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

Not really much of a point except a hot girl trying on bikinis. OK, yeah - I realize that's a point - but VS is not the right venue for this.

if it were just any "hot girl", i wouldn't have posted it - but because it's Dushku, it has geek appeal. sorry hot girls in bikinis don't do anything for you...would you prefer a dude in a Speedo?

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

Excuse me if I don't respond directly to this theo47 - but I see a bit of a problem here, which I've haven't experienced yet on VS.

There's been a lot of talk about how it's important to leave a comment explaining a down vote, but can you see why people might be reluctant to leave a comment when they get a kind of snarky/hostile response?

I don't think this is a great vid, and maybe not "right" for VS, therefore I down vote. That's all, nothing personal theo.

I don't care if you downvote it because you don't like it. That's not why I responded.
I see a bit of a problem here, too - that you felt the need to say this video is "not right for VS". Twice.

Go Daddy girl faces broadcast censorship hearing (you upvoted it)
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=5474
Important English Lesson - NSFW ("too funny", you commented)
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=1751
sexy english lesson: 'i give good head' (nsfw, obv.) ("LOL 'My grandmother gives good head'", you commented)
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=5272
The Governator Does Rio - NSFW (you submitted it)
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=2197

Just wondering what the standard is, or if there's a double standard.

theo, the issue isn't whether something NSFW or not - videosift doesn't have a problem with that. It's more of a quality issue.

btw, digging into people's vote records to support your point is *SO* not cool.

Besides the fact it's creepy and stalker-ish, people have evolving and changing tastes. That's not a factor here - dag is v. consistent in his vote patterns, from my observations - and his treatment of this vid is consistent with his reactions, so chill!


As an added bonus, I'll explain a bit more about the general thought behind voting for this or that: does it have a redeeming feature (story, comedy, fame/notoriety), or is all about being "so porno".

Go Daddy is an amusing ad campaign. Governator really needs no explanation given the context above.

There was a good debate on the English Lesson page you should've studied, James' key quote: "So I suppose then the rubric would be does the sexual content provide some sort of nebulous real value or not. With that in mind this was too hilarious to pass up."

Discarded due to negative votes by members

well played krupo, well played

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

For the record, I like sexy stuff. I just thought this was gratuitous.

Good thing that even discards are available for review (if you remember the URL) so the "record" stands for any concerned parties, eh?

[the URL *does* stay on the books just like Wikipedia maintains an archive of old obsolete edits, right?]