instantthreedown,
but what we can't understand, perhaps the non-confrontational types unlike ourselves have a hard time with this, is why this post,*********************

http://www.videosift.com/video/Improbable-Collapse-The-Demolition-of-Our-Republic

has been here as long as it has, with no takers, no..."experts", and this for what???/, to make no point at all, nut to cop to silence, defeat, or selective/subjective awareness...

I'm with BL on this one. If you adapted the feature to be somewhat like deading a sift, then there would be a period of 7 days where the sifter would be able to accept or refuse the claim, and where another collective owner could make a counter-claim, and the sifter could decide where it should go.

To be honest, I don't like a bunch of different things about the collectives. Overall, I think they're good, but here are my issues:

1. I don't like the finality of choosing a collective - I think users should be able to switch their sift from collective to collective. The reason for this ties in with #2, which is
2. I think any sift should be capable of being added to a collective, be it before the creation of the collective or before the sifter joined. I'm compulsive about categorizing stuff, and I can think of so many sifts that belong in my Science collective. The only argument I've heard against this and #1 so far is that it will mess up the collective rankings, and I honestly think that's a terrible reason. I haven't heard anyone thus far give a rat's hoot (and yes, I know that doesn't exist) about what ranking their collective is or what their ranking in the collective is, and I don't think it adds anything to the community - in fact, I would say if competition stepped up, it would detract from the community. Heck, I could only see people seriously bickering about where a collective belongs if there's more competition, not if competition doesn't matter.
3. I think there should be a button available to the collective owner to toss a sift from a collective. I've had some sifts in my collective that I didn't think belonged, and honestly, I think it's less offensive to remove the sift and explain to the sifter why I did this than to tell-by-asking the sifter to remove it himself. Also, I'm lazy and non-confrontational enough that I might consider letting an out-of-place sift slide by rather than tell a sifter to remove it from my collective.
4. I don't think there should be an invitations and memberships of collectives, period. Heck, pretty much all active sifters end up getting invited to pretty much every collective, anyways, and still the only argument I've heard against this is rankings. Bah.
5. I think the association to a collective on a per-sift basis thing should be implemented. I think that would definitely lessen the amount of squabbling over which sift belongs where.

Really, I'd prefer collectives to be more like moderated channels, with sifts limited to being in one main channel each.

But that's just me.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Oh damn - being non-confrontational, I don't treasure these moments. So, this looks to be a very divisive issue. Here's what I'm going to do:

I'm going to *discard this video - because Theo, it's not like you haven't been warned.

Next I'm going make a post to open a discussion on whether self-links should include videos that you upload to your account.

Then I'm going to place a poll on the sidebar of Sift Talk, but not until we've all had a chance to discuss it.

Theo, if the vote goes your way, I'll even retroactively *undiscard your vid.