officer and the driver).

TL;DR: any attempt to make a martyr out of the driver and demonize the officer in this particular scenario is misguided at best and retarded at worst

if i may divulge in a bit of an embarassing story:

a few years back i had the cops called to my apartment on a domestic disturbance investigation. I was playing an online game and, as a hardcore gamer, i get into it and, often times, too much into it. I was frustrated and, like a mature adult, decided to punch out my living room furniture and curse and scream. about 20 minutes later i had two cops knocking on my door. i stepped outside and politely conversed with the officers who explained that they had a domestic disturbance call and asked me some questions, namely if i lived alone (i did) and if they could search my apartment. I politely refused consent without a warrant which they then asked me to stay there (outside) while they went to speak with the "witness". after that they came back down, sternly told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. I aggressively voiced my disgust but complied (more on this in a minute). they cuffed me, sat me down, and searched my apartment, inevitably finding no one else in the house at which point they came back outside, stood me up, uncuffed me, apologized for the inconvenience, explained to me the situation (the "witness" swore she heard a womans voice), gave me a card with their sheriffs number should i have any more questions and kindly left me to video gaming nerddom.

now my point is this: when they came back down and ordered me to turn around and cuffed me, i complied because i knew why it was necessary. From their point of view, theyve received a domestic disturbance call of a lot of yelling and banging around and a womans desperate pleas for help (thats the story they got from the dumbshit "witness"). As officers of the law and keepers of the peace it is not only their duty but their obligation to fully investigate. So they arrive to the place, where the suspect comes outside, refuses consent (as is his right) so they move to the next manual bullet: get a sworn statement from witness that would make a no warrant search permissible, which, they did. Now at this point, for all they know there is a woman inside who could be battered and bruised, unconscious, or even dead, and given the context of the investigation, the suspect is a perceived threat. This makes their detainment of the suspect not only necessary to continue the investigation but fully justifiable not only for their safety, but for the suspects own safety and the safety of the neighbors.

now put yourself in the officer in this videos perspective. He's doin a routine stop: crooked license plate whatever, he's gonna give him a hand and fix it, write him a ticket, or just warn him about it so he could fix it at his earliest convenience. But as soon as the driver pulls over, he immediately gets out of his car and approaches the officer hand in pocket. this has now just become a stop that is anything but routine, even tho some of you would insist it is, and as such the officer escalates to protect not only himself, but the driver and anyone else that may be on the road or vicinity (although it appears to be quite isolated, which if thats the case would make for a more vulnerable situation for both the officer and the driver).

TL;DR: any attempt to make a martyr out of the driver and demonize the officer in this particular scenario is misguided at best and retarded at worst

>> ^spoco2:

@ Psychologic I didn't actually want an explanation, it was more that the description is gobbledegook to anyone not involved with StarCraft or online gaming like that.


And soccer clips have "gobbledegook" descriptions to anyone who doesn't follow footy. And hocky vids, and cricket vids, etc., etc.

Judging by the comments and upvotes, there are plenty here who follow gaming competitions.

The explanation was mainly aimed at those too embarrassed/uninterested to ask. =)

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
@Psychologic I didn't actually want an explanation, it was more that the description is gobbledegook to anyone not involved with StarCraft or online gaming like that.

@Psychologic I didn't actually want an explanation, it was more that the description is gobbledegook to anyone not involved with StarCraft or online gaming like that.

Same shit, different videos.

Seriously, why not actually have them play a game while they say their lines?

That way, they don't come across as complete video game morons.

Seriously, I get the message, but I cringe whenever I see someone (but since this video is trying to make a point about sexism in online games, this in particular) mash more then 3-5 buttons at the same time INCLUDING both analog sticks. The only game I know of where that was even viable was the godfather, where you'd hold down the triggers and analog sticks to give you the feeling of actually strangling something with your own hands.

This, though.. Just.. /sigh.

detective gamesairplane gamestank games

While I can appreciate negative opinions of the game (we all have different tastes) I have a difficult time understanding people who don't like the game because it's "over hyped".

It's a difficult charge to justify.

The core commuity of Halo fans will play each iteration of the game non-stop for years. Look at the top online game statistics for XBox live and Halo will always be in the #1 or #2 spot. Hype can convince you to buy a game but it can't convince you to keep playing a game for years if it's no good. Those people must truely enjoy something about the game.

Being massively popular doesn't instantly mean a game is good or that it's going to appeal to your personal tastes...but it certainly doesn't equate to being over-hyped.

>> ^Enzoblue:

Seems funny to me that no one mentions Everquest any more. Now it's like WoW is the only mmo that ever was. Everquest was the first online game to have an economy larger than some 3rd world nations. I played it for 3 yrs or so and I still miss it sometimes.


