>> ^chingalera:

>> ^gwiz665:
She sings just fine, but her guitar work is pretty basic.
Very cute though.

Yeah? Well the chord work for the tune as composed ain't rocket-science on the fretboard there wizzzy. Yeah, yeah, a few folks here have seen you play your guitar including myself and guess what?? Your own skills on the guitar come from rote and practice with very little soul or natural talent....
The showcase here anyhow, is her incredibly sincere and lilting voice and the SOUL that resides within her interpretation.
Soooo, thanks for the egotistical observations there,
MISTER Malmsteen!



lol.

>> ^gwiz665:

She sings just fine, but her guitar work is pretty basic.
Very cute though.


Yeah? Well the chord work for the tune as composed ain't rocket-science on the fretboard there wizzzy. Yeah, yeah, a few folks here have seen you play your guitar including myself and guess what?? Your own skills on the guitar come from rote and practice with very little soul or natural talent....

The showcase here anyhow, is her incredibly sincere and lilting voice and the SOUL that resides within her interpretation.

Soooo, thanks for the egotistical observations there,
MISTER Malmsteen!

>> ^bobknight33:

Unless you have young kids you have no room to talk. You don't have knowledge to make any judgement.
Parenting IS filtering out inappropriate material.
I'm talking when a 6 year old is clicking channels to get to his cartoon channel it at times comes across inappropriate material.
WRT to web serving same thing. The kid can be you You-tubing or sifting for kitty cat stuff and come across some wild stuff. Sure I don't want my 6 and 7 year seeing women and men rubbing up against each other or to watch some brutal gang violence event that some posted. What parent would? Some parents don't mind at all and that a darn shame. There are limits for kids and parenting filtering is a must.

I take responsibility for my kids upbringing. If other parents stepped up to the plate kids would have better moral compass.
When you have kids, revisit your post.
You don't seem to have high regard for the parenting skills from you mother. sorry to hear that.

>> ^VoodooV:
Instead of blaming television @bobknight33, the responsibility is still ultimately the parents. You don't have to be a parent to know that. Parents are not helpless to modern television. If you can't be bothered to educate your kids on the difference between made up television and reality, you don't get to blame television. My mom was a pretty horrible parent, but that is one of the first things I recall her ever teaching me. So since I'm actually armed with this thing called knowledge. I can watch any TV I wish and it's not damaging to me because IT'S NOT REAL!
It's the same thing with the teachers. Parents don't want to be the parents anymore, they want to be their pal. So when little billy doesn't do well on his test, who gets chewed out? Not little billy, that's for sure. Parents blame the teachers when they should be blaming themselves.
You can believe television and commercials are inappropriate all you want. Still doesn't absolve you from your responsibility. History has shown over and over again that when you try to hide shit from your kids, they always find it eventually. The more forcefully you dictate how bad something is, the more the kids want to do it just to spite you and rebel. So instead of trying to trick and coerce your kids into behaving, maybe you should actually try to educate them. If your "education" has any merit to it, then it will stick. Education beats coercion every time.
Parenting is not rocket science, it just takes effort, so you can get off your moral high horse. You've demonstrated time and time again you have no claim to any moral high ground, especially not any morality based off made up deities.



Once again, bob laughably attempts to claim moral superiority over everyone. Sorry, but you aren't magically granted wisdom the instant the kid pops out of the womb.

When you fail to educate your kids WHY things are inappropriate and just filter because "you said so" then you're not accomplishing anything. Authority without the actual facts to back it up fails EVERY time to kids with nothing better to do than to rebel. It's the hot stove analogy which you apparently failed to learn. Parents will tell you to not touch that hot stove. Kids disregard this and touch it anyway and are immediately introduced to the facts of WHY you shouldn't touch a hot stove and guess what..they never do it again.

If you told a kid to never touch a cold stove...because you said so. The kid eventually touches it and learns that nothing bad comes of it. Not only are they encouraged to rebel. Your authority is undermined and they learn that you're full of shit and continue to ignore you.

