Generally, I would agree with you, but not in this context and not to this degree. Every region in American has their own little dialect and is commonly accepted.

The point of the game is to figure out what the phrase is. The parts of the phrase he supposedly mis-pronounced were already revealed so it's not an issue of him trying to "guess" his way through the game.

same with the southern woman. The G she dropped in swimming was already revealed on the board, so to harp on that particular part of the word was bullshit. gee she said "swimmin'" what other word could she have possibly meant?

had the contestants been trying to mumble their way through some part of the phrase that hadn't been revealed, I would be on WoF's side, but that clearly is not the case.

It was a dick move on their part, probably motivated by not wanting to award prize money. end of story.

What's next? They going to screw over someone with a heavy Boston accent? I guess they screen out anyone with a foreign accent if they are that anal about pronunciation. Guess Joe Pesci won't ever be a celebrity contestant.

his meaning was obviously clear. This is no different than the southern servicewoman who got screwed because she said "swimmin'" instead of swimming.

all cracks about southern accents aside, it was OBVIOUS what her meaning was. the only reason they are harping on pronunciation is to have a convenient excuse to not pay out extra money.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Strict-Judging-on-Wheel-of-Fortune

Yeah, I didn't understand why he harped on that either. It was kind of a distraction from an otherwise very interesting video.

Your fanaticism is in not being able to see that I'm not arguing against you, nor really against your true hurdles (the guy in the video above who will never see the merit in slugs or snails regardless of your evidence). I'm arguing against the need to see the other side as a combatant and instead as a group that has a different expertise and perspective. The 2nd voice in a complex evaluation at a national or global level.

Science minded people can easily project the benefits of research and have a lot of faith in science's ability to provide exponential benefits in the future. It's because this IS the case that this is even a debate. What WE seem incapable of doing is accepting that even exponential benefits and aggregate benefits can fall prey to scope and mass.

People on the other side don't see the long term or the exponential benefits however because theyre not science minded. Their focus has likely been somewhere else like business, healthcare, politics, social issues, etc. and so they will know more about THOSE lasting impacts than science minded people (including you and I). Unless youre suggesting science minded people are more experts on these topics as well?

So when using the explicit or implicit "greater good" as a measure it can be surprising how things unfold. I say "greater good" like that because the idea that the future benefit of current research is worth current spending over immediate problems implies "the greater good of society over time" and if you disagree with that then we can discuss that some other day.

Let me assist you quickly in countering my own comments so you can see why I feel we're not on the same page. The counter to the arguments i've expressed would be that "greater good" evaluation from moment to moment is NOT the correct way to fund research. Because the value that the general population will put on immediate issues (or support through public policy/voting/opinion) will always carry more weight than solving problems in the future (the immediacy bias of humans) it can not be used as a forward thinking way of funding research.

In other words, we don't need to convince people of greater good or of researches value over other uses of resources. The reason is that the only way to properly do science research is as a ongoing project on a mass scale with inter-dependencies that are too complex for anyone but the most informed to evaluate.

Arguing dollars and cents through cost benefit analysis or some other method would ultimately work against research funding, particularly when arguing with business and fiscal spending experts that can play on immediate human need/emotion.

As an aside, i enjoy this discussion but I truly think that there is a miscommunication about what topics you and I are concerned about and what our exact stances on them are. Perhaps this is my fault for not making my stance or opinion more clear because I was not trying to chime in on the debate at large, but chime in on the way people were undertaking the debate.

I believe research funding is even more important than immediate needs and that the justification for them does not have to meet any "greater good" measures because, having studied economics in college, I'm aware of how bad our evaluation of non-concrete goods/services are (ie the evaluation of human life or environmental impacts expressed in real world terms like money).

Because I believe this, I have to accept that it is an IMPORTANT balance to have people as biased in the opposite direction around to offset my opinion and I welcome open discussion (ie without assuming they don't know what theyre talking about from the beginning) with those people because it helps me to feel that our society IS actually meeting the needs of both types of people as best it can.

