It does seem suspicious.. We need voting records, how far between have there been voted?

It may just be difference of opinion, but if it's a spree a 2-week ban is appropriate.

Why do you want to police peoples down votes?

Why don't you then see the downvote bias of qm, billo and cpn420 against anything that makes the Right wingers look stupid?

Downvotes are used on the sift to express dissent over someone elses ideas or views, both for video and comments.

Live with it.

Videoshift, quickly becoming a police state. Ah, the good times are gone.

>> ^gwiz665:
It does seem suspicious.. We need voting records, how far between have there been voted?
It may just be difference of opinion, but if it's a spree a 2-week ban is appropriate.


*gay

Adding post to channels (Gay) - requested by CaptainPlanet420.

Farhad: Because it goes against both the letter and the spirit of the law. If it has not been voted on for the content, then it's bad. If we just lie down and take it, we might as well become queer republicans that sell bibles.

Letter of what law? This is the internet. There is no law on the internet and that's it is called the internet.

The majority still votes and uses the site as intended. Conflicts naturally occur within a community. On an average we are talking marginal percentage of down votes not a cascade.

The imposition of any rules must have a cost benefit analysis, in this case the costs of being policing freaks like the ones on Digg.com and those bastards who report music on Youtube far out weigh the costs.

"I hate to be a stool pigeon, but..."

...you're going to do it anyway?

I'm new here, but maybe we should get approval from a committee of self-appointed VS SS. You submit your request for a downvote to the committee, and committee members can then approve your request by voting with their power points. Say... 5 points required for approval? Then the request could be forwarded to a "Downers Canyon" of sorts, where the junior sifters could hash out the request's merit. Of course, simply languishing within Downers Canyon indefinitely without resolution isn't really fair, so I think a time limit should be imposed, after which time Sifty sends all unresolved downvote requests to the "Downy DeadPool", where ambitious Sifters can earn power points for successfully taking up the argument for or against the request. Of course, only one Power Point awarded per day. We wouldn't want it to get ridiculous.

*nochannel

Whatever blankfist that's like saying you have a downvote bias because of downvoting 2 of my videos precisely around the time we had a disagreement. I am sure you downvoted because you are against Greece and the use of DNA to cure cancer right?

http://blankfist.videosift.com/member/blankfist/voteddown?pg=1


I agree with farhad, live with it; and if anything, let the admins take care of it instead of trying to infer things w/o concrete data.

fuck it, sick of not getting any response. time to play dirty.

Have you downvoted Sifty lately, berticus?

He can be a pill.

The rules is the law here - there are no web-wide laws, just as there are no world-wide laws either. I get increasingly tired of the old "this is the internet, I can do what I want" argument, because NO, you cannot do what you want.

If conflicts between users end in voting sprees such as these, the users in question ought to be stripped of their powers for a given probationary period; ie. 2 week ban. If we don't enforce this, we might as well forgo the rule.

And this does not belong in the gay channel, no matter how much captain planet wants to drag everyone in there.


>> ^Farhad2000:
Letter of what law? This is the internet. There is no law on the internet and that's it is called the internet.
The majority still votes and uses the site as intended. Conflicts naturally occur within a community. On an average we are talking marginal percentage of down votes not a cascade.
The imposition of any rules must have a cost benefit analysis, in this case the costs of being policing freaks like the ones on Digg.com and those bastards who report music on Youtube far out weigh the costs.

he seems to have a bias against videos about hamas, israel, palastine, gaza... blah... etc... and it seems imstellar and mharvey42 just happen to post alot of videos on the topic... no foul play i say

*promote

>> ^siftbot:
Adding post to channels (<a rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow" href="http://gay.videosift.com" style="color: rgb(255, 136, 170);">Gay) - requested by CaptainPlanet420.


^ siftbot quote fail

Promoting this Sift Talk post - promote requested by berticus.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Captain Planet - you have been warned about assigning to channels that are not appropriate to the content before - and were actually suspended in an incident related to that. We won't suspend again.

My troll tolerance has worn off. Unless someone would like to put a case to the contrary - you're permanent banishment begins now.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I've removed this from the gay channel.

Fletch looks around uncomfortably, hoping to avoid Dag's gaze of doom. He thinks he hears a cricket chirping in the distance. The others were looking down, not wanting to acknowledge the carnage they had witnessed. It was now or never, and he slowly backed out of the room.

Personally, I think that sift talk should have laxer policies than normal video posting.

Not wanting to go and cause more bile to be shed, just saying...

Related: looking at the issue behind those downvotes itself.

