Because you are clearly confused.....

Don't make personal attacks here. You may be as insulting to any idea as you like, but not the poster. Do not say things like;
"I am speaking to someone who doesn't even know the language he is speaking"
"I cant help it if your general ignorance seeps into every pore of your conscious existence"
and "someone of such an argy-bargy disposition" (whatever the hell that means, it's clearly personally insulting).

Stick to the topics, not the posters. If you disagree with a poster, disagree, don't attack the poster personally.

Don't fear, I'm not making any move to ban you over this...I was warning you that what you are doing is not allowed here, and IF YOU CONTINUE, it will rise to the level of banning eventually. Banning is not a first step...explaining that you're breaking the rules, which have clearly defined consequences, is a first step, and the only one I've taken.

EDIT: And the users you want to talk to about this are dag and lucky760, they are the 'moderators', eric3579 is more of a facilitator

No. Try reading again. I am threatening to ban you if you continue with personal ad hom attacks, which are not allowed. When you say things like
"I am speaking to someone who doesn't even know the language he is speaking, you see my amusement?
I cant help it if your general ignorance seeps into every pore of your conscious existence, and I must admit it should be above me(or anyone, for that matter), to aggravate someone of such an argy-bargy disposition. However, maybe someday the light-bulb will turn on inside your head, and you might finally see past the world you've been spoon-fed since birth."

...it's called an 'ad hom attack', it means moving from discussion of ideas to simple personal attacks, which you started, and which is not allowed here and is a bannable offence.

Let's examine.
You posted a vitriolic politically charged, contradictory post, insulting everyone you discussed.
I replied incredulously because you actually said "I am not necessarily saying that Trump is a good person, or would make a good President, but he would me loads better than the other shrimps for candidates...", which is so patently ridiculous it required me to ridicule it...but not YOU.
You replied with some personal ad hom attacks on my person because you didn't like my position.
I (inappropriately) replied in kind. (I should have just told you to stop the first time or you'll be banned, but I gave you the benefit of a doubt...the first time).
You post more personal insults and now try to characterize that as 'cordial'.
I tell you that your personal insults are not allowed here (try reading the site rules) and tell you if you continue them I'll move to ban you.

You run to who you think is an admin for help...he'll likely tell you to stop personally insulting people you don't know and stick to the topic, because.....

What can't I say in a comment?
We love a good fiery comment thread, but sometimes they go overboard. Please avoid personal attacks. It's okay to criticize ideas but refrain personal insults. Please avoid blatantly racist speech, threats, or other verbal abuse. This goes for comments in public arenas as well as private member profile comments. If a comment is bad enough it will probably be deleted due to negative feedback. If these types of comments are regular occurrences, we will probably ask you to leave the community or simply ban you outright.

EDIT: What exactly is an Aggro manner? I understand aggro, but not Aggro.

I must admit a certain amount of general amusement in speaking with you, I do love a good solid rant. It brings a unique air of difference into my otherwise droll existence.

You examined your post and found no sign of vulgar language, even abbreviated?


Definition of vulgar in English(Taken from the English Oxford Dictionary)
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/vulgar

adjective
1Lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined:

I am speaking to someone who doesn't even know the language he is speaking, you see my amusement?

I cant help it if your general ignorance seeps into every pore of your conscious existence, and I must admit it should be above me(or anyone, for that matter), to aggravate someone of such an argy-bargy disposition. However, maybe someday the light-bulb will turn on inside your head, and you might finally see past the world you've been spoon-fed since birth.

Good day:)

I'll say a little bit about my experience here, since you brought it up @ZappaDanMan. The reason I signed up to videosift, initially, was to provide a counterpoint to the enormous amount of anti-christian videos I noticed being propelled into the top 15. There was no one here representing the other side of the argument, or posting any Christian videos, so I figured I would be that guy. However, I quickly found out that I was pretty unwelcome here, except, that is, for a few important exceptions. One is @dag. Dag has commented many times that he feels I am a valuable member of the community. Perhaps he recognizes the pitfalls of a lack of diversity in the sift economy. Quite often the comment sections, at least for anything related to religion, are echo chambers for militant anti-theists. That isn't a good thing if you want to have a broad-based appeal.

