I'm with ponce, after a quick google on Jacques Magazine I came up with some interesting finds.

Now, the new "Definition" is " "Explicit sexual content" is defined on VideoSift as gratuitous nudity of a sexual nature lacking any reasonable artistic and educational merit, implying its sole intent is to cause sexual arousal. "

The entire purpose of the magazine however, is to be artfully sexual. It's playboy.. but a high class playboy.
"Where the good get naughty, and the Naughty get Naked"

Now, before I go any further, this is definitely *Viral

Now, onto this EXACT issue, Cover, "A red light says "Stop": this redhead's eyes undoubtedly say "Go": so just what message do her sexy stockings and garter give?

On the (something) theigh of this volumptuous vixen, these innovative intimates from agent Provocateur serve as both an incitation and a challenge."
(or, that's what I can make out, the text is stupidly small and difficult to read)

Anyway.. Wheres it has artistic merit to it.. it's still for an adult magazine. This.. may have to be discussed.

Damn straight!!!

In reply to this comment by demon_ix:
I've never seen the point in promoting a video that's already on the front page / top 15, but I guess when something pleases the ponce, it's going up there

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
Oh and *promote

I've never seen the point in promoting a video that's already on the front page / top 15, but I guess when something pleases the ponce, it's going up there

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
Oh and *promote

Man, no need to thank me, you find SO much good videos here... not like me and my constant college humor crap

This Neil video needs to go to #1 damnit!!!

In reply to this comment by demon_ix:
Thanks, ponce!

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
*promote for utter fucking awesomeness

Thanks, ponce!

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
*promote for utter fucking awesomeness

>> ^gtjwkq:
>> ^KnivesOut:
I don't think ponce was disparaging Objectivism or Rand, I think he was musing at the idea that QM would defend it, when he's clearly (from his posting history) not even remotely in that ideological camp.
I didn't think that either. He was insinuating that QM was an objectivist, I was pointing out that it clearly isn't possible given that QM is a christian (AFAIK). The ridicule I mentioned is from the video.


Uh, AFAIK QM is neither a christian nor an objectivist. They seem to most consistently be a troll, save for the rare occasions in which they break character.

>> ^KnivesOut:
I don't think ponce was disparaging Objectivism or Rand, I think he was musing at the idea that QM would defend it, when he's clearly (from his posting history) not even remotely in that ideological camp.

I didn't think that either. He was insinuating that QM was an objectivist, I was pointing out that it clearly isn't possible given that QM is a christian (AFAIK). The ridicule I mentioned is from the video.

>> ^gtjwkq:
^ Nice going, I think you just wasted your "argument from intimidation" on a christian
This kind of ridicule speaks more of the impotence of her critics than anything else


I don't think ponce was disparaging Objectivism or Rand, I think he was musing at the idea that QM would defend it, when he's clearly (from his posting history) not even remotely in that ideological camp.

Not at all... I have a soft spot in my heart for Fat Bastard.

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
That was nice of ya, thanks very much ponce!

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
*promote cuz I'm feeling Scottish.

Incredible! Nothing goes to waste in nature! And not me, ponce - If I could have it my way, my burial process would involve being floated out to sea on a wooden raft, and then someone would shoot a flaming arrow into my corpse as I floated away... that's probably from a movie, can't remember which; but an awesome way to go about it.

That was nice of ya, thanks very much ponce!

In reply to this comment by ponceleon:
*promote cuz I'm feeling Scottish.

Ponce, it already does that. You can't dupeof to a newer video, siftbot throws insults at you for that.

I'd like it to be not admin powered as such, they have enough to do, but like ban.. more than one user has to approve of it.

I think this is a *quality idea, ponce. I've always said partisan politics is nothing more than pageantry at the Superbowl. Instead of O.J. Simpson vs. Refrigerator Perry (yeah, that's right, I don't watch football too often so my knowledge of the roster is limited to 1980s Pepsi commercials. So what?), we have Miss Arizona vs. Miss Illinois.

What your team is doing wrong or the other team is doing right is incidental; all that matters is the trophy and, of course, how your pageant contestant carries herself as a respectful lady.

Only the two teams with the most money will win, because only they can afford the best team roster for the payoffs... er, I meant playoffs! Playoffs!

Also, wouldn't it be an outrage to have a commoner compete in this pageant? Only the best, most beautiful, most groomed contestants should compete to sling pigskin for the two party system. Leave the spectating to the little people.

>> ^ponceleon:
bluesnews


What ponce said.

>> ^EDD:
I hate to be a party-pooper, but.. seriously? Are you for reals?
You must've not looked - as of today there are only 70 videos named/tagged with "douche" (http://www.videosift.com/search?q=douche) - it might be a little subjective, but my opinion is that it's nowhere near enough to warrant the creation separate channel. Hell - me, I thought a 1500+ might not be enough when I searched for my first choice of a channel to create. And that's not going into the subjectivity of making a decision who's a douche as well as the ambiguity of the term itself.


I am seriously for reals!

70 tagged so far, with some remaining to be, and many more not yet even sifted! And then ponce's point: As for the number of videos tagged douche already, I feel that few are going to tag it without a channel.

We have to face the reality that in this world today, there are many douches. The douche-levels are rising rapidly. We see the effects of douche almost everywhere, and no where moreso than on the internets.

There are 492 videos in the Comics channel, 481 in Islam, and 311 in Grindhouse. I think *douche could surpass at least 500.