I'm disappointed with how the nature of this place (or at least my perception of it, given that I haven't been here that long) had changed for the worse when the ongoing events in Israel and Palestine cropped up. People have been using VideoSift as a soapbox and I dislike how it was being pounded into a personal tool for raising awareness of a certain perspective regarding these events.

I've had several comments downvoted because they attempted to be of a neutral and analytical stance rather than another agreement with the general Israel-is-evil sentiment that pervades this place, and I have received some now-deleted nasty and trite PM's in response to some of those comments.

Now I just leave all Israel/Palestine videos alone and don't view any of them. This is not because the theme doesn't deserve to be represented here, but because my experience has been that too many people here seem to be incapable of dealing with it like adults who respect other people's opinions even though they might disagree with them, particularly when those opinions are well-expressed in the comments section. And that comment isn't restricted to P members who register solely to climb on the comment bandwagon.

And yes, I'm aware this is the internet.

Well, dammit, a quick look at just 4 or 5 of the videos qualm downvoted indicate he did go on a downvote spree as they were all mere seconds apart...

This really does hurt the Sift more than it hurts you, qualm, but it also hurts the Sift when you start fucking with videos out of your personal bad feelings for the submitter. As we always say, our primary job is to keep a healthy Sift, so in accordance with the FAQ:

"Please do not down vote a video because you dislike the Sifter who submitted it.... If down voting or any other member privilege is intentionally misused, the offending member will be temporarily banned for no less than 2 weeks. A second offense will result in a permanent ban."

If your troll tolerance has worn off why not ban Billo, QM, Mink, me and Fletch and others.

Finish what you start.

>> ^dag:
Captain Planet - you have been warned about assigning to channels that are not appropriate to the content before - and were actually suspended in an incident related to that. We won't suspend again.
My troll tolerance has worn off. Unless someone would like to put a case to the contrary - you're permanent banishment begins now.


I fucking knew I should have called January.

Wow, 3 bans from a single talk post. Impressive. Most impressive.

I gotta say, I appreciate the attempt at consistency, but banning berticus seems silly. VideoSift has tolerated, and even encouraged, more homophobic bigotry than would be tolerated for any other group. He finally gets angry enough to do something "drastic" (that is easily reversible) to make a point, and he gets banned? Given the order and timing of the comments, it seems pretty clear this post was removed from the gay channel and that CP's ban at the very earliest occurred while he was outing CP. So, from his perspective, this latest abuse was being overlooked just as it had been in the past.

*raghead
*chink
*kyke
*nigger
*cracker

Would those channel invocations be any less offensive? How long would someone last doing that? How long would VS tolerate that bigotry?

Ban em all let dag sort them out.

Obama would disapprove of this liberal bickering. We should all get along, and everyone should have a puppy. And a handout from the government. Handouts are good.

I smell something odd. Is that...is that a dead troll? It's such a sweet smell.

>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
gay

>> ^Farhad2000:
If your troll tolerance has worn off why not ban Billo, QM, Mink, me and Fletch and others.
Finish what you start.

Come on, dude. Don't adopt that defiant "Ban me!" attitude. If you want to leave, just leave. You don't need to be banned to stop coming here. I've gotten angry before and left. Then later I came back. You can do the same if you want. Or you can leave and never come back. Or you can just stay. It's all your choice. No one is forcing you to stay here.

I'm NOT denying your right to express dissent or dissatisfaction with this place. If you (or anyone else) has a problem with this place, then by all means say it. If you want to parse what dag meant by his "troll tolerance" remark, that's fine. He's a big boy; I don't need to defend him. And some might disagree with you, but that's to be expected, because you can't expect everyone to agree with you. But if you're so fed up with this place that you can't stand it any more, you don't need to ask for a ban if you don't want to be here. Just log off. I'd rather you stay, but if being here makes you unhappy then you should really leave. You can always come back later if you want.

I really don't think anyone should burn their bridges.

You cant pick and choose your rules. Either you enforce em, or you do not.

Keep personal thoughts, and emotions out of your distribution of punishment. Doing this would not cause the dissent that I see in this sift talk.

I read some of the profile responses in the punishment phase of today's drama. When punishing some one for a blatant violation of the rules, do not try to reason with them or apply apologetic ointment.

The fact that you are punishing them is enough.

In short, trial is where you talk. Punishment is where you punish, they are two separate things. The latter is a place where politics can only succeed in furthering drama.

^You know I am government spy, right? I am watching you...