I'm right with you there! The economy was much more player driven in EQ, without limits/restrictions put in place such as Bind on Equip/Soulbound armor (the most epic of the epic stuff was indeed non-tradable). Once you were done with a piece of armor you could easily resell it to another player. It was really fun to haggle with people/search for deals and just upright barter.

The whole game in general was just more player driven, and less rigorously structured around soloing: especially the PvP servers, with the pro-PK vs the pacifistic non-PK guilds, waging war and providing either their protection to newbs from highway thieves or pillaging certain zones of all players and looting the spoils. Not to mention all the social intrigue of player alliances, betrayals, guild spies and secret plots to overthrow/assassinate and usurp leaders, bounty hunters, and tests of loyalty to your compatriots. Such a dynamic has never existed in any other MMO, to my knowledge. It was a hard, unforgiving place where loyalty was worth more than any piece of gear.

If you're interested in revisiting Classic EQ PVE progression for FREE (Kunark is being beta'd atm and then Velious) I'd check out Project 1999, the finest private server available for purely Classic EQ, no custom modifications just the real deal. I have a level 37 Darkelf necro and have been playing fairly regularly, the server population is pretty good and everyone is friendly, helpful towards newbs as well. You wouldn't believe how happy I was when I discovered P99 and ended up seeing a few people I remember from my dear old Quellious server. It really is everything one could ask for considering Live EQ1, at this state, is an abomination. Well, there it is. Try it out, I'll help you get started right! PM me if you decide to come back to Norrath, this also goes for anyone else on the Sift who would try it/return. It really surprised me how harsh they start you out in that game after years of WoW, one needs all the help they can get.

Great WoW trailer as well, and I love Blizzard, but I just can't get back into the game despite my attempts to literally will myself into playing. I really feel as if I'm just being touted around, top-down style, by Blizzard to do this dungeon or that. My choices feel like they have no real impact on the game world, my actions rarely end up having actual consequences, besides maybe a momentary invconvenience. It's just too damned safe to be exciting! Raids are easy mode, though from all the impressions of Cataclysm is seems like they're trying to return to form of having the content be much more stimulating, brain intensive. If raiding becomes more like pre-BC/BC then I will return. I will most definitely at the very least try Cataclysm and see what happens.

Seems funny to me that no one mentions Everquest any more. Now it's like WoW is the only mmo that ever was. Everquest was the first online game to have an economy larger than some 3rd world nations. I played it for 3 yrs or so and I still miss it sometimes.

casual mmo games are a totaly different game sector to that of AAA boxed games , or AAA online games.

just the same as mobile games are different sector to flash games , and AAA games.

each sector requires different methods to maximise profit.



what he said at the very end was good though ,

Guild Wars Uno was my first online game. Loved it. Pretty hyped about the sequel.

They brag about their concept art being the best in the industry...and I don't think you could really deny them that. Amazing artwork and it really seems to rub off on the game environment. Some of those places look magical. Gives me geekchills. Wish I could go to cologne and try the demo out.

Oh, I forgot to mention the soundtrack...droooool

jokes are easier to get if they're funny

>> ^ponceleon:

Jokes... you don't get them.
If you didn't notice, I was being sarcastic. I upvoted the video and found it quite funny. I was actually just trying to poke fun at it using the same brand of sarcasm that the video itself uses.
You fail at sarcasm. (and that is not meant sarcastically.... wait... maybe it is).


<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> yourhydra said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/y/yourhydra-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">ForgeReality...maybe the video's main point wasn't to be funny? And ponceleon...it's the fact that they made the girl be blind and guided by a man that is annoying, instead of doing it the other way around.
It's almost laughable how dense most guys are when it comes to these issues since it doesn't concern them. I play loads of online games and love it, and there are many lovely guys on there that I've made lasting friendships with...at the same time...per one nice guy (meaning a man who knows that a girl is a capable HUMAN not a baby oven with tits) there are 10 douche bags telling me I'm gonna suck, and being rude and sexist towards me...(shutting up as soon as I reach top 3 on the scoreboard by the way) I agree with this vid 100%. MOST games and movies have damsels in distress and male heroes rescuing them, just another way for the male public to feel big. Most strands of Feminism's aren't about female superiority by the way, but about equality, I feel the word itself has been tainted to be shuddered at.
"Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." -Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler
"In my heart, I think a woman has two choices: either she's a feminist or a masochist."
—Gloria Steinem
Sorry to get all insulted and serious, but...people should think a little more, we do make up more than half of the population.
</div></div></div>