*notdupe

*notdupe, different soundtrack, longer *timeshift

>> ^smiley:

I disagree. Different length and audio. I would say it's a different video, from another camera/angel.
>> ^Deano:
dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Worlds-largets-firework



Yes, and from how many angles would it take for one to view this from before tiring of it?? Maybe a hundred! *notdupe

*notdupe... I mean, seriously, just watch the other clip... It only takes two seconds to see that they're different.

Oh, it's a "companion piece". Sorry!

*notdupe

>> ^Hybrid:

1. Make it so I can choose a custom thumbnail in the actual submission page. I would be happy with just this!
2. Ditch the Top 10 Lounge Lizards box from the front page. Not all member ranks can access the lounge anyway.
3. Remove the "login with facebook" button from the top of the page, and put that onto the member login page directly. So a user either logs in with facebook or their username & password. That seems to be the standard way of doing things.
4. Clean up all the social networking integrations/icons/text about the place. A generic "social networking" panel on the right of the page (perhaps replacing the Top 10 lounge lizards box), might be a cleaner way of doing things.
5. A dynamic ticker bar for the top of site, viewable on most pages. Cycles recent "news items" and by that I mean: Videos hitting #1, videos going Top 15, members ranking up, new sift talk posts, new blog posts. Maybe even badge awards (though that might be a lot of news items to cycle).... When news items are low it could generate informal ones like "@dag is only 3 sifts away from getting their crown. Click here to look at their pqueue" etc. I actually had a similar idea for just publicising member rankings before: http://videosift.com/talk/Publicize-member-rank-increases
6. Auto-generated sift talk posts by Siftbot when a member reaches gold or above? Could be a nice way to make sure people don't go unnoticed when they rank up? Though I am aware that there have been some great custom, new rank sift talk posts in the past, so it would lose that aspect.
7. A page (similar to the no thumbs page), that has all the videos that have had dupeof called on them, but are awaiting the second isdupe invocation. Also, I think we do need a notdupe invocation to cancel out bad dupeof calls, before someone randomly calls isdupe without proper checking.
8. Ditch Beggar's Canyon.
9. Server load permitting I guess, but open up the lounge to all non-probie ranks.
10. The ability to transfer powerpoints to another member. I know, strange request, but it'd be nice to have this for those times when members want to reward another for helping them out with finding a video or something.


And this from the guy who just wants custom thumbnails

I love #6 too. It's such a shame we don't seem to make such a celebration of people's milestones like we used to. I really don't think the community is any less inclined, just that we've got lax about it.

1. Make it so I can choose a custom thumbnail in the actual submission page. I would be happy with just this!

2. Ditch the Top 10 Lounge Lizards box from the front page. Not all member ranks can access the lounge anyway.

3. Remove the "login with facebook" button from the top of the page, and put that onto the member login page directly. So a user either logs in with facebook or their username & password. That seems to be the standard way of doing things.

4. Clean up all the social networking integrations/icons/text about the place. A generic "social networking" panel on the right of the page (perhaps replacing the Top 10 lounge lizards box), might be a cleaner way of doing things.

5. A dynamic ticker bar for the top of site, viewable on most pages. Cycles recent "news items" and by that I mean: Videos hitting #1, videos going Top 15, members ranking up, new sift talk posts, new blog posts. Maybe even badge awards (though that might be a lot of news items to cycle).... When news items are low it could generate informal ones like "@dag is only 3 sifts away from getting their crown. Click here to look at their pqueue" etc. I actually had a similar idea for just publicising member rankings before: http://videosift.com/talk/Publicize-member-rank-increases

6. Auto-generated sift talk posts by Siftbot when a member reaches gold or above? Could be a nice way to make sure people don't go unnoticed when they rank up? Though I am aware that there have been some great custom, new rank sift talk posts in the past, so it would lose that aspect.

7. A page (similar to the no thumbs page), that has all the videos that have had dupeof called on them, but are awaiting the second isdupe invocation. Also, I think we do need a *notdupe invocation to cancel out bad dupeof calls, before someone randomly calls *isdupe without proper checking.

8. Ditch Beggar's Canyon.

9. Server load permitting I guess, but open up the lounge to all non-probie ranks.

10. The ability to transfer powerpoints to another member. I know, strange request, but it'd be nice to have this for those times when members want to reward another for helping them out with finding a video or something.

Oh no, no offense taken at all chief. Honestly what it is is sometimes I read too fast for my own good. I have gotten really good at skimming internets especially. Combine that with the fact that I'm TERRIBLE with names and you've got how things got messed up.

