addendum to VS' FAQ: "it's ok for people with no personalities of their own to create multiple accounts, fuck with other sifters and use *gay tag indiscriminately — as long as they regularly rub it in people's faces"

Maybe it's because he's really 5 years old and pretends to be 35. Some people find that adorable.

Leave him alone, he has mental and emotional development problems. Just smile and nod. Maybe pat him on the back every once in a while and tell him you're proud of his being able to put words and sentences together. It doesn't matter that his comments don't make sense he's trying really hard to be an active part of this community.

if i had any power points left, youd get a quality friend.
more proof that siftquisitions and hobbiting are clunky, cumbersome and not a way for a community to effectively regulate itself
though it is great if you want mob rule
in this case the mob has determined that one douchebag is more lovable and less annoying than another douchebag
which is simply untrue

I can't shake the feeling that volumtuous is still upset about blanky making him a French techno lover.

It'd be funnier if you spelled my name properly and understood the difference between techno and epic trance.

But, point taken.

Feel free to start a Siftquisition.

and feel free to file it under the new *law channel

Adding post to channels (Law) - requested by rottenseed.

I rule non compus mentis

>> ^lucky760:
Feel free to start a Siftquisition.


See Lucky, that's why you're an admin and I just make stupid comments all the time.

I never even thought that someone might not be sifquisitioned because NO ONE SIFTQUISITIONED THEM.

It's funny Volumptuous, in that fantastic video of the sift-up, you didn't look petty or spiteful. I never would've guessed. This place isn't perfect but if you think we need to siftquisition him then JUST DO IT. This site relies on you just as much as anyone else.

It seems to me that you have an adequate reason. I don't think you really need to fear any reprisals. Sock-puppeting is clearly against the rules.

^ Uggh

It's because I'm basically a nice guy. But I don't know what that has to do with fuckall.

I just find it curious that while others get quisitioned or hobbitted, there are some who can violate rules here and rub it in people's faces with no risk. I don't like either siftquisitions or hobbiting, but if it is to be done to some, shouldn't it be done to all?

I guess "even playing field" to you is being "spiteful" and "petty". ffs


ps: Lucky was the one who temp-banned me. Noone asked him, he just did it. Why isn't Lucky temp-banning blankfist for obvious violation of the rules?

Nice guy or not, the playing field is even. It's just not always perfect. Nothing ever is. Why don't you just ask Lucky directly? I'll support you %100.

LUCKY,

WHY HASN'T BLANKFIST BEEN INSTABANNED BY YOU FOR AN OBVIOUS VIOLATION OF SIFT GUIDELINES?

Oops... lag.

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

^The power is in the hands of the people (at least for now). It's your right, or maybe better said, responsibility to use it as you see fit.

I'm basically a nice guy too. That's why I don't want to wield the punishment stick exclusively. It takes the fun out of this place for me.

everybody knows it's impossible to ban blankfist. here's why:
banning blankfist = blank sift
see my point? now, most of us agree blankfist can be a total prick sometimes, but I'll vote against banning him if it comes to that.

in the case of creating sockpuppets, banning or hobbiting isnt an appropriate recourse anyhow. you cant do much damage with a probie sockpuppet and when you get banned, well you can still create sockpuppets.

and there are users who are actively using old sockpuppets as their current accounts and users that are obviously sockpuppets of former members and noone cares. dont misinterpret my statements for me caring a whole lot. i care a minimal amount to be sure. im just observing.

dft did ban the sockpuppet. im not sure what else you can do about it. its kind of elusive and kind of a side effect of the whole set up. and it was for jokesys.

[edit: this portion redacted on account of it sounded unintentionally bitchy.]

i think hobbiting people for killing their own sifts is ridiculous. btw.

even downvote sprees get corrected in the end. i suppose hobbitting can be useful in those instances to minimize the clean up for daglucky. other than that though, pffffty.

I don't get how hobubbling him is the right response to his creation of a secondary account. I thought it was for people who are abusive in comments or go on a video killing spree (which hoboblowbubbling would prevent).

