Congratulations on reaching new heights on VideoSift. You have earned yourself 50 stars, earning you status of Silver Star member. You have been awarded 1 Power Point for achieving this level. Thanks for all your contributions.

Your video, Insanely Complex Rotary Weaver Makes Carbon Fiber Parts, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

You're welcome. It's a wonderful video, and really deserves to be on the sift.

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
Thanks so much Ornthoron! I was hoping it would eventually find its way back onto YT.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
Try this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNF0ADLIswk

Congratulations on reaching new heights on VideoSift. You have earned yourself 33 stars, earning you status of Silver Star member. You have been awarded 1 Power Point for achieving this level. Thanks for all your contributions.

http://land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/vk2k.shtml

This talks about what you talked about below.

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
To all those who would say that Americans would rise up against a rule of martial law, I have a couple of points to make. Keep in mind that I'm doing this mostly to play Devil's Advocate, but also to hopefully contribute to the discussion.

1. First, and I could be wrong about this, but I think that it would be safe to say that the subset of Americans who would amass any significant stockpile of weapons and know how to use them would share a sizable overlap with the subset of Americans who are either in the military or have been in the military. Would it not make sense, if one were planning to do something that would cause an uprising, to send as many of these military men and women out of the country? Maybe to Iraq or Afghanistan, or to hundreds of military bases around the world? This would keep them away from the country they swore to protect.

2. To those who would argue that those in the military would desert when given an order to harm their fellow countrymen, I would submit the Milgram experiment as an example of the flaw in that argument. It has been demonstrated that if a superior is willing to take full responsibility for their actions, people will rarely exercise any self control when in contact with their fellow man, especially when verbally pushed to do so. This doesn't even take into account threatening soldiers with violence against their family if they were to refuse, or other less than pleasant ideas.

I wouldn't say that I believe that something incredible will happen between now and November 2 that would "necessitate" martial law, but I would not be surprised if something does.

I would say to you, "be prepared", but I'm not sure what preparations one could make for those kinds of events.

Even if the rules are unconventional, the self-link rule is plainly visible on the "submit a video" page when you're a P.

He's welcome to ask Dag or Lucky to reinstate his account, which they will do. If this was not a self-link, which the evidence indicates, then he can even try to submit the video again.

Your friend is welcome to make a fresh start as well under another pseudonym.

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
Hey guys, that's pretty fucking harsh if you ask me. Now before you jump down my throat telling me he should've read the FAQs before posting, let me say this. I love this site, but it's got some pretty unconventional rules. Some rules that, you might say, aren't all that obvious like the self-linking rule. Therefore, if you want the community to grow in quality as well as in quantity, you need to nurture it instead of swinging your banhammers round and round at the slightest provocation.

onestem is a friend of mine that I introduced to videosift. He lurked, much like myself, until he saw a video that he felt so compelled to comment on that he registered here. He enjoyed the (mostly) mature and thoughtful discussions, and although not as rabid in his usage of the sift, he still used the site and enjoyed it. When he posted this video, he emailed me to let me know so I could view it, which I did. When I saw that he had self-linked, I sent him back an email letting him know that this was against the site's rules and that he might catch some flak for it. This happened right before he went to work, so he didn't get the email until he came back. When he also noticed that he had been banned.

It really pisses me off when people say, "let's look at the facts" and they look at the length of membership at a site and the duration between posts as if those are the facts of the matter. I'm sure think that I'm only acting like this because he's my friend, and if it was anyone else, I wouldn't care. Well, you're damn right!

Hey, man, I know you're pissed off about your boy getting banned, but it was a self-link. There really isn't any room for a warning on that. I get the argument that he probably would have increased the quality of the sift, but overall, if every self-linker got a second chance, the quality would go down. As far as the facts thing: the length of membership, length of time between post to y/t and post to sift, the number of views of the y/t vid are all facts even in the strictest sense. I hope you don't read this as me shouting back at you; I really just don't want to lose two sifters to one self-link.

Hey blutruth -- this video appears to be dead.

Thanks!

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
This is *dead, but there's a replacement below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHYEt4zptRg

you bet! only posted it because i recently remembered myself

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
I've seen all of the BMW shorts, but I forgot how good this one was. Thanks for the reminder.

There's several of us. Including at least two* other top 15ers, or three,*** if you count people who studied here. Dig through the Videosift archives for Siftups, there've been 3 to date in Canada actually, two in Toronto.

*zifnab and fedquip

**farhad

In reply to this comment by blutruth:
Krupo = Canadian? New knowledge, I am not alone.