>> ^Payback:
>> ^therealblankman:
Ironic that Zappa and the Mothers of Invention would be featured in the accompanying slideshow. Zappa was totally straight, and really hated the fact that Stoners would spoil their experience of his shows by generously imbibing.

Yes... I totally believe someone who named their child "Moon Unit" never touched the stuff.


Alas, it's true. Zappa didn't do the shit.

Now...shouldn't you be out carving wooden shoes or tending to your windmill or something?



(by the way...this vid is fucking funny!)

>> ^Payback:
>> ^therealblankman:
Ironic that Zappa and the Mothers of Invention would be featured in the accompanying slideshow. Zappa was totally straight, and really hated the fact that Stoners would spoil their experience of his shows by generously imbibing.

Yes... I totally believe someone who named their child "Moon Unit" never touched the stuff.


Then you don't know anything about Frank Zappa. He absolutely despised drug users. He called them "Assholes in action".

>> ^therealblankman:
Ironic that Zappa and the Mothers of Invention would be featured in the accompanying slideshow. Zappa was totally straight, and really hated the fact that Stoners would spoil their experience of his shows by generously imbibing.


Yes... I totally believe someone who named their child "Moon Unit" never touched the stuff.

Ironic that Zappa and the Mothers of Invention would be featured in the accompanying slideshow. Zappa was totally straight, and really hated the fact that Stoners would spoil their experience of his shows by generously imbibing.

"I'm a lot better before you know me."
That's the one that got me...

There was a video made a few years ago (I think by the same guys). It was basically a "slideshow" of their postcards, but I couldn't find it on the site.

Anyone got any ideas?

EDIT: Actually scratch that, if you google there's million. I'm sure I can find the one I was thinking of

Downvote for misrepresenting my royal house. I'm a staunch defender of our royalty, and this (perhaps unintentional) depiction of the king as being less-than-respectful couldn't be further from the truth.

Do you know how many time they meet and shake hands in front of the camera like that? Well I can tell you it's enough times to warrant an initial bow, followed only by subsequent handshakes. You can definately find a picture where the emperor and my king bow to eachother, garantueed! Also, some of these heads of state have spent everything from a few years to several decades in events together. As I understand it, bowing is oftentimes more of a formal greeting for people introducing themselves to each other. Is that wrong?

As we've so clearly seen in this slideshow, if your agenda is to paint someone up as being more humble than the rest and at the same time try to equate that trait as something negative, then there's more than enough of a selection of pictures to choose from.

Meme's not dead until the government's involved.

I've seen this done with a Pentax on a photography site. Ah, here:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/31970-pentax-k10d-space.html

Related v. cool flickr set:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arena5/sets/72157606119049987/detail/

There you see how you can rig things up to survive landing.



I think a slower slideshow with less pix would be better to watch than this, but like I said, sitll cool.

^you can do an advanced search and search in multiple selected channels.

To complement *nosound/mute, what about *novideo/visuals/blind (audiosifts with album art (slideshows)), I think these 2 belong to the same category as NSFW, blocked, brief, long..(and NSFE

>> ^campionidelmondo:
Personally, I feel that even if it's not considered a dupe in this case, it should be. This is a very specific case and apparently falls through a hole in the rules imo.
We're talking about a video of an audio song that has no visual component, so a slideshow was added to it. Alternatively it could've had a still image or an unrelated video added, but the visual component is pretty much random. It's the song that's of importance and that's being sifted.
Ok, so the slideshows could be quite different, fair enough. However, if we don't consider this a dupe, then there's nothing stopping people from looking for popular songs on here and then resifting the exact same songs, just with a different pseudo-visual component, such as a slideshow/scene from a movie/still image etc.
Of course, the added visual component could be of great quality, like setting a great song to a very fitting scene from a movie...things like that. It's a thin line that begs more discussion imo.
Stripping rasch of his dupeoff powers seems a bit much. Especially, like burdturgler pointed out, given how much effort he puts into maintaining the videos.


I think it should not. I would rather that the votes too care of those cases, because they are not duplicates, even if the songs are the same. I don't think we should analyze "what the video is about" so we can figure out if its a dupe or not - it should be relatively simple and if there are doubts, then I'd rather discuss it than throw another version out. If we've all seen a great version of X song with an unofficial music video, would the official music video be a dupe? Not at all, and it should not be that other way either - it's a whole package. The only grey area there is, is when the differences are trivial. That's my opinion anyway.

In any case, in spite of the enmity towards rasch from me, I still respect his tireless effort in dead fixes and dupeofs, with that many of them anyone can make a mistake. I would think it's just a slap on the wrist; there's no reason to cut off a working limb, so to speak.

^I totally agree. Do you really think that a single person who voted for that video did so because they liked the cheesy slideshow? People were voting for the song, end of story. The second slideshow is a dupe of the first.

Rasch should get back his dupeof powers, and the second video should be declared the dupe that it is.

Personally, I feel that even if it's not considered a dupe in this case, it should be. This is a very specific case and apparently falls through a hole in the rules imo.

We're talking about a video of an audio song that has no visual component, so a slideshow was added to it. Alternatively it could've had a still image or an unrelated video added, but the visual component is pretty much random. It's the song that's of importance and that's being sifted.

Ok, so the slideshows could be quite different, fair enough. However, if we don't consider this a dupe, then there's nothing stopping people from looking for popular songs on here and then resifting the exact same songs, just with a different pseudo-visual component, such as a slideshow/scene from a movie/still image etc.

Of course, the added visual component could be of great quality, like setting a great song to a very fitting scene from a movie...things like that. It's a thin line that begs more discussion imo.

Stripping rasch of his dupeoff powers seems a bit much. Especially, like burdturgler pointed out, given how much effort he puts into maintaining the videos.

Thank you for the embed fix! that fucking video was published for literally like 10 minutes. I voted/commented on some stuff and went back to it and saw it was removed then went on a frantic search to replace it. Kept finding shitty remixes of it and picture slideshows. I was all very frustrating.

In reply to this comment by ant:
*dead BUT http://www.movie-list.com/trailers.php?id=aliceinwonderland has it (embeddable):

love the song, not the slideshow.

Hhahaha! That's genius!

In reply to this comment by kulpims:
Hahaha. People will put anything on the interwebs.

true