*quality

>> ^dag:

Right. Now I understand what you mean by that made up quote - but it's inaccurate. I'm deeply involved.
I don't like to have to ban or suspend people. - that doesn't mean I don't think it's necessary. You may think it's for "barely anything" <- (that's how quotation works) but that is your opinion and my opinion is different. If the action is performed together as a community - it becomes a consensus rather than an opinion.
That's what this thread is about - not about what a tyrant I am. (I'm deducing your opinion - notice the lack of quotes around that bit) You're welcome to start a thread about that if you like

Look, there's really no need to be patronizing. If the mock quote is not reflective of your actual opinion then I apologize, but you mustn't feel the need to correct me in a condescending manner. The way I understood it was that you don't like to get involved in these disputes and that you're not happy with having to make potentially unpopular decisions involving bans and suspensions. Wasn't that why you had that Hitler avatar for a while?

I certainly don't think you're a tyrant, but I have to admit that I don't really understand your reaction to the whole chic situation. As far as I understand, two sifters had an argument via profile messages. Neither of them asked for any kind of administrative intervention. Yet you came in and told chic that he was forbidden to contact the other member, why? There's a perfectly fine ignore function, which neither of the two sifters involved in the argument found necessary to use. Given your stance on self-regulation I really don't understand why you intervened at all.

@shinyblurry so if I understand you correctly, you agree that the bible is rubbish, but are not satisfied with the evidence supporting the theory of evolution, thus trying to find more answers using the scientific process? Nothing wrong with that at all.

>> ^Ryjkyj:
If species don't evolve, how do you explain the massive, rapid, observable evolution in dogs over just the last 500 years?


Selective breeding. Dogs haven't been naturally selected in the past 500 years and you can't really call their development evolutionary.

But of course the fact that selective breeding works so well would also support the theory of evolution, as Darwin said in Origin of Species.

Looks like lucky found the "search by user" loophole and closed it...same with the RSS feeds. Two down, two to go...

I don't think more people carrying guns is ever a solution to a problem. Unless the problem is overpopulation of course. Here in Europe very few civilians even own guns, let alone carry them and we don't have that kind of issues with our police. Besides, there will always be isolated incidents useful to support either side of the argument.

Well you did say how you don't like playing Kindergarten Cop on these kind of issues (chic vs bb2), but seems to me the opposite is true. There might be alot more productive ways to get more involved in the site than banning contributing members over barely anything.

>> ^dag:

This is true - just saw the comments and history, no reports.


Well then so much for "I don't like getting involved"...

>> ^bareboards2:

I wasn't happy when dag stepped in when chic started after me.


Hold on. If you didn't call in dag on your argument with chicchorea then who did?

>> ^ant:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Problem-with-Jeggings


It's the next episode of that sketch, not a dupe. Quick ant, hide before they take away your dupeof power!!

I have to be honest and say that I really enjoy this contest so far. And also the bonus scavenger hunt: Finding all the ways it's still possible to see who submitted what video

From the looks of the trailer I'm not at all motivated to watch this one. Then again, the same was true for "The Adjustment Bureau" and that turned out to be enjoyable. I guess it's sometimes difficult to make a good trailer that's really representative of the movie.

*quality

>> ^blankfist:

We should guess who we think posted which video.


Well it wouldn't be a stretch if you sifted something about Ron Paul. Findind an alternative must be very taxing for you.

If you can still see who voted for the video FIRST, you know who submitted it.