There are some individual users who have reached out to me, some openly like @enoch, most though in secret. The reason being is because from the beginning there was a concerted campaign to try to get rid of me. The first strategy was to downvote all of my videos and comments and deny my participation in the system. I am sure I am the most downvoted user of all the time. Can anyone (@lucky760) track that? There was a time when I couldn't get a video to last more than half a day. It wasn't because of the nonsense people are posting in this thread, it was because there was a group of people working against me to kill them all off. I have 18 discarded videos in my discarded posts folder. Granted not all of them were that great, but some were sincerely good. Can anyone else claim a number like that? I doubt it, because people don't generally treat eachother like that here.

When that didn't work there was another campaign waged to totally marginalize me by labeling me as a troll. Many people put me on ignore and advised others to do the same. I felt like I had entered into an Amish community and advised them to use zippers instead of buttons. That actually worked because at some point I decided to leave and stopped posting for awhile. I couldn't get any videos published, and every time I posted anywhere people would insult me, or ignore me. It was only because a few people reached out to me that I came back.

These days, it isn't as bad. People just generally ignore me and don't really downvote my videos that much. There has actually been somewhat of a softening towards me and I've gotten a few videos published, which surprised me. I also appreciate @ChaosEngine 's principaled stand and I wish more people thought that way. There have been some people who have consistently given me their votes (I won't name you because it will make you unpopular) even though I know they disagreed with the material. So I am not here to rail against the sift, because I appreciate the people who are being nicer to me, and I pray for all of you whether you like me or not.

The point I am making is that my experience completely affirms everything Zappa said. If you want further proof, just look at the amount of anti-religious vs. religious videos that have been sifted. There is no actual comparison. People downvote for ideological reasons (they hate religion) and that is why you don't see many videos that inform rather than denigrate religion on the sift.

>> ^kceaton1:

It really would be nice to have a general board/forum on the Sift to stop the miscommunication. Sorry to those offended, if you read this anyway, you can now un-ignore me now...


There actually is -- the "Newest Channel Talk Posts" section off to the right is where off-topic discussion is generally supposed to take place. However, the "Sift-related discussion only" rule in Sift Talk is generally ignored and I don't think anyone particularly cares, so no need to feel bad about it.

Top 10 reasons for not believing in climate science consensus

1. Not being a climate scientist
2. Susceptibility to corporate programing
3. Subservience to media
4. Subservience to politicians
5. Ownership of a business that generates massive amounts of pollution
6. Paid to not believe publicly
7. Poor critical thinking skills
8. General gullibility
9. General ignorance
10. Wearing a bow tie so tightly that it cuts off circulation to the brain

>> ^lantern53:

Especially since there are a thousand other reasons to not believe in global warming.

I got it. When I hit 250, my channel is going to be: "vacant hipsters in abandoned factories, Phantasizing that they are in andrei tarkovsky movies, generally ignoring the material realities of industrial envelopment and abandon, with intelligent dance music playing in their heads"

this video is kind of subversive with respect to that figure. i kinda love it.

Yes cops speed for emergencies but they also abuse their privileges by running lights, speeding and just generally ignoring the rules they give us tickets for out of sheer laziness too. I'm guessing that's what this cop was doing judging by his reaction and why the filmer was pissed. Stupid? Brass balls? Or both?


>> ^Shepppard:
I hate these kinds of people. What was the point of chasing him down? What happens if he tailed him all the way to a domestic dispute, then what? For all we know the cop was on his way to something along those lines, and had to call it off because someone behind him in a civic may be in distress.
when you're being trained to be a police officer, it's mandatory to be given more in car training for things like the P.I.T. maneuver, and high speed safety. This guy, has not been, and you can tell by the fact that he's actually scared getting his car up to 90.

oxdottir, I strongly recommend ignoring choggie. The above comment is completely typical of his prolific writings. Some people find him entertaining, but for the most part it is simply a vulgar assault on the English language and trolling.

In the above post, he missed the entire point about organizing political rallies, he insulted Rachel specifically, lesbians specifically, and women in general.

Ignore, ignore, ignore.

>> ^blankfist:
Hitler's party was the National Socialist German Workers Party. You seriously cannot get more left than that!

