I'm sorry, but by what insane definition or theory do you NOT consider this *snuff?!? It is the literal definition of the word, and is in fact double snuff as it seems both the 'hero' and the kidnapper are killed. Just because you feel the one death was 'heroic', and the other totally justified, does not make it any less a snuff film.
Good on the homeless man for saving the woman.
Bad on @Lawdeedaw for posting snuff.

newtboy, death has long not been considered snuff if it newsworthy, historic or artful. Or haven't you seen the millions of fucking police and troops killing people on the sift? They are allowed because they are "unexpected" and newsworthy. In fact that is exactly what @lucky760 told me back then. Guess he was wrong back then eh?

Or how about when I posted the video of mother nature being a powerful, awe inspiring motherfucker? There was definitely death in this vein there. I was told it was fine, because it showed the artistic power of mother-nature. That came from the mods and nearly everyone else. A few did argue their point, "But, but...it shows someone dying..."

Or how about the world's ten greatest tragedies that showed a fighter pilot drown with his jet? Oh the video was historically based, but that particular pilot's death was in no way historical at all. Yet it was defended and remained.

Honestly, if you have no clue what you are talking about, then shut up. You can argue the homeless saving people does not matter (not newsworthy,) you could argue that I could have edited it, but don't pull that bullshit "just because both die from gunshots."

In my opinion this is the definition of newsworthy. More of this needs shown to the world so they fucking have to eat the truth--that heroes can be poor street men. This is art in a very sad way. Like a fucking painting of a great man standing, defending a wall against a force much larger than his own. This is fucking news because no one expects it and it stuns people awake.

And just for good measure, @dag can be brought into this discussion too. I just expect you guys to read my response to newt and judge based off of that logic--since logic should be valued more so than the thoughts of individuals here on the sift.

I believe I do know what I'm talking about, unlike some.

The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited, incidental portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera.

Many 'newsworthy' videos have been removed because they were far less graphic snuff than this, even though they also were newsworthy and informative (unlike this video). This was nothing more than a graphic murder in full view with a second violent killing alongside it, plain and simple, and there's no more egregious, clear, or more clearly forbidden type of snuff than a short clip of nothing more than blatant violent multiple murder in full view and color. It was not incidental to the video, it WAS the entirety of the video, and there was no narrative or educational portion at all.

@dag, a ruling please.

And until we can have a ruling, how about at least at big old *NSFW (and a warning that you're about to watch someone be held hostage at gun point, watch someone else be violently murdered, and watch the murderer be shot to death as well)

This video has been flagged as being Not Suitable For Work - declared nsfw by newtboy.

This was a depressing show of strength and loss of life from a brave man, and I feel better for having watched it. It gives me hope to know there are those with the self-sacrificing wherewithal to do things like this.

That could be me some day, and I would want nothing more than for people to honor that choice by seeing the act of courage it took to put ones self in that space. Hopefully it would inspire others to do good after seeing a video like this.

It was heartbreaking to see him stop and stand there, realizing he'd had it, and then just crumple in the church entryway like that.

About as snuff as it gets.

So you're admitting the police videos showing murder and senseless life taking--which almost all the police videos are hardly "educational, informative news report or documentary that," you're admitting they should be removed? Again, I am about fairness and if this is true, lets do it. Homeless man beaten to death? How is that more educational than this? It was left. And you didn't address the content of what I wrote about other videos, a plethora of others, that have been left? Address those "snuff" videos and either demand they come down or admit your idea of snuff isn't all that matters.

So are other sift videos that only add anger in our community. As @artician says, we are better for having seen it. It adds life to a perception that others have wrongly. It is educational, but I didn't put the tag on it because it is not educational in a certain sense.

If this had been a cop killing some homeless guy for no reason, you would be writing "About as NOT snuff as it gets."

Add to the content eric, explain why it is snuff to you, but most of all explain why other videos of this type are completely fine when not educational or otherwise in the least.

You really are being aggressive aren't you? Okay, so "I don't consider this snuff" leads you to what conclusion? Are you really A-surprised that the content is of a deep nature with human sacrifice? B-Unable to read it? Or C-Just mad?

I concede the NSFW, so there is that.

And more clearly that you are just upset and ranting, and made this personal, I already called dag into the conversation for an OBVIOUS reason--e.g., to make a call. Same reason I called lucky here. But you just had to be the one to...make it official...

Maybe, (suggestion for @dag?), there should be another channel /tag for this that allows for us to post thoughtful-but-offensive clips (that won't just pave the way for a slew of porn or violence).

RE: the 'educational' value-- maybe a "human condition" or "humanity" tag would be good? I know there's already 'humanitarian' but the difference in meaning is probably clear. There must be a term to categorize videos like this under exclusively... "Graphic Content"? Some way to respectfully post videos that encourage sincere, humble thoughtfulness about our world and lives, that can show content like this in that light for the sake of seeing the gravity of our existence face to face. These events, actions and consequences are all reflective of all of us.