Also this whole business of "dragging it out into the public" is a downer. After all, there's no user action that can't be reversed. If a user is caught creating a secondary account, just delete his old one and let him keep the new one. That should be enough to discourage people from creating sock puppet accounts.

Edit: I'm not saying that blankfists account should be deleted, but that some clear consequences should be set and executed the next time it happens without all this fuzz and public stake burning.

Oh and I also want to add that I don't think volumptuous' actions are petty or spiteful at all. The way I understand it, he simply pointed out that he feels the same rules should apply to all users, which has nothing to do with pettyness, but rather with fairness. I agree that the same rules should apply to all sifters, but I feel the general response to this kind of behaviour (sock puppet accounts) should be different.

blanky created that account to have some fun, not to game the system. He won't be able to do it again because his IP is blocked from creating new accounts now. If you feel strongly that he needs official discipline, you should siftquisition him. If I know blankfist as well as I think, I'm guessing he would enjoy being the subject of a siftquisition - plenty of opportunities for humor. He's probably already coming up with material.

As I remember, you were banned for putting a siftquisition (about captainplanet putting inappropriate things in the gay channel) in the gay channel. You shouldn't have been banned for your first offence, but at the time, it read like you were playing chicken with admin, and lucky doesn't fuck around.

Maybe as an alternative punishment, you could create a Ron Paul sock puppet for 2 days, and have him give out recipes for cooking up various types of poor people - Hobo or Rye, Chicken Fried Single Mother, Grandpa on a Stick.

single mom is a dish best served cold and bitter. like gazpacho with 2 tablespoons of mylanta-to neutralize the acidity of the tomato and soothe all the stomach ulcers.

i would also enjoy some refried illegal immigrant, and pickled dead beat dad.

>> ps: Lucky was the one who temp-banned me. Noone asked him, he just did it.

That is an outright lie, and I'll thank you not to spread about me your assumptions about my actions as fact. And it wasn't up for a community Siftquisition because we didn't have the feature at the time.


>> Why isn't Lucky temp-banning blankfist for obvious violation of the rules?

For one thing, I didn't know anything about it until I saw this post and even now I still don't know the details of the situation. I haven't been aware of all this drama lately because I've been busy with things that actually matter in life. If you are all so up in arms about what you're certain blankfist has done, why haven't any of you started a Siftquisition while we admins have remained unaware of the matter?

Anyway, this is why the community needs the Siftquisition. So you can use it. No need to keep running to the teacher when someone pours sand down your diaper. Just handle it.

Ya hearrrd.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
blanky created that account to have some fun, not to game the system.


Here's what the FAQ says:
-----
6. Can I create or use more than one VideoSift account?

There is a strict rule of no more than one account per person, please. Abusers of this rule will be permanently ban hammered via IP address. Sorry.


Not to be nit picky, but if there is a rule, and it's in the FAQ, that definitely seems to be the rule. It doesn't say "unless you're just having fun".

I knew my gay invocation was going to get me temp-banned, but I thought it was funny anyway, and took my lumps. I just don't want to see diamond(+) members abusing the system knowing they'll be let off the hook, because "they were just joking" or whatever. Right now, we have Thinker, who was "just joking" as well, hobbitted all the way to the shire.

Anyway, I've said what I need to. I dislike Siftquisitions and hobbitting, which is why I just made a talkpost instead. I'd like Thinker to be back in the fold, or Blankfist to be hobbitted too. I think we should just pick one.

>> ^lucky760:
That is an outright lie, and I'll thank you not to spread about me your assumptions about my actions.

You didn't ban me? Wait a minute. If you didn't, then I am wrong, not a liar.


But this is what I have in my in-box:
-------------
In reply to this comment by lucky760:
Dunno why you did it... I guess it's the rebel in you, but as requested, your 2 week tempban starts now.

blankfist's account has been permanently banned as per the posting guidelines.