Most of the time when I am trying to get someone's name right I copy/paste it, which is not to say that I don't know your name. Trouble is, I can't pronounce it. Every time I see your name I look at it and scratch my head thinking "Boy's-lib?" "Bose-lib?" "Bo-ice-lib?" and nothing really seems to sound right. My mind's attempt to deal with the situation has been to skip over the middle letters and in my head I literally read now "B---s_Lib"

*shrug* sounds crazy but it's the truth
and looking at the name "Boss_Lib" in the context, I could see how this would create confusion.

Anyway, no I'm not offended. It's just frustrating sometimes because I wish there were hard and fast rules about such things. I'm not going to dig up any now, but I've seen many instances where the shorter clip changed the spirit of the video and was ruled *notdupe by the community; so much so that without seeing what you quoted in the FAQ I really thought that THAT was the rule (a dupe is the SAME video length and all).

I plan on making a poll about it after lucky is done with his powerpoint ticker poll. I feel though, that the video really is a different video. Most people wont sit through the 10 minute film long enough to even get to the 1 minute clip i posted. But meh, what I like about this place is we're all community driven with rules n such. We'll see what the peeps think and hopefully update the FAQ.

peace
-jj

(EDIT) On a completely unrelated side note, I just hopped in a Battlefield 3 server and got banned about 2 minutes in for "Having a racist name"
This is the nn my friends gave me in high school, nothing more. *shrug*

Clearly a longer video of the Exact same thing.
Granted the longer one is being of more value (since it's longer) but still the same.
Funny though - I always look at video length - this time though, the videos were so exactly the same I didn't look at length.
Did I mention that they're still the same video

>> ^gwiz665:

notdupe
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Sagemind" title="member since April 2nd, 2008" class="profilelink">Sagemind See the video lengths.
You're like Fox News.. "thoroughly" fact checked

*notdupe

@Sagemind See the video lengths.

You're like Fox News.. "thoroughly" fact checked

i'm with berticus.
ill post the link to what appears to be a dupe and let the chips fall where they may.
i will dupe if the original poster catches and asks me to second a dupe,which i have had to do on a few occasions myself.
the notdupe option seems redundant with a secondary isdupe already in place.

@bareboards2: I'm not implying I assume a lack of human error. I'm explicitly stating you must use extreme caution when using both *dupeof and *isdupe as to mitigate your own error before you make it. If someone else after the first *dupeof just comes along and posts a comment stating "This is not a dupe," that should have the same affect of invoking *notdupe. (This is why *isdupe exists.)

If the first person is erring when they *dupeof and the second person is also erring when they *isdupe, then they'll both lose their privileges for being so overwhelmingly careless.

These powers cannot be taken so lightly as to encourage people to think, "Well, I'll just invoke without doing any research. If I'm wrong, we'll make siftbot undo it for me. Yay for ignorance!"

You assume no human error, lucky. There is more than you realize, as the votes so far are indicating.



>> ^lucky760:

>> ^arvana:
@lucky760 my understanding of the suggestion is that notdupe would cancel a dupeof before isdupe is called. I know that correcting a mistakenly duped video after isdupe would be a nightmare, but in between the two should be easy. amirite?

Thanks for your Cliff's Notes interpretation of this poll.
Now I understand the desired functionality, but how useful/necessary would that really be? If no one else invokes isdupe, then the initial dupeof will just be ignored. The lack of a confirmation isdupe invocation is the same as adding an additional notdupe invocation, except the latter would just serve to clutter the post.
I still vote no against what would be an unnecessary and comment cluttering invocation.

>> ^arvana:

@lucky760 my understanding of the suggestion is that notdupe would cancel a dupeof before isdupe is called. I know that correcting a mistakenly duped video after isdupe would be a nightmare, but in between the two should be easy. amirite?


Thanks for your Cliff's Notes interpretation of this poll.

Now I understand the desired functionality, but how useful/necessary would that really be? If no one else invokes *isdupe, then the initial *dupeof will just be ignored. The lack of a confirmation *isdupe invocation is the same as adding an additional *notdupe invocation, except the latter would just serve to clutter the post.

I still vote no against what would be an unnecessary and comment cluttering invocation.

I think people who fuck up need to be punished more readily.

If people don't give a shit about the details then adding this invocation may just lead to dupeof/notdupe wars.

What we need to do is hobble or suspend people who screw it up out of blatant negligence. And before we can really do that, we need the written rule changed to match the rule that was voted into place a month or so ago.