I also have certain content that I refuse to put my eyeballs on, and would get extremely offended if I opened the Sift one day and found it at the top of the page, but I'm more in favor of giving videos like that a proper place rather than censoring it entirely.

@newtboy
@Lawdeedaw

you two are adorable.like an old couple that should have divorced decades ago but were unwilling to share the pet dog.

the arguments i see playing out here are one of distinctions,but what are we basing those distinction on?
well,Lawdeedaw has addressed that point and i happen to agree with him.

if you find an abuse of power cop video,where someone is shot or beaten to death acceptable.then you must also find this video acceptable,because they are both using the exact same metric.

that being said,i feel newtboy brings up a good point:context,meaning and ultimately the REASON for posting a video where someone dies.

i think i understand lawdeedaws intent on posting.to reveal the cultural hypocrisy we have in regards to homeless people.how they are invisible,disregarded and disenfranchised.that even though we cringe at having to see homeless people,nevermind interact with them.they are still human and can have just as much courage and moral integrity as any one of us,even though they are discarded and invisible.even though there is much hand-wringing and empty-worded rhetoric,disguised as compassion,making us have the feel-goods while we do nothing.

they are human and this mans humanity and sacrifice can be beautiful to behold.

but where is the context?
take away lawdeedaws poetic understanding...what is happening here,besides a man getting shot and the gunman riddled with bullets?

so newtboy brings up a good point.
so allow me to add some much needed context:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/homeless-man-saving-hostage-victim_55f06cdbe4b093be51bd1940

I base it solely on the sifts definition of 'snuff' (the way i read it), and my experience of the history of this site and how snuff has been judged in the past. We have had this debate so many times that i think the dag/lucky should just make the call as this is always somewhat subjective. I'm fine with whatever they think.

Also if @lucky760 finds the content acceptable (not snuff) he can remove my downvote for it was cast due to rule violation the way i see it.

I'm saying they HAVE (quite properly) been removed in the past...and ANY video that's nothing more than a murder SHOULD be removed. Period.
This video is nothing more than a murder, and a secondary violent killing, with absolutely zero redeeming quality, education, or information. It is the definition of 'snuff' on the sift.

@dag, @lucky760 we're still waiting for a ruling on this, it seems cut and dry snuff.

I did address them, by posting the rule. Those videos you mentioned MAY have followed that rule, by having other information. If they did not, they would be removed if brought to the moderators attention. Snuff is not allowed.

And you can stop being insulting and infantile, buddy. It's not MY idea of snuff, it's the clear sift rules. Because you like this snuff video doesn't make it any less snuff. Your insistence on furthering it MAY be reason for hobbling. It's clearly not allowed, and is clearly snuff.

I would agree, if there was a place where these videos could be posted, but maybe not voted on so it never makes it to the front page and must be sought out to find it, that would be reasonable.
If I come to the sift and find a murder/snuff video at the top of the page as a promoted video, I'm going to hobble the person who posted it, and the person who promoted it and let the chips fall where they may.
The sift is not for murder videos or porno. They can be found elsewhere if that's what you're into.
Consider someone may decide to plaster the sift with animal abuse videos, 'because people need to know' so 'it's educational', would you like the sift to be 1/4 animal abuse videos? How about 1/3 porn, because 'people need to know about sex' in all it's forms...or because a single person found a redeeming quality in the porno?
I must say, I found absolutely zero educational value in this video...how could one find education in a video of a murder and second killing in another language where there's absolutely no explanation of what happened?

Please explain yourself. What point did lawdeedaw address that you agree with? I see none.

Yes, the video is pure snuff as I see it, as it contained zero educational value, no information at all in fact. Also because it's a graphic depiction of both murder and violent killing. It fits every portion of 'snuff' as described in the rules...and I'm fairly pissed off @Lawdeedaw for posting it at all, and disturbed that he's defending it so angrily.
I (and others) don't come here for faces of death, and that's ALL this was in my opinion. Because one of the multiple dead people was heroic makes absolutely zero difference.

And to address the red herring, videos of cops killing citizens is also snuff, and I have labeled many of them as such and seen them be removed, and I have also refrained from posting many videos that I thought were extremely relevant and informative BECAUSE they included a graphic murder/killing, far more informative than this video and with a far less graphic murder or death than the two this video contains.

If this is deemed 'not snuff', many will likely leave the sift. People come here because the rules keep videos like this one out. If I randomly find murder videos here, there's no longer a reason for me to be here....and I'm sure I'm not alone in that....that's why the rule exists.

The posting guidelines define it very clearly:

"The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited, incidental portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

Discarding this post - discard requested by member lucky760.

Yes @enoch, but I don't take kindly to my feelings being dismissed to garbage. So when newt starts off "shame shame" on Law, it is an insult of the highest caliber to me. There was no other intentions of it besides shaming, correct? Or did you see a finer point I missed in the insult?