Excuse me? - "The Nazi Party is generally described as being at the extreme or far right of the left-right political axis."

Seriously BF, wtf? Was that a joke? I hope you didn't make the same mistake and consider the German Democratic Republic a democratic state merely because of what the title implied.

As far as winfield is concerned, iaui summed him up well. The guy's the definition of a troll, contributing nothing to the website except comments, in which he offers almost nothing but dissenting 'opinion', which is copy & pasted from conservative media, rarely relying on facts and generally ignoring other' rebuttals. Please, do not compare him to yourself, because he's nothing like you except for the occasional disagreement with mainstream opinion, which, in your case, I welcome and have learned to value.

Cheers dude, I was hoping I didn't come across the wrong way. Believe me I don't like feeling like this and thinking the worst of a religion. To be honest as a Catholic I've despised my former religion for quite a while (I'm still a hypocrite though, as I happily read from the Bible at a friend's funeral a few weeks ago) but Islam as a political ideology that has no tolerance for non-believers really bugs me now. That YouTube video goes further in rationalising Islam as something that provides it's followers with a toolkit to either convert or kill non-believers. It's either submit to Allah or Jihad. At the moment I am convinced by those arguments but I'm still a novice in fully developing my views. I'm smart enough to know this is a complicated business.

In Britain I think we're reaching this point where there's this debate about multi-culturalism and what that really means. Again it's one of those terms that everyone has taken for granted but perhaps not really understood. Some of the far-right groups attack it of course but I suspect if you took religion out of the equation then we'd all get along a whole lot better. We would just have alot more in common.



In reply to this comment by enoch:
that was a great comment on the pat conell vid.
i still feel he is coming from a general ignorance but one thing you brought to light is that i dont live in britain,and while i am aware of the huge influx of mid eastern and asian muslims,that was a factor i never considered.
does that make a difference?
quite possibly,but then i think the argument should include the cultures and not just focus on the religion.
i am vehemently anti-fundamentalist,of any nature or color,but i feel using such a broad brush to admonish a whole religion while ignoring the cultural and religious history is a disingenuious(sp?) argument.
then again,
i dont live where pat conell lives,and have not experienced what he ,or you have.
it's easy to throw stones from shore,
much harder when your in the water.
thank you very much my friend.
till next time.
namaste.

that was a great comment on the pat conell vid.
i still feel he is coming from a general ignorance but one thing you brought to light is that i dont live in britain,and while i am aware of the huge influx of mid eastern and asian muslims,that was a factor i never considered.
does that make a difference?
quite possibly,but then i think the argument should include the cultures and not just focus on the religion.
i am vehemently anti-fundamentalist,of any nature or color,but i feel using such a broad brush to admonish a whole religion while ignoring the cultural and religious history is a disingenuious(sp?) argument.
then again,
i dont live where pat conell lives,and have not experienced what he ,or you have.
it's easy to throw stones from shore,
much harder when your in the water.
thank you very much my friend.
till next time.
namaste.

It's just basic pandering to a constituency. I'm sure she and the cosponsors of the bill had experts that could have given them the honest truth that the evidence linking violence in videogames and the actualisation of that is tentative at best.

At the same time though, she knows from focus groups and surveys that if the general ignorant consensus of older adults, which know nothing of video games or at best played pacman, is that video games are blatant killing and sex simulators, then that's what she needs to legislate against if she wants to boost her political popularity.

Loved the-web swinging in spider-man 2... like yahtzee, I generally ignored the plot and the cries for help just to enjoy swinging around Manhattan for hours. I was hoping they would take that base and make a really good game with it, but unfortunately the ultimate spider-man game that followed ripped most of the fun parts of swinging out. I haven't gotten around to this iteration yet.

A devastating illness that destroys lives and rips families apart. My heart goes out to anyone suffering from this awful disease. Not only do they have to contend with the many and varied symptoms that impact upon their daily life, but also a generally ignorant medical community that's unable to efficiently diagnose and treat it. Add to this a lack of funds being directed at research and the situation is quite tragic.

Increasing attention is being aimed at the issue though. Let's hope the powers that be see some sense and start to treat Lyme disease with a more appropriate level of concern.