@newtboy
i totally understand my friend and i dont necessarily disagree,but what do you think makes a greater impact?
banning an intelligent person,who may cause some controversy from time to time but is VITAL to human discourse.
OR...
as we are seeing here,a community coming together to admonish that person for breaking the rules?

which is the point i was trying to make.i want trance to acknowledge that what he did was out of an emotional,ego-driven response,but i dont want his voice silenced just because we may disagree from time to time.

and i am willing to bet that trance gets the point.he is no fool and understands full well the implications.the community is telling him:
bad trance..baaaaaad....

shunning is a FAR more powerful tool than clicking a button to silence someone.
just ask the amish.

not everybody fits into this category.there have been some who were deliberate in their offensiveness.those people SHOULD be banned from civil discourse but trance has something to say.we may not always agree but to silence him over an emotional over-reaction is a tad harsh..in my opinion.

and thats all it really is..my opinion.

i also dont think it fair to drag dag into becoming supreme overlord to pass judgement.i dont think he created this site with that in mind.i think he wanted a community driven enterprise that self-regulated without the need for moderators.

which is exactly what we are doing here..yes?

remember siftquistions?
good times my friends..good times.

i have zero desire to see trance banned,that was never my intent for calling him out.
i simply wanted him to acknowledge his emotional response to a disagreement on a video he posted,
that the disagreement was with the video NOT him..personally.

i know this will only further derail this thread but i think it should be said.

a video is not a representation of the person.
being called out does not automatically translate to dislike of the person being called out.

a few weeks ago i did a little experiment with clickbait titles and @ChaosEngine totally called me on it.which gave me a nice chuckle and chaos was in the right but interestingly enough,the experiment worked.that video got 10 times the views it normally would in the same allotted time.

there was another video i posted where i didnt do my due diligence and it turned out to be a total fraud and @speechless (quite politely) called me out on that video and i was forced to apologize in shame.

does all this translate to chaos and speechless disliking me?
of course not.
i got busted using clickbait methodology and not doing my homework.while a tad embarrassing,being called out taught a lesson and a bit of humility.

point: i was the better for it.

trances targeted downvoting was an emotional response and he was behaving foolishly,but make no mistake..trance is no fool.he just took my analysis and criticism personally and responded emotionally.

no animals were harmed,all the puppies are still cute and kitty videos are more popular than ever.

human beings are sometimes irrational and emotional.trance should not be banned for behaving like a human being.

You're just the king of the strawmen and trying to change the subject aren't you?

I never referred to Trance's video. That's not the issue. Once again (since you keep forgetting...deliberately?) the issue is the abuse of the voting system.

I haven't watched the video, nor have I voted on it. Also irrelevant to your censorship argument since even flagged videos are still viewable here. Regardless of how you spin it. There is no censorship and by extension (since you appear to have not understood my argument) freedom of speech on a private website. If the Owner of the site says you're out, you're out. You exist here on the owner's whim. You of all people should understand that.

So quit trying to derail...or gasp..we may have to start questioning your...integrity.

What a pleasant correspondence. /s

And no one is saying "free speech" is a presiding factor here. In any event, I wasn't talking about "Trance" being right wing, I was bringing up a longer, more insidious, problem on this site. In fact, that point was for people who've been here much longer than you have.

And, yes, trying to get this video flagged is definitely censorship. You just don't like the content of the video. Admit it.

Spare me you little crybaby. Censorship my ass. Freedom of Speech doesn't exist on a private website. Besides, isn't Freedom of speech some rule some dirty statist cooked up? Proves you're a hypocrite though. Rails against statism, but attempts to run and hide behind protections established by statism

Never made the claim that Trance was right wing. The suggestion to ban him is over the abuse of the voting system which is why I quoted the guidelines which is irrelevant to his political leanings or lack thereof. It's good to know you've been paying attention so well.

Integrity of this site? That's rich coming from someone who has been previously banned. And your return which I've heard from others was a detriment to this site's integrity.

Don't like guidelines here? Go troll elsewhere. You have no inherent right to be here.

haha.we both promoting that elite video!
great minds blah blah blah
i have to admit being extremely surprised at just how many downvotes trance has given and how targeted they all are.

i knew he was a passive/aggressive child but wow....hyper egocentric to boot.

and i thought trance was hitting MY que hard with the downvotes.
jesus christ trance,what newt do to piss in your wheaties?

i usually dont care why somebody downvotes.its their business and i rarely care enough to inquire why.
thats not quite true..i WILL ask,but only from someone i feel i have a fairly good understanding of and if i truly dont understand the downvote.

but systematic downvoting?
seems to be a pattern based on an emotional response reflex.maybe we should ask a social scientist the implications.

oh,
and *promote the crowd-sourcing!