As a reward for righteously making a federal case out of this atrocious act of terrorism, volumptuous has been given a diamond and moved into blankfist's No. 5 spot on the 'Top 15 Sifters of All Time' list. Don't believe me? Go look for yourself, meatbag.

Aye aye aye...

I was referring to: "Noone asked him, he just did it."

A short-lived hobbling might be appropriate, since we have not milder form of punishment.

We have precedence in the Johnald_Chaffinch/johnald128 case

http://www.videosift.com/member/johnald128
http://www.videosift.com/member/8727

Where dag simply banned the sockpuppet and slapped him on the wrist. (the ban disappeared in 3/11)

Since nothing was voted on by the sockpuppet (http://www.videosift.com/member/keitholbermann/votedup) I don't think there's any reason to hobble or ban him. Other than the existence of the sockpuppet no real violation was done, the system wasn't "gamed", other than instigating a little talk.

>> ^lucky760:
Aye aye aye...
I was referring to: "Noone asked him, he just did it."


OK, well that was my understanding. And what I took from the PM from you. I was wrong, I wasn't lying.

OK, now BF is hobbitted and I feel shitty about that.

Can someone hobbit me please?

Isn't it funny? Online communities really are little microcosms into which we drag a lot of the same shit that gets us into trouble in the real world...

In this case we have the illustration of rule enforcement being bent/disregarded when the punishment would fall upon someone we like (well, most of us) and know. The reality of it is that this same thing happens all the time in the real world - everybody knows that asshole that gets away with everything (stinkeye at Blanky).

Now, I'm not sure this is such a bad thing - new members or unknown quantities are not going to get the same treatment - you have to be around for a while, build some capital and then see what you can get away with.

For myself - no skin off my ass (or anyone else's unless self-inflicted) that I can see, so what's the big deal? The community (or admins) withhold the right to lower the hammer if they see fit. It doesn't have to fall every time. I sure as hell know that I wouldn't get away with that shit - and I don't really care - I'm just not going to take the chance.

Oh, but I do like the idea of deleting the high ranking account and keeping the puppet...

There is a great deal of difference between the offenses of the two..

Thinker is on indefinite hobbling, because he discarded several of his sifted videos (major) and a pornographic avatar (minor) - or that is my understanding). His original hobbling, which I did, was a precaution to prevent further escalation of his and peggedbea's PMS. This was promptly reported to a higher authority, dag, and was lifted after a very short period of time.

Blankfist made a sockpuppet account (one could argue that he could be lying about it, because we only have his word for it, but let's assume it). This in itself is not a huge deal, because the big bad thing is when sockpuppets are used to gain votes or to inflate your own stuff. This was not done.

Slap on the wrist, maybe a day or two as a hobbit. That'll be fine.

"Oh, but I do like the idea of deleting the high ranking account and keeping the puppet..."

Ooooh. That's a great idea. You've got the glacial blood of a C17 courtesan.

If you really want to rules lawyer the guidelines, it says:

"There is a strict rule of no more than one account per person, please. Abusers of this rule will be permanently ban hammered via IP address. Sorry."

If he made 100 he would clearly be abusing it, but this is hardly abuse. Do you abuse alcohol/drugs/etc? This is obviously pedantic, but my point is that they are just guidelines and we shouldn't take every little wording as absolute law. Some things are clearer and firmer than others, but this one doesn't even mention or conject how to punish. It could be that only the sockpuppets ought to be banned and that's that?

Slap on the wrist (or wherever you feel appropriate.. no questions asked) and move on.

Abusers of this rule is the same in intent and meaning as breakers of this rule. You're trying to win house-arrest for the senator's son, when anyone else would be instabanned. Hypocritical double-standards make the rules meaningless.

Off with his head!

I cite the above precedent again. He was not instabanned and he was only a bronze.

And I suppose boys will be boys...

^Ok then. Each sifter gets his/her own set of rules, or, do away with all the rules. Multiple accounts for everyone!