/\ See anything you like?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

>> ^NordlichReiter:


That's very well put. Thanks for that.

All three bans are fair and all three brought it on themselves.. (See what you made us do!?)

I think it may have been a rash decision on Captain Planet, but it's a habitual crime, so I won't try to defend him (I've been ignoring since last ban, so I don't know what I've missed either). Qualm's been here long enough to know that what he did was wrong, even if he's been absent for a while, and berticus, you fucking knew better.

It a good think we have diligent users like squeelfist or we would never have caught these infractions.

Qualm and bert, I hope to see you again in 2 weeks, enjoy your stay on Monster Island. (Don't worry, it's just a name.)



(It's actually a peninsula.)

Good riddance to CP420 I say. Let him seek the attention he needs elsewhere. The guy was only here to instigate and boo-hoo.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

The drama of the public bannination is too much. I can understand now why sites like Digg ban problem users in the dead of the night without explanation.

>> ^videosiftbannedme:
Good riddance to CP420 I say. Let him seek the attention he needs elsewhere. The guy was only here to instigate and boo-hoo.


Unfortunately he was transparently poor at it. He should have gone to troll school first and at least avoid becoming the most boring participant on the site.

I simply do not think this sets a good precedent for further action down the line.

We had a large Sift Talk as I recall with regards to CPN420. That was the venue to ban him. But we didn't. Then this happens.

^We didn't because we hoped the 2 week suspension had done some good, it hadn't.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I can't believe you are disputing his ban Farhad. CaptainPlanet was given a very clear warning before his last suspension that any future channel manipulations would result in a ban.

What would you have me do? Warn him again? Suspend him again? Call for another dramatic Siftquisition? Do tell.

>> ^gwiz665:
^We didn't because we hoped the 2 week suspension had done some good, it hadn't.

I think it was pretty obvious to just about everyone back then that it wouldn't. He was a clown the whole time and we just gave him too much benefit of doubt, he has posted so much more hateful commentary and views that would have constituted a firm ban in the first place.

I don't think Qualm should have been suspended. People should be allowed to use down votes as they please, because that is what happens now with QM who basically uses it as a way to disagree with progressive liberal.

Qualm disagrees with Imstellar and his Ayn Rand fuel views. So he down voted most of the videos that deal with Austrian free market ideology.

By this logic we should suspend QM for basically downvoting anything that has progressive liberal content. He just doesn't do it in quick succession.

This is not a dispute or in defense of CPN420s ban, he deserved to have banned years before. He was always just here as a troll and instigator. Alot like BillO.

Look I just don't like it. You may disagree. That is okay. Let's move on.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

^There's a thin line, but I see Bill'O as more of a parody homage than a troll.

Quantum Mushroom is not a troll in my eyes. I disagree with just about everything he posts - but there's something about his postings that make me think he is putting forth what he believes - and he's not just spewing to get people riled.

>> ^Farhad2000:
^Qualm disagrees with Imstellar and his Ayn Rand fuel views. So he down voted most of the videos that deal with Austrian free market ideology.

Disagreement is fine. But, downvoting within seconds of viewing, say, eight videos is not being a discerning critic, it's doing a blanket attack. The precedence has already been set by those who own and run the site that "hurting the sift" is bad, and downvoting a large number of videos in a row for an obvious personal vendetta is certainly hurting the sift because it denigrates the intended quality-by-number-of-votes model of the site.

By the way, I've already pulled dag aside about his picture being something that is clearly hurting the sift, so I, too, am trying to fight the good fight. That scruffy, sexy bastard needs to SHAVE!!! His mouth looks like a hairy 1970s porn vagina that I would most certainly have my way with John Holmes style*.

Okay, let's get naked and party!


*In honor of the gay tag invoked earlier, and because mouth raping dag is hilarious. I bet for a fleeting moment dag considered upvoting this comment until he read the 2nd paragraph.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Upvoted. I'm actually sporting a full 70s porn mustache with fanny tickler at the moment. I get no end of shit at my buttoned down government job for this. But I turned them on to 2 girls 1 cup on Friday - so I think they will come around.

I've had it with the literal assholes that start this rule-enforcement stuff. These same assholes should be suspended also from their ad hom and pathetic behavior usually on profile pages. People like Farhad and I just ignore them, since they are just assholes, but I guess the correct behavior is whining and see who you can get banned.

These call out diaries SHOULD BE BANNABLE offenses. I've said it before. You should establish and admin page and all the tattle tales and vote stalkers can report people to the gestapo that way. Enough with the public hashing out of their grievances.