As far as the rest, well said. The context is in the comments of the video, since this video will never, ever be put on a mainstream forum. You can't get context any other way.

Everything with killings in it will get reviewed then @lucky760. There will be no exceptions then for shit based on cops, soldiers, etc., unless it is "lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative."

OH, AND IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE NEWS REPORTS OR DOCUMENTARY'S ARE THEMSELVES A BROAD NARRATIVE, THE FATALITY ITSELF MUST ALSO BE educational and all that crap.

And since no mention was made about insulting other sifters in snide ass manners, backhanded bullshit insults that sting far worse than dumb and crass insults, I assume it's now no hands barred? I would rather be called a dumb fuck than treated as I was...so you will be the one to make the ruling on that bud. Either we can all be insulting, snide assholes, or someone else gets told to be civil... I don't care whether he was "pissed off at me for posting it"...

At least my video died with a majority of positive votes. It says something not about my anger or arguing, but about how civilly we can look at the overall issue. I am very happy with that much. God bless the man if he believed, otherwise, blessing from me to him if he did not.

I don't have enough time in my day right now to read through monolithic walls of comments, otherwise I might have more input.

My only response was to the content of the video and the question of whether or not it's snuff according to our guidelines. And it is.

There may be an honorable reason one of the two people died in the video, but regardless of the why, it is still death porn. It's kind of like dag's wood test, except instead of giving you wood, you feel your soul die a little inside.

There was no timeline on your response. Take your time. But just remember, it now applies to every video on the sift so please do have your discard button handy

@newtboy, are you jerking off on downvoting my comments? Remember to downvote them on content, not because you are pissed. The other comments? I can understand you downvoting them, but the last one I posted directly to lucky, as he is a mod and we were talking directly about mod issues, is suspect...I told @lucky760 A-Take his time, B-I am fine with this ruling but all must now be fair, and C-Be ready to discard the other snuff that has escaped to ruin the sift...

So please do tell, what part of that content offended you or was intellectually devoid? If nothing, then stop spamming my comments with downvotes. I wouldn't want people to get banned for downvotting based on bullshit reqs.

I don't follow what you mean.

My response is in accordance with the same guidelines we've been following since the dawn of siftbot. I'm using our old precedents, not setting new ones.

So, yes the precedent applies to every video on the Sift, but it always has.

Then follow me my friend.

http://videosift.com/video/Seattle-cop-kills-nonthreatining-pedestrian

That video has no informative content. It's not a documentary or in any way shape or form follows your guidelines. It just gives an account of an officer killing a man. You hear the brutal gunshots, and see the man's lifeless corpse rotting on the sidewalk. His murder complete, the horror no less worse than my video any day of the week. Showing the shooting is no requirement for snuff... "Whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

Oh, and you UPVOTED the snuff... At the time I was personally mortified with that video, but then I kept my mouth shut because I don't ruin strong emotional videos for other people.

Discard that video. It is clearly snuff by our results today. No amount of "other reasons," such as the offender being an officer changes that.

http://videosift.com/video/10-Tragedies-Caught-on-Film

That video is hardly a documentary. It is snuff bullshit. Just a collage of death. I let it go because again it is not my place to attack its artistic conceptualization. Of course my own comments were put in, but I let the issue drop.

Now discard it.

http://videosift.com/video/Craziest-and-most-awesome-animal-compilations-of-the-web

This is my OWN video. This was a wildlife post that was deemed fine by the community after a bit of discussion. Although people didn't die on the video itself, some were killed. But again, it was not a documentary or anything other than the powerful, awe-inspiring reflection of nature. Even though it is "dead" it still must be discarded because the underlying content is still snuff; therefore, it would still be dead snuff.

Discard it.

Again, take your time. We have all the time in the world. We have a long long week of video killing to do you and I

Yep, all snuff.

All discarded.

Thanks!

(For the record, just because I'm an admin doesn't mean it's impossible for it to never come to mind that something might not qualify as not being snuff.)

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

Sorry I'm a bit late to the party. I've been on the road for the past 18 hours - but I concur with Lucky. This one is snuff.

@newtboy

see all those posts lawdeedaw pointed out to lucky?
that is what i was referring.
which i gather you felt was a red herring,though i was not making an argument,just an analogy.

people have their own reasons for coming to the sift,and their own reasons for posting.

if lawdeedaw's posting this video offends you (and others) then i guess be offended.just like lawdeedaw was offended by your remarks towards him..again..his choice how to proceed.

while i will always visit the sift and consider this place a home away from home.my visits have become less frequent.simply because the video content i seek is no longer prevalent here,nor is there much interest in the videos i wish to share.

still some great people here though,and that will always be attractive.

love ya fucker..now you and lawdeedaw make out!

And we agree the cretiera has changed? It used to be the mentioned videos were protected, even if snuff, even if not under the SOP. That's all I ask. As I said, I will destroy anything my own to make that point easily

Hence the law part of my name.