In other words, since bob probably hasn't been following. Moral authority means absolutely jack unless you have provable facts to back it up. When kids find out you're bullshitting them. Kids have this pesky thing called the ability to learn and the ability to detect bullshit. Telling them not to do something only because your imaginary friend up in the clouds told you so has a way of coming back to bite you in the ass when the imaginary friend in the clouds doesn't punish them because that imaginary friend doesn't exist.

Bob lives in the typical republican bubble where he deludes himself into believing he's the good parent and everyone else is lacking. What's it like being so self-centered bob?

And once again, Bob cherry picks what he wants to hear and disregards everything else. I praise my mom for teaching me that TV is make-believe and all bob chooses to hear is the negative part. You are utterly incapable of having a rational discussion bob. I've proven this time and time again. The sift is going to continue to beat you over the head with logic and rationality every time until hopefully you learn something.

Unless you have young kids you have no room to talk. You don't have knowledge to make any judgement.

Parenting IS filtering out inappropriate material.

I'm talking when a 6 year old is clicking channels to get to his cartoon channel it at times comes across inappropriate material.

WRT to web serving same thing. The kid can be you You-tubing or sifting for kitty cat stuff and come across some wild stuff. Sure I don't want my 6 and 7 year seeing women and men rubbing up against each other or to watch some brutal gang violence event that some posted. What parent would? Some parents don't mind at all and that a darn shame. There are limits for kids and parenting filtering is a must.


I take responsibility for my kids upbringing. If other parents stepped up to the plate kids would have better moral compass.

When you have kids, revisit your post.

You don't seem to have high regard for the parenting skills from you mother. sorry to hear that.



>> ^VoodooV:

Instead of blaming television @bobknight33, the responsibility is still ultimately the parents. You don't have to be a parent to know that. Parents are not helpless to modern television. If you can't be bothered to educate your kids on the difference between made up television and reality, you don't get to blame television. My mom was a pretty horrible parent, but that is one of the first things I recall her ever teaching me. So since I'm actually armed with this thing called knowledge. I can watch any TV I wish and it's not damaging to me because IT'S NOT REAL!
It's the same thing with the teachers. Parents don't want to be the parents anymore, they want to be their pal. So when little billy doesn't do well on his test, who gets chewed out? Not little billy, that's for sure. Parents blame the teachers when they should be blaming themselves.
You can believe television and commercials are inappropriate all you want. Still doesn't absolve you from your responsibility. History has shown over and over again that when you try to hide shit from your kids, they always find it eventually. The more forcefully you dictate how bad something is, the more the kids want to do it just to spite you and rebel. So instead of trying to trick and coerce your kids into behaving, maybe you should actually try to educate them. If your "education" has any merit to it, then it will stick. Education beats coercion every time.
Parenting is not rocket science, it just takes effort, so you can get off your moral high horse. You've demonstrated time and time again you have no claim to any moral high ground, especially not any morality based off made up deities.

Instead of blaming television @bobknight33, the responsibility is still ultimately the parents. You don't have to be a parent to know that. Parents are not helpless to modern television. If you can't be bothered to educate your kids on the difference between made up television and reality, you don't get to blame television. My mom was a pretty horrible parent, but that is one of the first things I recall her ever teaching me. So since I'm actually armed with this thing called knowledge. I can watch any TV I wish and it's not damaging to me because IT'S NOT REAL!

It's the same thing with the teachers. Parents don't want to be the parents anymore, they want to be their pal. So when little billy doesn't do well on his test, who gets chewed out? Not little billy, that's for sure. Parents blame the teachers when they should be blaming themselves.

You can believe television and commercials are inappropriate all you want. Still doesn't absolve you from your responsibility. History has shown over and over again that when you try to hide shit from your kids, they always find it eventually. The more forcefully you dictate how bad something is, the more the kids want to do it just to spite you and rebel. So instead of trying to trick and coerce your kids into behaving, maybe you should actually try to educate them. If your "education" has any merit to it, then it will stick. Education beats coercion every time.