I don't know when you are going to wake up and see the are driving long time contributors away.

I'm done with upvoting, and I think for now, I'm going to only downvote videos that I feel are subpar. Maybe a bunch of us will start this. Hopefully it will counteract the amazing lack of good videos on the front page.

>> ^joedirt:


"I can't see out this idea is not a blatant violation of the rules if you do go ahead with Upvote Everything Day (TM)"

"Hey faggots, you are clearly violating many of the rules that have caused people to be banned. I am requesting a siftquisition for anyone who takes part in such behavior as blanket upvoting other submissions, especially in a reciprocal nature."

"ban... You better hope everyone else agrees with you, cause the good thing here at least is that one person cannot ban you."

"...you encourage folks to test boundaries, abuse the voting system, and get Siftbot a gold star all in the name of good fun."

>> ^dag:
Upvoted. I'm actually sporting a full 70s porn mustache with fanny tickler at the moment. I get no end of shit at my buttoned down government job for this. But I turned them on to 2 girls 1 cup on Friday - so I think they will come around.


Do the curtains match the drapes?

>> ^NordlichReiter:
You cant pick and choose your rules. Either you enforce em, or you do not.

Indeed, dag, it is well put. It's also a fucking shame that it's completely untrue in this situation. It's a shame that despite repeated siftquisitions in which I and others have begged for a consistent and even handed approach, that "justice" here is meted out with a capriciousness that would make Stalin blush.

Someone please explain to me how CumPouch420's repeatedly inappropriate channel invocations over weeks (months!?) is in any way consistent with the ban placed on berticus. This is some of the worst hypocrisy I've seen here yet, and it's making me physically ill. CP was given every bit of slack we could find to change his ways. Berticus is banned summarily, without discussion, without warning, without a second chance, or even a chance to apologize. One time he finally gets so pissed off at the abusive use of the 'gay' tag that he retaliates in kind, having never seen anyone even reprimanded, much less punished for what is clearly outlawed in the FAQ. Bam. Bye bye faggot.

Oh, wait I get it now. It only happens if someone points it out and writes up a sift talk post about it. Oh what a fool berticus was for not simply calling for a siftquisition in the first place. Because clearly, it's only when one gets fucking whiny enough about abuses that anything will be done. God forbid they be reasonable and quietly suggest that people stop being dicks. Don't you dare try to make a fucking point.

*useless
*self-congratulatory
*cunts

First, they came for the homophobic trolls, but I did not speak out, for I was not a homophobic troll.

Next, they... well, uh... after that, there really weren't too many problems... not that I can remember off the top of my head.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

OK, deeep breath everyone.

Lucky and I are but two people. We rely on the community to bring problems to our attention. We act on what we are told or what we see. I'm afraid that's how a self-policed community like this works. We try to be pro-active where possible but VideoSift has gotten too big to police everything. We don't have an all-seeing orb.

Berticus is a good dude - and I'm sorry we had to suspend him for 2 weeks - but we're doing our best to be even-handed and consistent with the rules.

>> ^dag:
Berticus is a good dude - and I'm sorry we had to suspend him for 2 weeks - but we're doing our best to be even-handed and consistent with the rules.

That's just it dag - you did not have to ban him and you are not being consistent in your application of the rules. Why has nearly everyone else that has engaged in such behavior been given a warning, or at least a forum (siftiquisition) in which to defend themselves? Berticus was afforded no such luxury. He was banned less than 30 minutes after his actions. No talk. No vote. No consensus. Boom. Gone.

[edit] Apologies for editing the previous comment while you were responding. My mind is kind of racing right now and I realized there were a couple details left out. And deep apologies to everyone for such crass use of "faggot".

"justice" here is meted out with a capriciousness that would make Stalin blush

So true. Stalin, if nothing else, was a principled man of justice and fairness.

I would have thought that you, of all people, blankfist, would understand what I'm saying here.

>> ^jonny:
Why has nearly everyone else that has engaged in such behavior been given a warning, or at least a forum (siftiquisition) in which to defend themselves? Berticus was afforded no such luxury. He was banned less than 30 minutes after his actions. No talk. No vote. No consensus. Boom. Gone.

Actually, good point. I believe berticus was suspended to remain consistent with other choices the admin has made, and, believe me, I really wish berti was here because he's really the salt of the Sift. I'm torn on this one, but I think the idea behind the temporary suspension of berticus was for consistency more than any other nefarious means. I know your comment about Stalin is meant to be a bit drastic to make a point, but it's a bit overboard, no?