Just wrong. Comedy is comedy, not prejudice. Wearing drag is not the same as wearing black face in a civil rights rally. That's patently ridiculous. He insulted no one.
You and Trance really need to cultivate a sense of humor. Your lack of understanding jokes is only hurting you.

Technically, none of this changes Trance's point, whether the video was comedy or not. One might even say the video author himself is the one guilty of prejudice. Extreme example warning: what if he did this stunt wearing blackface during the civil rights movement? "It's just a joke" is rarely a good excuse.

these are the instances where harris always shines in my opinion.everyone should experience psychedelics at least once in their life,and as harris pointed out,there are caveats but it is so worth it.

the dissolving of the ego can be frightening for some but it can bring you to a truth,about yourself and others,that is quite hard to accomplish without assistance.

i find it interesting that this video is going to be sifted while trances video on the healing nature of psychedelics has been downvoted.

ah sift...you are a fickle mistress.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/This-is-Life-with-Lisa-Ling-Jungle-Fix-Ayahuasca

Trance said he doesn't understand why she doesn't. You said why should she have to? Nobody is saying she has to. She might want to if she'd like to avoid hearing other people speak their mind. It's her choice. Similarly, catcalling is their choice. They don't need to be classy if they don't want to.

The Jessica Williams video is better in that it isn't about privileged white cisgendered problems exclusively. However, it also doesn't make the case very well. There isn't any evidence of "Wall Street douches" making catcalls unless you want to talk about a picture of a blurred out face in a suit verbalizing nothing.

The assertion that many men are making is that girls selectively complain about catcalls. Specifically, they only want attention from the men they want attention from, and expect us to read their minds... I'm sorry... Body language... and figure out the difference.

For example, a (female) friend of mine was a teaching assistant at UT. She tells this story about going over a study on gender differences regarding random propositions for sex. As you might expect the results were that men were more likely to say yes, and women no. Big surprise there. Well, once the professor finished, Vince Young raised his hand and said "that's not how it works." Every girl in the room (according to my friend) blushed, giggled, twirled their hair, and "made eyes at him." It seems every girl in the room was ready for proposition from an nfl quarterback... Just not homeless people drinking on the stoop.

Did you miss the part where I quoted trance saying she should wear earbuds?

Also please quote the part where I said "there should be stricter limits on their speech". For what seems like the 7 millionth time, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech. These guys are free to make comments on her ass or whatever, and I am free to call them misogynist assholes for doing so.

And this whole thing about class and race is a bullshit smokescreen, by men desperate to paint this as anything other than what it clearly is.

Here's Jessica Williams talking about being harassed by "wall street douches". So that's a black woman being harrassed by rich white guys.

Still think it's about how "dark skinned men might rape your white woman"?

Meanwhile, tranceidiot is desperately trying to somehow make this about his retarded libertarian agenda.

Absolute BS.
Bad math, no science. He's cherry picking data and extrapolating using partial worst case scenarios rather than actual measurements...that is not science, it's misleading propaganda.
The cost of moving away from fossil fuels is easily offset completely by the savings of the new technologies used, and likely the switch would be a gain to GDP, as it makes tens of thousands of new technology jobs and billions-trillions in additional GDP selling the tech, and once built many new techs have far lower operation costs, saving money. (That's how economies work, you sell stuff and make money...right?) It sure worked for my solar system, which you, Trance, would likely still try to talk people out of, claiming it's more expensive than it's worth, while reality is it paid for itself in less than 1/3 of it's expected lifespan AND has other benefits.
The cost of 'adapting to climate change' is infinite, as it's impossible. Plants, animals, and biota can't survive it...and people like to eat. Kind of hard to adapt if there's no food, far LESS farmable land, less or no natural food sources, etc.
Also, he ignores the facts that 1) it's almost certainly going to be MORE than 3 deg. by 2100 and 2)methane hydrates are already melting, and methane is (I think) something like 100 times more damaging to the atmosphere (as far as greenhouse effects), so even "just" 3 deg. suddenly becomes 8 deg...that's often ignored.
3 deg. means on average, but also means the spread gets larger. Winters are colder, summers are even hotter. 3 deg. doesn't sound like much by itself, but it really means 15-20 deg. hotter when it's hot, and 12-17deg. colder when it's cold.

Actually it's trance and coolhund that are the sifts resident deniers

Heroin is indeed a nasty drug. However, when it's managed, people can actually lead normal, even productive lives and still be addicts. It was legal in the UK up to the 1950s as diamorphine and we didn't see anything like the kind of problems we have with it now.

That said, I'm in favour of decriminalising it, not legalising it. It might sound like a non-distinction, but there's a difference between allowing anyone to go out and buy heroin from a pharmacy and prosecuting some poor fool who made some bad life choices.

As for Trance, he continues to push his childish agenda in the face of reality. That Tolstoy quote is cute and sounds great, until you realise that it is completely and utterly wrong.