Ha, what does that say about my commenting I wonder? :-/

Well, I'm glad to be a recipient of your comment upvote journey

In reply to this comment by longde:
Hi Spoco.

I took the 4 words in the comment below; then did a 4 comment searches with each of the keywords. Then read and upvoted the comments that had 14 points in the results. You won the jackpot; apparently you had a few comments with any of those words therein.

crazy, wrong, long, frequent



In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Hey, you didn't just happen to purposefully go and upvote a bunch of my comments to get me to the next Silver Tongue level did you? If so... thanks!

If not, then... thanks for all the upvotes on my comments anyway, I must be an insightful chap

Hey, you didn't just happen to purposefully go and upvote a bunch of my comments to get me to the next Silver Tongue level did you? If so... thanks!

If not, then... thanks for all the upvotes on my comments anyway, I must be an insightful chap

Hey Lucky, any reason why my profile pic has gone from the usual cheery dog playing a banjo to one I used for a few days ago ages ago (the one of the chimp covered in poo... was some joke thing we were doing).

>> ^spaceman:

Wow. As a nerd who is currently studying math in College I do NOT see the appeal in this video. Why do you guys upvote...just because a girl is narrating. I am disappointed in the sifters today, this video sucks.


Or, in other words:

I like to show how superior I am by poo pooing anything that's about maths (which I'm super good at dontcha know, because I study it and all), and it not up to the highly specific standards I have set as being necessary for a maths based video.

Bloody hell, it's a video of a girl/woman talking about maths and drawing quite nicely. She is showing a level of interest in maths that it sadly lacking in the VAST majority of females (and a lot of males for that matter). If she can show how just doodling can be exploring maths then this is GOOD.

So we upvote because we appreciate this level of enthusiasm for something important like maths and art, rather than discussing whether you're on team Edward or team Jacob.

That is some potent combination of artistic flair and a mathematical/enquiring mind...

I can only hope my daughter ends up with some of this wonder about mathematics and shapes and the world at large.

Yeah, I don't have instaban powers... there should be a way of calling for a ban on a user when they haven't posted anything but comments as that user did. currently they have to post a video in order to be banned.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
You just have to click the instaban icon by their name at the top of the page, but you have to have a ruby to do that I think.

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Argh, there's a spammer spamming my profile and posts, how does one ban someone? I thought we just did a * ban on their profile?

http://www.videosift.com/member/aikowest0002

Argh, there's a spammer spamming my profile and posts, how does one ban someone? I thought we just did a * ban on their profile?

http://www.videosift.com/member/aikowest0002

Just letting you know that I was going to post a particular video, so did a search for "Walrus sucking" and got no results... so I started to try to post it, only to be told it was already here.

Something a miss with the search engine?

Thanks

In reply to this comment by littledragon_79:
omg that is *quality
Although I'm still scratching my head at how there is a giant desert behind the Smithsonian.

Ha, thanks

In reply to this comment by EDD:
I wanted to do this as soon as I was 30 seconds in: *quality!

Thanks Kev, No probs at all, I've done it many a time despite searching first. Sometimes I really wonder about Videosift's search. :-/

In reply to this comment by Kevlar:
Heya Spoco,
Sorry for the dupeage. I always try to be as thorough as possible when sifting, but I do miss dupes from time to time. Let me forward the dupe request along to someone (BF, maybe) to see if they can transfer the votes over to you.

Best,
-Kev

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
*dupeof http://www.videosift.com/video/Hugh-Jackman-Daniel-Craig-interrupted-by-cell-phone

Not sure I get where you're coming from.

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
So would it be fair to summarise your argument as: "There's no room for an anarchic mini-economy inside a capitalist super-economy"?

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Having just said what I did above... I've always been torn about filesharing in general and people trying to justify doing it.

I do it... but I know it's wrong really.

If I download music or a movie and I enjoy it, how is it right that I not be giving the artist compensation for that work?

Most people who copy stuff will say 'Yeah, but the artist doesn't get much anyway, it's the evil record/movie companies that get most of the money, so fuck them'.

Except that doesn't solve the problem does it? Just because you don't like the corporations, not getting any money to the artist doesn't solve a thing.

Other people say 'music/information should be free man'. Um... ok, but then how do those who make said music or information make a living? Hmmm, if they're not paid for the thing they spend time creating and others do enjoy consuming... how are they supposed to make money?

And if you say 'well, they should tour and make money that way', then get stuffed. I KNOW they CAN make money that way, and do, but there are those who produce music in ways that don't translate to live shows, and then it only works for those that are in the areas where the acts do tour. So you're saying it's ok for those outside those areas to consume the music for free and not give the artist anything just because they live in some area that bands don't tour? Riiight.

Definitely there's arguments for using filesharing better than it is, definitely there are arguments for throwing god awful DRM out the window, definitely there are arguments for looking at different ways of delivering music and movies to people, but just saying to all 'have at it' is not the answer either.

If you think you're entitled to music and movies and books for free (not lent, but to keep), and that the creators of those works deserve no compensation for their work, then you're a fool.

If you can think up a way to make everyone happy in this debate... then you're a genius!

Danka sir.

In reply to this comment by MarineGunrock:
*quality

Ha! How awesome is that?

My wife and I just looked agog on the set when he opened it... and both thought 'my god, how OLD is that set?'.

Apparently had we not let him play with it we could have got around $250 for it, but hey... it's meant for playing with, and how many kids can say they got and played with a 35 year old lego set for their birthday?

In reply to this comment by EDD:
Wow, just wow, spoco - my first Lego possession was that exact same set And yeah, completely agree with all of the above, what a nostalgia trip

>> ^spoco2:

I think you expect me to say 'Yes, because they had guns'.

But my actual answer is 'No, because they just sat in their car and told us to leave.

I don't think you'll ever see the point. You think that if you have a gun you're safe, and that everyone can have guns because then everyone is safe. But all it means is that more people die from guns.

In reply to this comment by imstellar28:
Did you feel safer next to the cops, and if so why?

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Nope, because I live in a country with sensible gun control laws. (Australia)

Actually, the only time I've really feared for my wellbeing just by being in an area was when me and some friends somehow ended up in Compton, LA at night, and had the police bring us over to their squad car and tell us that we'd better get out of that area pretty quickly if we didn't want to be dead soon. Hurray for guns, hurray for everyone being armed, it makes you all so much safer.

In reply to this comment by imstellar28:
Just guessing, you've never been close to violence have you?


In reply to this comment by spoco2:
You keep repeating your mantra of 'you need guns to defend against other guns'.

You keep doing that if it makes you happy.

In reply to this comment by imstellar28:
A whoooole lot easier to kill people, and lots of them, who don't have guns, that is.

In reply to this comment by spoco2

To say that people have been able to kill people before the advent of guns is stating the absolute bleeding obvious, doesn't change the fact that guns make it a whoooole lot easier to kill people, and lots of them, quickly. And easier to accidentally kill people, or yourself for that matter.