I do believe berticus should've been given a Siftquisition. Personally, I do. But, I think this is one of those times when those in charge would've been damned if they did and damned if they didn't. I don't think we should incite martyrdom from a two week ban. We miss him. I do. He was more than cool in my book.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Jonny, I think you'll find - if you look back through Sift Talk history- that a 2 week suspension has been the standard response for vindictive downvote sprees. [edit: I cite the case of The Sift vs. Schmawy as a precedent.

We could just ignore these sprees - but we are not a big site like Digg - and a single member doing this does have an effect on the site.

Jesus Christ how long do these promotes last? This thing has been up here forever. Videos are only promoted for a couple hours. Can we discard this already?

quote dag:
"Lucky and I are but two people. We rely on the community to bring problems to our attention. We act on what we are told or what we see."

for further information see: Guantanamo Bay.

[show the body of this ignored comment]

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

You're so right MINK - Lucky and I are making it just like Guantanamo around here.

Why don't you go the full Godwin - VideoSift is just a digital Auswitch really. I'm looking forward to melting down all of your virtual gold fillings and cashing in.

>> ^MINK:
quote dag:
"Lucky and I are but two people. We rely on the community to bring problems to our attention. We act on what we are told or what we see."
for further information see: Guantanamo Bay.

LOLWUT? Dag is hoarding Jew gold? I knew it, Dag did 9/11.

blankfist - yes, the Stalin remark was clearly an over-the-top reference to make a point.

dag - Interesting that you mention schmawy's case. First, it wasn't a downvote spree. Second, he specifically asked to be banned before it was applied. Third, even then it was down with some reluctance if I remember correctly.

All I am asking is that you give him a fucking chance! Reverse the ban and call him to a siftquistion. If the community really thinks he should be banned for his actions, then so be it. But this kind of summary action goes against everything I understand that you want VS to be. When I engaged you in a pm conversation about democracy vs authoritarianism, you entertained the old fart here for a while, consistently and persuasively arguing that democracy is best. But in this case, the authoritarian hammer has been dropped. And yet you seem unwilling to even recognize the difference in how quantumushroom, CP, schmawy, choggie, and a variety of others were handled differently.

I've always had a problem with public siftquisitions, but eventually I came to accept that they are a part of how the place is going to be run. But the very process that had been held up as the model is now thrown out the window.

Dag, I hope you realize that I'm not trying to attack you or Lucky personally. It is a matter of policy debate, and while my words tonight have been partially fueled by emotion and alcohol, this is not about you. It's about VideoSift.

It's good to see the Legion of Douche is present: Lex Luthor2000, Gorilla Groddirt, MINKestro and Mauzzaro.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Jonny You were the one who hated the Siftquisitions because of the public lynching aspect. You know what fuck it - we're never going to please everyone, and we may even displease the same person whatever decision we make. Can't help but feel Jonny that you would be the first in line crying "lynch mob" if we went the full Siftquisition route.

we'll keep doing the best that we can and try make fair decisions based on what we feel is good for the site and community. When we don't have a clear precedent, we'll still have Siftquisitions - but don't feel it was called for in this case because it's a relatively minor infraction and they will be welcomed back after their spell in the bad lands.

I refuse to make a Solomon Jonny! He's in no way a member of the Legion of Douche. He's too good of a person in my book. He will remain the Guy Gardner of the DC universe!

Bloody hell, is this still going on?

This was a siftquisition of qualm, even if it was not advertised as such. Qualm was judged based on the evidence - downvote spree -> 2 week suspension. This is not arguable.

CP420 had been warned time and time again and as soon as our vigilance slacked, he invoked the channel again. He had been warned about this several times, was siftquisitioned about it once, and did it again now. There is little room for discussion about his current ban. It may have been prudent to make a second siftquisition, but the line had been drawn at the last one, so I doubt anything good would have come of it.

Berticus made his channel invocations in ill will, knowingly breaking the rules for a political purpose (to get cp420 banned). This is just foolish behavior and is no better than to attack any given sifter, by downvoting his entire library. This should have warranted an siftquisition, so that we all could have agreed that he broke the rules and given him his two-week suspension. This was not done, because the case is very clear and cut, so no amount of democratic debate would make him not guilty.

Indeed, dag, I do hate the public lynching of a siftquisition. But it was made abundantly clear at the time when I said so (during qm's) that that is how things are done here. There have been multiple siftquisitions since, and while I never changed my view of it, I did accept it as part of VS.

