This is far from taking 30 sec off a much longer clip. Its taking 3:00 off a 3:30 clip(85%ish less). There is a sift talk post about it somewhere. I think there was some ratio that came out of it. thought it was 3 to 1. Replacing a 3:31 video with a 27 sec partial clip imo is far from enough to be considered the same video. There are plenty of lectures and tons of random vids where long videos have had small segments resifted. Anyway i guess best to let lucky be the decider.

Bummer dead will resift if another becomes available *kill

*kill and resift
http://videosift.com/video/Epic-cinematic-of-War-Thunder

*kill going to resift as tube chop is sucking for some reason

No particularly good reason. 5 votes in 8 hours. Might just resift on monday when more traffic. You're welcome to it. Its quite funny. I'm just weird when it comes to sifting and killing.

I also killed this http://videosift.com/video/Americans-Dylan-Moran

and have you seen my killed/discard file. More videos in those files then videos ive sifted.

I resifted it. http://videosift.com/video/Battery-Powered-Track-All-Terrain-Vehicle-1

Also think you'll dig this
http://videosift.com/video/Awesome-dad-makes-Mission-Control-Desk-for-his-son

Might want to discard this sift and resift it using the embed here.
http://youtu.be/P01BXM2YdCc

I resifted it for my friends to the North
http://videosift.com/video/Canadians-First-World-Problems

and GO SHARKS!

Can someone resift a version where Leno's face is blurred out and his voice over-dubbed?

*kill Didnt get its proper time to make the top 15. May have to resift it.

Thanks @deathcow for pointing that out. I don't mind if this gets a dupedof since choggie's video was the one that was already sifted. IMO We shouldn't go resifting old videos just because the previous member is banned, I just didn't know this one was already on here.

It's up to you guys.

I've done that, Eric, and normally, I'd agree. But I never bother putting anything in Beggar's Canyon unless it has 6 or more votes. My PQ is filled to the brim with these kinds of almost-but-not-quite vids. And that's fine, I'm not complaining about vids not sifting right away.

But to toss out a 6, 7, 8, or 9 vote vid and starting over with a resift seems futile. Maybe that's what my vids are but I'd like to feel like they've had a fair chance.

I have never once looked at videos in beggar's canyon. Personally I would kill the video and resift it.

>> ^campionidelmondo:
Personally, I feel that even if it's not considered a dupe in this case, it should be. This is a very specific case and apparently falls through a hole in the rules imo.
We're talking about a video of an audio song that has no visual component, so a slideshow was added to it. Alternatively it could've had a still image or an unrelated video added, but the visual component is pretty much random. It's the song that's of importance and that's being sifted.
Ok, so the slideshows could be quite different, fair enough. However, if we don't consider this a dupe, then there's nothing stopping people from looking for popular songs on here and then resifting the exact same songs, just with a different pseudo-visual component, such as a slideshow/scene from a movie/still image etc.
Of course, the added visual component could be of great quality, like setting a great song to a very fitting scene from a movie...things like that. It's a thin line that begs more discussion imo.
Stripping rasch of his dupeoff powers seems a bit much. Especially, like burdturgler pointed out, given how much effort he puts into maintaining the videos.


I think it should not. I would rather that the votes too care of those cases, because they are not duplicates, even if the songs are the same. I don't think we should analyze "what the video is about" so we can figure out if its a dupe or not - it should be relatively simple and if there are doubts, then I'd rather discuss it than throw another version out. If we've all seen a great version of X song with an unofficial music video, would the official music video be a dupe? Not at all, and it should not be that other way either - it's a whole package. The only grey area there is, is when the differences are trivial. That's my opinion anyway.

In any case, in spite of the enmity towards rasch from me, I still respect his tireless effort in dead fixes and dupeofs, with that many of them anyone can make a mistake. I would think it's just a slap on the wrist; there's no reason to cut off a working limb, so to speak.

Personally, I feel that even if it's not considered a dupe in this case, it should be. This is a very specific case and apparently falls through a hole in the rules imo.

We're talking about a video of an audio song that has no visual component, so a slideshow was added to it. Alternatively it could've had a still image or an unrelated video added, but the visual component is pretty much random. It's the song that's of importance and that's being sifted.

Ok, so the slideshows could be quite different, fair enough. However, if we don't consider this a dupe, then there's nothing stopping people from looking for popular songs on here and then resifting the exact same songs, just with a different pseudo-visual component, such as a slideshow/scene from a movie/still image etc.

Of course, the added visual component could be of great quality, like setting a great song to a very fitting scene from a movie...things like that. It's a thin line that begs more discussion imo.

Stripping rasch of his dupeoff powers seems a bit much. Especially, like burdturgler pointed out, given how much effort he puts into maintaining the videos.