That is a really, really good suggestion. Honestly, unless it's technically hard to implement, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with this. I'd *quality this post, but I don't believe I have the points.

Sarzy cannot award a quality point for this Sift Talk post because Sarzy does not have enough Power Points - ignoring quality request by Sarzy.

*quality, would make things easier

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

Oh please yes... please indeed... I have a feeling I'll be requeing a bit in the future

Hell yeahs dude, requeue buttons!!??
*sticky!

Stickying this post at the top of Sift Talk - sticky requested by choggie.

If we did that how would we denote that it was a re-sifted video.

I for one vote for a hangman's noose where S I F T Y is slowly spelled out, at 5 you just gotta let go of the dream.

*sticky ^ 2

Post is already stickied - ignoring sticky request by James Roe.

Yeah, sifty is a conversation killer. All business, no leather....

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

It would work better if the little gray box over the comment field that shows the possible invocations were links that could be used to perform the action.

This was already mentioned before, and was subsequently shot down, though I can't remember why. Allot of the con arguments were that some people didn't upvote a 5 time requeue. well a 4 or 5 time requeue used to be either 16 or 20 days in the queue. Now its only 8 or 10. But I'm with lucky, we need SOME sort of method to determine how many times the video was requeued. What Dag suggested is a good idea, though the only downside to that i can see is that some people like to be creative with their *invocations, in how they word them, and that would make those people sad ehh, but who cares about them though. However, clicky buttons would be nice for the admin stuff, (dead, sticky, etc) but the channels should remain a user *invocation, so people can explain why they added a video to a certain channel, or why someone removed a video from a certain channel.

Couldnt you have a limited number of rq's and a button that says 4..3..2..1 requeue left..? I have no idea how technically difficult this stuff is, I'm just throwint things out there. alternatively it could just stop working after 4 clicks..

If we want this place to feature quality and not quantity I think we should make it 3 requeues max.

Who is with me?

Don´t care if it is through a limited button or just a witty siftbot comment that slaps a wet eel in your face when you try to requeue a fourth time...

i like it....makes ya look desperate for attention with all the requeue requeue requeue messages, get rid of those too!!!

So 3 requeues? a total of 6 days? Well whatever is decided, keep in mind that under the old rule of 4 days, it was not uncommon to see a video being requeued 3 times.

>> ^dag:
It would work better if the little gray box over the comment field that shows the possible invocations were links that could be used to perform the action.


Yeah, I suggested this back in the "what do you want to see in 3.0" thread. I have trouble typing out "requeue" sometimes.

Make it like the quote link, so it just pops *invocation right down into the comment or something.

I for one lobbied for this awhile back, and indeed was shot down.

But now with 12 hour turn around, my vids are getting pretty thick with requeue request and sift bot replies. A button would be BRILLIANT! Possibly a ticker of some sort? a subscript number, quietly out of the way, but noticeable if you were looking for it?

my .02 worth

It would work better if the little gray box over the comment field that shows the possible invocations were links that could be used to perform the action.

BINGO!

Time to * unsticky, no?

Glad this got resolved so elegantly.