Clearly I've pushed your buttons beyond repair tonight. I'm sorry about that. As I wrote above, my comments tonight were not designed to be a personal attack. I think I understand your reaction, though. All the usual suspects lining up to protest, right? Obviously, this is the last sort of thing you want to be dealing with when trying to run a website that is supposed to be entertaining. I appreciate that. I am humbly asking you to reconsider the summary ban on berticus. Forget me. Fuck it - ban me if I've pissed you off that much. But I beg you to do both in a way that is consistent with your own beliefs about VS. Peace bro.

In a year nobody will care or remember.

http://humanitarian.videosift.com/talk/Siftquisition-of-Berticus

Made this to hear people out on the matter.

Blankfist, you fail as a troll. (when the hell is he finally going to be suspended for his nonsense?

<embed src="http://423smith.com/wp-content/doom.jpg">

Badge of Honor.. you still fail at troooolin'

Haha. Please, joedouche, how do I succeed at trolling. I'd love to know. That would be awesome, because the truth is I have beef with NO ONE outside the LEGION OF DOUCHE, therefore why would I want to troll. Who cares, just tell me how I'm wrong. You're awesome. Please don't attack the Hall of Justice.

>> ^peggedbea:
he seems to have a bias against videos about hamas, israel, palastine, gaza... blah... etc... and it seems imstellar and mharvey42 just happen to post alot of videos on the topic... no foul play i say


I think that from now on it should be necessary for people who are the target of these trials to be present during the proceedings. qualm has cast a lot of downvotes, if you didn't notice. I'm sure if you looked at ants donwvote list you could also find discrepancies.
And besides it's not really fair to ban a guy before hearing his part of the story. (unless he already confirmed his reasons in a private talk)

Blankfist,

I would take 10 more quantumushrooms over you any day. At least they are actually funny.

>> ^Farhad2000:
Blankfist,
I would take 10 more quantumushrooms over you any day. At least they are actually funny.


And, I'd take 10 VideoSifts over Videocu.lt. At least Videosift is original, not derivative, and a place where people actually want to visit. For some reason Videocult feels like the kind of place where I'd die a little inside when I visited it.

I really hope the Legion of [you know what] decides to hang out at the superior videocu.lt [aka the bullshit no one wants to visit because the rest of you nerds are hanging out there and your elitist personalities suck so much we hate you] so we never have to deal with your hate ever again. But seriously, I know you are a bunch of elitists but won't you consider a fuckface like joedirt? He really sucks, therefore I thought he'd really fit in with your bullshit elitism. He's opinionated like you. You two could have cosmic sex until the black hole sucked you all up into oblivion and you all died. That would be the greatest!

Love, blankfist

Now now kids, there's no need to get rough. You can all have a ball to play with.

bluecliff: Lucky checked the logs and several of the downvotes were within seconds of each other. But yeah, I suppose his side could have been heard before he was suspended. But then, a policeman rarely hears why you were speeding.

^but we aren't the police. at least I hope we aren't.
And still, the guy being arrested has the privilege of being present.

This is where you fail, I never posted about VC as a alternative in anyway to VS. You push that idea forward because you have no other valid criticism of me. Your entire input to this site consists of nothing but stupid low brow college level humor that would work better on YouTube.

Being opinionated about a site that Mink, Joe, me and Mauz have contributed to is not a fallacy, we love this place, we loved enough to give it alot of time over the 2 years that we been here. Our approaches are different. Somehow our criticism of VS is some kind of great infraction for you.

My view is that see it changing for the worst, some say is simply changing but I would disagree, I think we are starting to lose that community essence that worked so well at the time of MLX, Silvercord, Benjee, Plastiquemonkey, RickyGee, Deano, Raven and so many other users that have now simply disappeared.

It's not the same, and if you disagree so much then maybe you should go back and read some of the Siftquisitions or any threads we had before and see how exactly the tone of dialog and input differs from what it is now.

Your defacto answer would be for me to leave, but I won't because in essence I can still find good discussions here, even though I don't particularly watch that many videos.

Don't try and reason with AquaManfist. He cares nothing about rules, only his ego. Hence he prides in whole threads dedicated to breaking rules and site guidelines, only to squeal like Cartman when he can try and ban someone else who violates the rules. Respect his autoritay. (That's why he sees the world through his comic allegories, it's all about him and his ego)

>> ^Farhad2000:
I think we are starting to lose that community essence that worked so well at the time of MLX, Silvercord, Benjee, Plastiquemonkey, RickyGee, Deano, Raven and so many other users that have now simply disappeared.