I somehow feel "Q" is sitting in his High Judges Chair, looking down at everyone. He is slowly shaking his head, saying Tsk, Tsk..., Humans, you will never agree, such a backwards race..... Get along or I'll snap my fingers and poof.... Even Jean Luc wasn't this unruly...

as much as I like gloating over blankfist's misfortune, I think this hobbiting business is fucking stupid to say the least. no harm was done, so let's forget about it and move on. shit, I never thought I'd be defending that big, beautiful, veiny prick...

Perhaps *Bobbited is more appropriate given Blankfist's current avatar.

On a serious note...,
There is a lot of Crap in my life. And right now a lot of bickering & fighting between family members, I'm tired of it all.

I come here to have a little fun..., I sure wish people would lighten up. “Please”, and make it fun again!

--> Blankfist, you went too far, just say sorry, Keep up the comments, It makes it fun..
--> Volumptuous, You have perfect right to point out the injustice, thanks for pointing it out, (you are free to go play outside with the other kids). Cheers!
--> Lucky & Dag, Thanks for being our gracious hosts, I know you do your best and work hard and that's all we ask – thanks…, no really – Thanks!
--> Others, let it go, The more this keeps going, the more people’s backs are pushed up against the wall, and things will be said - in the heat of the moment.

This is a great place, I've seen many sites, with trolls everywhere, This place isn't like that, which is why I have been lurking here for years... It took me forever just to commit and join, and forever again to make my first post. I am certifiably now hooked!

I work in a job where everything is communicated through email. Quite a bit is lost in an email, and sometimes, you just need to pick up a phone, presto, things get fixed.
I'm not saying anyone here needs to pick up a phone, but remember "allot is lost in translation" which makes it easy to let your hackles up.

Thanks for letting my gripe,
In the gracious words of drunks everywhere, “I love you, man”
Cheers and Respect to all!!!

(What? Too Long - Oop's sorry!)

^ Ok then. Dag and Lucky should release a statement that lists for which members of this community the rules simply don't apply. It's only fair. The other option is to do away with the rules altogether.

I love this place, which can be observed from my frantic posting of comments and videos, in hopes that I achieve an awesome rank one day. But since I have now commissioned my friend Blankfist to being hobbitted, I feel that I should now join his rank


*gay

Please hobbit me, so I suffer the same fate as my BFF, BF.

You kids need to go outside... to the unsifted queue and vote on things instead of yammering on and on in here - honestly. This drama is getting stale - what do you want this to turn into? One of those insular BBSes from 1993?

Rules are rules. As much as I like blankfist (and I want to have his babies, preferably if they have some DNA from kp and rs also), if the rules say a sockpuppet account in itself is an offense deserving swift banination, we'll just have to make it so. Or course, since he wasn't tainting the very essence of the Sift, i.e. he wasn't voting, I think it needs to be a temporary ban, say, a week.

If nobody else wants to take up doing the siftquisition when the current one ends (provided said practice isn't abolished - votes are currently against it, but dag and lucky are strictly against the votes), I will.

I'm fairly sure all will be well between me and blankfist afterward anyway, I mean c'mon it's not like I'd be attempting to start struggling whenever he felt like I needed a good raping session.

Thanks to deputy for providing the music to listen to while reading these comments

yeah, this is really boring to me. everybody with handcuffs. the siftdrama just gets more and more convoluted. i used to care. now it just seems... like more and more siftdrama, for no reason.

>> ^Krupo:
You kids need to go outside... to the unsifted queue and vote on things instead of yammering on and on in here - honestly. This drama is getting stale - what do you want this to turn into? One of those insular BBSes from 1993?


Woohoo! 9600 baud! 3 nodes! 0-2 day warez! Running Renegade v7.071.9! Legend Of The Red Dragon! Sysop: Dagicus! Co-sysop: Lucky!

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

You kids with your 9600 baud modems. 300 baud was good enough for me. I downloaded Castle Wolfenstein overnight and from a BBS in New Jersey - and it was good. (no not that Castle Wolfenstein - go back further)

Unhobble them both and unhobble thinker as well. The community can monitor them, to make sure they don't do anything "bad". This is getting tiresome - drama for the sake of drama is boring.

