@BackgroundBailey: Methinks your premise is flawed.

Recent polls by the University of Minnesota indicate that Atheists are the least trusted minority in the United States. Even the Arkansas Constitution forbids atheists from holding public office (http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/data/constitution/ArkansasConstitution1874.pdf), although I doubt seriously that an atheist would want to hold a public office in Arkansas anyway.

I can see it now...

Siftbot: User SnakePlissken has unleashed a vote grenade. FIRE IN THE HOLE!

As far as neologisms go, 'islamofascist' is an oxymoron with, in my always humble opinion, dangerous consequences.

Linguistically, 'Islam' is abnormally conjugated in the English language. Unlike the words we use to describe other religions, 'Islam' refers to the faith whereas 'muslim' is used to to describe an adherent of the faith (as opposed to Catholocism/Catholics, Buddhism/Buddhists, &c.) Although it doesn't roll off the tongue as smoothly, 'muslimofascists' would be at least lexically corrrect.

Secondly, Islam does not promote a central political authority or a political system centered around a state-based military-economic complex. It might be argued that those states which adopt Sharia are (at best) authoritarian and (at worst) totalitarian, but the same terms apply with varying shades of success to every state that has ever existed, including the US and GB. The point is that the primary criteria for identification of fascism are fundamentally absent from the Islamic faith.

So why do people continue to coin this stupifying oxymoron for describing those who some have alleged to constitute 'the greatest threat to western civilization'? One might think it lends legitimacy to the ill-defined typology of enemies (TERRROR!!! ™) which the United States has discovered during its most recent adventuring in the middle east. Fascism, specifically in the form of National Socialism, was indeed a very legitimate threat during the mid 1900s but does fascism deserve to be associated with the loosely organized yet strongly convicted muslims who allegedly coordinated 9/11? In the context of fighting a war, are we not collectively wandering down a slippery slope by allowing the terms we use to identify our opponents become increasingly ambiguous and, in this particular case, unequivocally wrong?

mas·sa·cre (n.)

1. The act or an instance of killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly.
2. The slaughter of a large number of animals.
3. Informal. A severe defeat, as in a sports event.

What exactly is an 'islamofascist'?

I've been known to mash the voting buttons without discretion too...

I'm sure this is not some new youtube policy and I imagine the message itself was specified by youtube execs as the result of CBS lawyers. It would be nice if I were wrong, though.

Can I get more poorly spelled and badly articulated ranting from religious nutbags in the monitor?

With regard to the original wish of this blog post, page views (or more specifically "object views") as a metric is not nearly as valuable as knowing how many distinct people actually started watching your video. Consider for instance just how many different ways one can get the object/embed code for a particular video to appear. Just off the cuff, I know that you can often find a submitted video in the new queue/front pages, the "story" page, profile pages, and keyword search results.

What is really required for tracking the metric I described is a transparent, custom SWF which loads the originally submitted content and sends a "ping" of sorts back to videosift whenever someone clicks to play the video.

"I know, at least a teapot is useful."++

Wow. It's like a combination of piano and guitar that you play like a drum. So cool.

The shrewd snake is just biding his time as part of an extended psychological attack against the hamster. One day, when his best friend least expects it, *it's chompin time*

I'll ask my coworkers who are a bit more knowledgeable about all things flash than I

Actually, videosift could theoretically load third party flash content into a custom SWF -- with or without watermark.

Sayin'

It looks like oohahh is about to summon some kind of mystical, dragonball-z'ish orb of raw metal power into his left hand.

If you don't mind my prying, how much does hardware/hosting run?

It seems most 'meta' commentary websites make their money from either charging membership fees or advertisements -- and I should point out that PBS uses both.