Blimey, I must indeed have the personality of a dead fish if Farhad thinks I have left the site.
<goes to cry in his pillow>

These threads lately are sounding like a bunch of over educated 15 year olds. I see trolls get banned for "hurting the sift" over and over again. BUT....

How is this any different?

Admins pay attention: You need to stop these destructive threads pronto however you feel like you need to... kill the comment ability on them, delete them whatever.. Just end this crap.

You're either going to have happy loving visitors come to the site to read intelligent witty conversation, or the members you'll attract are train wreck drive by types that are coming for the drama.

Ladies and gents. I love you all, let's keep it fun. We all hate those awkward apologies the day after a drunken fight with a friend.

^thats right.. speaking of drinking rotten, I just posted a drinking game for the festivities tomorrow on my blog

Drink every time Bush fell of the wagon?

Swampy is right; you're always going to have differences of opinion in how things are done. But ultimately whatever rules there are, they are subject to the discretion of those who run the site, in this case Lucky and Dag.
Complaining that so and so shouldn't have been banned because previously someone didn't get banned is a bit weak to me. It's like expecting 100% consistency from a referee at a football match.

I don't like these polls about what is supposedly fair nor those who start posts about getting others banned. Funnell it all through the admins and let them do their job - I certainly don't want pseudo admin/power user rights that end up in someone getting a ban.

Now complaining about how the site is run *is* ok. But after a while this sounds like a broken record. In the long term the fate of the site is with the admins and the goodwill of the users. If someone feels the site is genuinely broken or moved away from its original raison d'etre then surely it is time to leave. I've done that once and you know, it felt ok. It was only a website after all.

*gay

Adding post to channels (Gay) - requested by volumptuous.

Jesus fucking christ.

^Amen.

Fook. Someone's going to be banished to the badlands with Bertie.

stop this sketch! it's getting too silly

^you mean "too silly." (channeling assfist)

^looky, looky, i just made your remark totally redundant (I can do assfist to(o))

For whatever reason, I guess Volumptuous wants to be banned as well, so again, we'll follow our guidelines and go ahead with a 2 week ban starting now.

*sigh*...

You meatbags just bought yourself another tempban. We'll keep going. You want another one? Just say the word. Say it...

Don't mess with a bull, young man. You'll get the horns.

The next time I have to come in here I'm crackin' skulls.

This post lead to four bans (technically one ban and three two week suspensions). This is the Sift Talk Post heard around the world.

there's blood all over this room

^DD

What are you doing here? I'm waiting for something awesome on your blog.

Signed,

A fan.

wow...the shockwave sent around the sift brought all the oldtimers out. Hello fletch, deano, deputydog. We've missed you.

Oh and I'd like to send a shout out to berticus, qualm, and volumptuous for unbridled internet anarchy. It's easier when you're hiding in the anonymity of the internets but any sign of contempt towards establishment is entertaining in my book so, bravo.

Also, I'd like to send a special appreciation to CaptainPlanet420, or at least his absence. You will not be missed. About 2 weeks of sock puppeting to go before we see the last of you.

also, thank you all for a *quality soap opera.

rottenseed cannot award a quality point for this Sift Talk post because rottenseed does not have enough Power Points - ignoring quality request by rottenseed. (You can always purchase more Power Points.)

oh darn...maybe next time.

Be the change you wish to see in the sift.

*total carnage

dystopianfuturetoday cannot award a quality point for this Sift Talk post because dystopianfuturetoday does not have enough Power Points - ignoring quality request by dystopianfuturetoday. (You can always purchase more Power Points.)

100th

We need to stop the personal attacks from both sides of the dispute. And attempting to cloak your vitriol with jokes doesn't make you any less harmful.

Assigning vids to the wrong channel happens all the time by mistake, or when someone just disagrees whether a vid should be included or not. What is the standard for bannination (bannanation? bananation?)? Volumptuous was clearly trying to be funny (or maybe making a point), but it certainly made ME laugh. I think a two-week ban, in this case, is overboard.

All my future posts will be channel-less, that's for sure.

*quality

Awarding blankfist with one star point for this contribution to Sift Talk - declared quality by E_Nygma.

Jesus Christ, I wandered past, and the topic has a higher bodycount than Robocop

Hope we can stop the drama, and get back to sifting...

I love all the comic references!

Wow, I'm late..., What'd I miss??
Oh.., nevermind!
Good will to all!

As long as we're talking about selective application of the rules, why has IssyKitty not been reprimanded for flagging most all of JoeDirt's comments [here, at least] as spam? If I recall, there was a thread here a month or so back where someone else did something similar. It was made clear that a ban would be occurring to the next offender.