Parenting is not rocket science, it just takes effort, so you can get off your moral high horse. You've demonstrated time and time again you have no claim to any moral high ground, especially not any morality based off made up deities.

Why would you think that message was directed at you ? Your horse seems a little high if you think that was refering to you specifically. It did take me a wopping couple seconds, the fact it happened to me as well is why I posted that. What turned my " oh for fuck sakes" crank for my video analogy was this phrase

" Why can't videosift remember me for more than two weeks.
I have to log on to this site soo often. Not more than once a day or week, but still so many times"

What that said to me is that you have a problem with logging in once every 7-10 days. So every 7-10 days you have to log in, okay, I can understand how you want to fix the problem, but your wording just sounded like a crying little wiener wanting everything to be perfect. The video has jack all to do with your immediate problem it had to do with the comparison of people bitching about stupid little shit that they should just be happy that it works in the first place.


But that second reply was nothing to do with you. I figured it was time I let you in on the little secret. Lets say you sign in not once a day or once a week but once every ten days, thast three times a month and you make it seems like such great efforts were taken to do so.

CHEERIO !
In reply to this comment by sanderbos:
You just can't let it go can you ;-)

Here's how I use videosift. I open the homepage, then open all videos I want to check out in new tabs. So then I have like 10 tabs open, the result of a selection process.

It is only then that I discover that I am not logged in, and then I have 10 tabs open without me being logged in, and having to log on on every page. Plus, even though the login process is partly Ajax, it is not all Ajax, so you should not attempt to log on when the video is playing, because then it will reload the page. It is frigging annoying, and this is not rocket science to implement.

>> ^BoneRemake:

Happened to me earlier like it did to Sarzy.
Took me a whopping six seconds to enter my info.

You just can't let it go can you ;-)

Here's how I use videosift. I open the homepage, then open all videos I want to check out in new tabs. So then I have like 10 tabs open, the result of a selection process.

It is only then that I discover that I am not logged in, and then I have 10 tabs open without me being logged in, and having to log on on every page. Plus, even though the login process is partly Ajax, it is not all Ajax, so you should not attempt to log on when the video is playing, because then it will reload the page. It is frigging annoying, and this is not rocket science to implement.

>> ^BoneRemake:

Happened to me earlier like it did to Sarzy.
Took me a whopping six seconds to enter my info.

So learn some new chords. It's not rocket science.

http://www.electricguitarblog.com/2008/04/printable-guitar-chord-chart.html

Was the manager within his rights to close early? Sure, it's not like he's breaking any laws. Was that good customer service? Nope. The store is advertised as open and he's not letting people in. If he wanted to close sooner, he could have simply put a sign on the door. This shit is not rocket science. He also could have offered to resolve the situation by having an employee go grab the items the customers wanted and then had the customers pay at the door. This has nothing to do with his employees. He wasn't doing them any favors by misrepresenting the hours that his store was open.

>> ^Nexxus:

What's wrong with charging for convenience? If you don't like it, go somewhere else or use cash. It's not rocket science. This is a witch hunt similar to toyota with the gas pedals.
If pizza hut raised the price of their pizza by a few bucks, would it make national news and warrant discussion on the senate floor? I think not.


You're actually equating a purchase with a fee? Besides, Interac and the other Point of Sale "cash equivalents" were brought in so that you would STOP actually coming in to the brick and mortar and wasting their time with non-sales matters. Debit is for THEIR convenience and profit. Now they're just getting greedy.

>> ^Nexxus:

What's wrong with charging for convenience? If you don't like it, go somewhere else or use cash. It's not rocket science. This is a witch hunt similar to toyota with the gas pedals.
If pizza hut raised the price of their pizza by a few bucks, would it make national news and warrant discussion on the senate floor? I think not.


Because if one huge bank does it's likely that the other HUGE banks will do it and then there's a serious problem. Like when you have a monopoly or only 5 media companies in the United States, that's a serious problem.