^ Ok. So what happens when someone gets banned for a much less significant violation of the rules. Will you then admit that VS is actually Grade 5 with a thesaurus? No one should be untouchable. Rules only have meaning when rules are enforced equally. Justice must not only be done, but it must be seen to be done.

Now off with his head.

>> ^lucky760:
I haven't been aware of all this drama lately because I've been busy with things that actually matter in life.

You mean videosift doesn't matter?

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
*runs away like Steven Seagal, crying*

qualm, you are being willfully ignorant and a contrarian. I think that blankfist has earlier called this group the "legion of douche". I think you fit in there quite nicely.

This is tiresome and not really important. It hurts the sift more to keep the visibly handcuffed than not to. Most civilized countries abandoned public shaming and punishment in the dark ages, let's do this in a better way.

I'm fucking tired of people's whiny gripes. The rules are not set in stone, they are applied differently to each case, because each case is different. It's not that some people are exempt from the rules, but some people have proved themselves to get more leeway with them. The law is not equal to all people, like real life. And all infractions on the rules does not, and should not, mean the same punishment. This ought to be fucking obvious. Argh.

My point in the diatribe above is that, because a user is not punished severely at every turn, it does not follow that from then on they are completely outside the rules. Asking for a list of un-punishable users is just being douchy for the sake of it.

I'm on that list... UNTOUCHABLE!

>> ^qualm:
^ Ok then. Dag and Lucky should release a statement that lists for which members of this community the rules simply don't apply. It's only fair. The other option is to do away with the rules altogether.

I say get rid of banning for ANY established member! I'm tired of seeing accounts killed. If powers are being abused.. then just disable his powers a while, not get rid of someone for good. If he's a repeat offender then we can talk about it then.

Banning a family member just for breaking a rule, doesn't sound much like family does it?

Gwiz - Amen.

Wow, all of this over little ol' me? Pshaw. What's funny, no one cares if I was or was not the sockpuppet in question. No one asked. Before any real proof surfaced (only dag or lucky know the truth), the irons were slapped on me and people were asking for my head on a spit.

I told DFT publicly I was keitholbermann. That was all the proof some needed, I suppose, though I'm not sure volumtuspsoyus even read that. He asked if I was KO and I replied 'It was a shitty social experiment. You failed."

I also shot JFK. I was also this guy: http://www.videosift.com/member/Karambo

I spammed all of you with this http://canada.videosift.com/talk/Jewelry-Shop and this: http://brain.videosift.com/talk/Replica-watches

I'm not sure why volumpypumpous was hobbled. I don't think I agree with his ad hoc martyrdom. It's pretty silly, but so is this. I wonder why the legion of douche didn't Siftquisition me. I'm still waiting for my swift and just trial, or else I believe the cuffs should come off.

^or you could have made this comment somewhere around 1 day 9 hours ago and minimized the fuss. drama queen.

I was wondering when blankfist would get around to giving us a Nelsonian "ha ha"!

>> ^peggedbea:
^or you could have made this comment somewhere around 1 day 9 hours ago and minimized the fuss. drama queen.


I didn't say I was or was not keitholbermann. I was asserting out how quickly assumptions were made with nothing more than me saying to DFT "that was me.", and soon enough this turned into a game of telephone with me in irons.

And, before long I knew many would come asking for my throat to be ceremoniously slit for all to see.

^Hah, I totally called that you weren't necessarily telling the truth.

And everyone wants to see your slit.. (ew, eew..)

I can neither confirm nor deny that statement.

So, since the evidence is inconclusive, can we please unhobble the two fuckers and move on with our lives? That would be swell.

Well, that was a *quality good time. Let's do it again soon, 'kay?

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

>> ^gwiz665:
So, since the evidence is inconclusive, can we please unhobble the two fuckers and move on with our lives? That would be swell.


Apparently the sift decided that only one fucker gets unhobbitted.

^You asked to be hobbled, no? Did you want to be unhobbled? Maybe you should ask.

meh.