What I don't do is raise my nose at them as being uninformed and incapable of understanding the issues at large because I believe they do, but with a different process all together which still has value. I also don't assume that my fact and science based arguments will always win out over arguments with immediacy and immediate human benefit (which are very difficult to put a value on).

I apologize for harping on greater good, but it was being thrown around and wielded (even if implicitly) as though it was a single edged sword when it is in fact a double edged sword when the issue is viewed with the proper scope. I also didn't feel the need to be yet another voice clamoring for science funding when the opposite side had little to no presence. Group think is dangerous and without voices to temper the enthusiasm it's easy to forget that debates have 2 sides and both typically have merit even if the other side wouldn't care to admit it.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Sexy-Harp-Twins-Play-Led-Zeppelin

http://www.harptwins.com/

⚢ Twins With Harps perform theme from Doctor Who ⚢ has been added as a related post - related requested by chingalera on that post.

Sexy Harp Twins Play Led Zeppelin has been added as a related post - related requested by chingalera.

Thanks for seeing the errror of that word. I won't harp on it.

Comparing guns to drugs to ME is very relevent. As I said I used to smoke quite a lot of pot but not now.( I do wish it were legalized) Now I like to go to the range and blow off steam with big bangs and the zen of finding the centre of the target.
I don't want any war on drugs (or guns) that is not using facts to support the arguments.
The reality is that humankind would be better off without all guns, drugs and alcohal but that will never happen so I propose live and let live.

If you are harming someone else by your actions, it's against my moral compass as correct.

Thanks for your response.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'hallelujah, glass harp, crystal, glass, glasses, street artist, play' to 'Cohen, hallelujah, glass harp, crystal, glass, glasses, street artist, play' - edited by chingalera

Not sure why that's supposed to be funny. Parents have been screwing over their kids dreams for eons.

"Stop screwing with that. There's real work to do, and you have to get prepared for the real world. Not that shit. Stop playing around and take responsibility for your life."

If a parent found no value in music, they would harp on their child about it. Worse if it were based on jealousy.

Man, I feel like I keep harping on 5.0, but I really gotta say that I don't like the promote system now at all.

I promoted a video about 20 minutes ago, and it's about to be bumped out any second now.
On a busy day, you may get 5 minutes if others promote at the same time.

on a positive note, I like the new chat system! see? I do like some change!

Your video, New Meat-eating Sponge Looks Like a Harp, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^lv_hunter:

2:50 into the clip wtf is that pink vieny thing on the lower left?!


It's a sea anemone!

People like this are fucking scary. These conspiracy nutballs who think EVERYTHING is a conspiracy. EVERYTHING is being controlled by the governments or secret cabals of hooded men.

He keeps harping on (haarping on?) about the storm being a distraction.

Isn't his batshit crazy bullshit really a distraction, rather than focusing on real issues?

This guy is a moron if he thinks they can actually control hurricanes as much as he thinks they can. When you do a cursory bit of reading you see that they have theories, they think they can lessen the impact of hurricanes (in theory), they have been trying for decades but never had conclusive proof one way or the other.

The bullshit that he keeps spouting as fact gets lapped up by the conspiracy nutjobs.

Fuck this man annoys the shit out of me. Not least of which because I have at least one friend who watches this dick and believes his shit.

This was made more relevant the past couple weeks as the country ERUPTED in anger at the fact we have "Replacement Refs" making bad calls in NFL games. It was just shocking, I was seeing this shit reported up to the minute on the BBC. Every news channel and website was constantly harping on it, but that wasn't the worst part. THE WORST PART of this was the fans, the people in this country who's lives are being fucked over by the government and corporations. Their major concern was that some refs weren't doing a good enough job and the good refs were at home instead. It's ridiculous.

The American people deserve the country they have and the country they work for. I love sports, I'm a referee, it's my Job. But I understand better than most the difference between Sport and Life. Some people brag about a certain sport being their Life. Those people have never been foreclosed on, or had to watch their children walk to school with no breakfast. This country man, I'm just fucking sick every day.