I agree pull your money out and don't give them anymore business but just having a solution doesn't mean this doesn't warrant discussion or outrage. You can say "If you don't like the TV propaganda turn off the TV." That isn't the answer because you're going to have to deal with people all the time that have been influenced by said propaganda. We're a society, this kinda shit effects all of us when it's on a large enough scale.

>> ^Nexxus:

What's wrong with charging for convenience? If you don't like it, go somewhere else or use cash. It's not rocket science. This is a witch hunt similar to toyota with the gas pedals.
If pizza hut raised the price of their pizza by a few bucks, would it make national news and warrant discussion on the senate floor? I think not.


Because they are charging us $5 a month for what costs them pennies to do. That's what's wrong with it.

What's wrong with charging for convenience? If you don't like it, go somewhere else or use cash. It's not rocket science. This is a witch hunt similar to toyota with the gas pedals.

If pizza hut raised the price of their pizza by a few bucks, would it make national news and warrant discussion on the senate floor? I think not.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Martin Luther King managed to create protests and a movement that DIDN'T get in people's faces or disrupting the business of innocent bystanders who have nothing to do with what you're protesting. He did it with a positive, uplifting, inspirational message that people of good sense could not help but agree with. These yahoos are doing the exact opposite. They couldn't be driving people AWAY from their cause any better if they were trying.


wrong wrong WRONG!
martin luther king jr knew full well the only way a peaceful protest would be effective was by interfering with business.
any protest that was even moderately successful interfered with business and the everyday machinery of government.
now we have "free speech zones"(see:RNC 2008 st paul MN) which are many times far distances from the very thing being protested.....how convenient.
this is where the protesters can be marginalized and ignored but get in the way of everyday business and NOW you will get noticed.
and the government will send its goons in to strong arm and intimidate because the business class scream bloody murder.
there will be arrests.
there will be macings.
there will be violence and yes,even sometimes murders.
all of which can now be clandestinely videotaped from a phone exposing the strong arm tactics of the government all in the name of "keeping the peace".

this aint rocket science.it is effective and it works.
your obedient slave solution just leaves the protester flaccid and ineffective.
you have the RIGHT of redress.
you have the RIGHT to assemble.
and the police are within their powers to cite or detain you for civil disobedience.
they are NOT within their powers to:maim,torture,brutalize and disregard the laws in which they were sworn to uphold.
this is about challenging power and authority and the only way to do that properly is to disrupt the machinations of power and authority.

Isn't that exactly what I just said? That regardless of how "hard" (the word is in quotations because I am not sure if semantically speaking we are working from the same definition of "more hours worked") someone works, the government is already taking a set amount? I've bolded your own words that mirror my own.

If the government takes a quarter of what you make no matter how hard you work, are you going to work harder?

If the government takes 1/10th of what you make no matter how hard you work, are you going to work harder?

If the government takes 1/100th of what you make no matter how hard you work, are you going to work harder?

That was exactly my point and you seem to agree with it - the government is taking a set amount regardless of how hard you work, whether that's 15 hours a week or 40 hours a week or 80 hours a week. How "hard" (again, as in # of hours) someone works is irrelevant to how much the government is taking.

Your underlying assumption is that working more hours = more money, which is simply not the case for 1. all salaried employees in the workforce and 2. businesses that are subject to market forces/demand. How can someone work 80 hours a week if their business doesn't have sufficient demand/customers to even produce that much? That's like saying home construction workers/architects/building contractors at the trough of the housing crisis would have worked harder if only the government would lower taxes on their income. That's bullshit because home building and renovations/improvements were at record lows during that time.

Unemployment itself is a far, far bigger problem than lowering taxes if we're talking about average Joe Citizen trying to make an honest living.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Why do you think you're the standard for what I'm talking about? You're not running a business, are you? Because those people put in 80 hours a week easily, and are preyed on by the system far more than regular workers.
This isn't rocket science, peeps. If you shovel sh1t for 10 hours and the government takes half of what you make no matter how hard you work, are you going to work harder? I'm dealing with liberals so I've tried to type as slowly as possible.
Oh, and Genjkerk, I'll remove the splinter from mine eye when you remove the beam from yours.