I wish I could flag someone's vagina as spam so their uterus would be banned from reproducing. Is that possible via the internet? Just curious. And in no way does this have anything to do with anyone's comment on this page.

So, what now? When ever someone makes a good point about someone that you don't have a problem with it, you feel the need to direct your anger against them?

It does seem suspicious.. We need voting records, how far between have there been voted?

Videosift is more accurate in counting votes than Democrats! Foul Franken would've lost here!

By this logic we should suspend QM for basically downvoting anything that has progressive liberal content. He just doesn't do it in quick succession.

Every vote against socialist/communist progressive liberal content is from the heart.

Trade up.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

At this point, (because the recriminations just will not end) I'd like to mention that this thread has inspired Lucky and I to work towards a solution to all this Siftquistion drama. Lucky is in his workshop hammering away. We like to call our idea "the final solution". Catchy, no?

Technology will save us all.

we need to be able to post anonymously.. even use some powers (good powers) anonymously....

I think the FAQ/About page could use some work too. Maybe we could brainstorm/rewrite as a group in siftalk.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
I think the FAQ/About page could use some work too. Maybe we could brainstorm/rewrite as a group in siftalk.

Haha! See the mess you create when you boast "egalitarianism"? Haha! Keep fighting the good (and inconsistent) fight.

^Is it really that big of a deal to suggest sprucing up the FAQ? I'm not sure I get your point here, el blank.

We have a lot of leeway with comments, so perpetual upvotes, downvotes or spam flags are not scrutinized in the same way. Because comments are on the same page, it's impossible to see whether the content was actually considered or not.

I don't remember the thread you mention.. is it the UsesProzac/Pinky one?

>> ^LittleRed:
As long as we're talking about selective application of the rules, why has IssyKitty not been reprimanded for flagging most all of JoeDirt's comments [here, at least] as spam? If I recall, there was a thread here a month or so back where someone else did something similar. It was made clear that a ban would be occurring to the next offender.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

We have one kind of serious update coming down the pipe related to Siftquisitions - after that I'd like to hold a first Siftitutional Congress to rewrite our FAQs and Guidelines collaboratively. Does anyone know of a a good embeddable applet that makes group editing of a document easy? Lucky and I use Google Docs, but it wouldn't suit a couple of hundred writers.

The faq could use some sprucing up, as long as we keep it clear that it is supposed to embody the spirit of the law and not be taken literally to an insane degree. Right now they are defined as relatively vague, which is probably the best way to do it. Still, we have a bunch of unwritten laws that might as well be jotted down, ie.:

Discarding someone else's post for no good reason with ill will warrants 2 week suspension
Habitually invoking a channel that does not belong to the given content -> 2 week suspension
Downvote sprees, a number of downvotes in quick succession with obviously no content viewing -> 2 week suspension

I'm sure there are more.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
^Is it really that big of a deal to suggest sprucing up the FAQ? I'm not sure I get your point here, el blank.


Jesus, DFT, get over yourself! I'm kidding. I have no point to make outside being a surly douche.

a "downvote spree" can be explained by this hipothesis:

during the journey through the sift, sifter lets open in different tabs only videos intended for downvote. said journey ends. sifter goes quickly through the tabs to perform his downvoting duties.

This explains the few seconds between downvotes.
But it would bear some logic that said sifter would do the same for upvotes.
And it would bear even more logic that said sifter was less of a organizoholic.

to really conclude that a "vote spree" has ocurred - sifter downvotes or upvotes without seeing the content of posted videos - registers should be compared: those regarding the starting time of a post visit by a sifter, those regarding the starting time and length of the video from said post by said sifter, those regarding the time of the vote (down or up) to said video by said sifter.

all possible scenarios must be taken into account when monitoring activities and simultaneously maintaining a freedom environment.

everyone is doing well in presenting the most fair methods they can think of.

ill add this even if it's been added:

People aren't always "logged in" when they are viewing a video, or series of videos in tabs... or have time to log in, but remember a certain video and go immediately to it later. Set 'em up, knock 'em down. It's a personal style choice.

There is a variable there that I can't account for, because it is personal style... so I guess "good judgment" on the part of our "judge" before we are sentenced, and being given a chance to explain any "questions", is the most fair system, despite the inherent flaws.

see: Arrow's impossibility theorem about voting/deciding methods ... how did i remember that from math class... oh yea i just learned it cuz im 26 though i just started university, and have to sit in all the 101's.