When VideoSift started back in 2006- we wrote some basic guidelines- tenants- to guide and direct the kind of community that we hoped VideoSift would grow to be. Things like "no self-posting" - to promote altruism and socialization -- no full TV episodes- we didn't want the Sift to turn into a dump for pirated embeds. And ... no porn.

Even before the advent of sites like YouPorn and PornHub - we could tell Flash video porn would be huge. I made a conscious decision, from the very beginning of VideoSift, not to entangle VideoSift in porn. I had a few reasons for this:

1. video porn would be ubiquitous and everywhere- VideoSift could be a break from that. A place for adults, that wasn't "adult" if you catch my drift.

2. Not all of it, but some porn exploits desperate people who are at the end of their rope. I didn't want to have to sort the "good" porn from the "bad" porn - good luck going down that road.

3. I've got my own demons, people. Let's just say I have some personal issues with porn that are between me and a therapist. Since VideoSift was going to be my "home" I had a personal preference to not have it here.

The advertising thing came about six months later, when I realized that the first question any of the ad networks ask is "do you have adult content". I'm now glad that we can say no- or we would probably not be here.

We are not rolling in dough. As great as the charter subscriptions are- they only pay a small portion of our costs. We need the ad networks to stay alive. You can call it a sellout- but it's one I'm willing to make because I didn't want adult material here anyway.

*************************

Another issue is the definition of porn. It's definitely not a black-and-white thing, and the word itself is loaded. It's not just whatever gets someone sexually excited because we're all bent a little different - especially me. (no I'm not telling what my fetish is)

But we do need a better definition- help me out in the comments with a good definition and we'll add it to the guidelines.

I seem to recall having a couple of times where an * isdupe invocation was required.
This morning I called dupe on a video, and instead of waiting for someone else, siftbot wrote:

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by demon_ix.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by demon_ix. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Note - I wasn't the original submitter of the video.
After that, the video was duped, and didn't wait for an isdupe invocation.

Is it broken, or am I missing something?

Why am I hobbled?

First one to answer correctly wins a lifetime supply of Carlin's Active Sprunt©. Now in MegaDouche™ size!

	Yes	(10 votes)
	No	(31 votes)
A total of 41 votes have been cast on this poll

or is it just me?

Taking EIT's lead here:

It has come to my attention that some of our beloved sifters were deeply traumatized by my video today. I understand how the sight of vaginas that are not attached to porn stars can be troubling, so to all the gay men born by Cesarian section out there, I am sorry.

As a token of my apologies, I offer you this adorable video of puppies in people clothes.

http://www.videosift.com/video/PUPPY-PARTY

Let the healing begin.

..unless he's got a gold star?

http://www.videosift.com/video/Cars-Tokyo-Mater

The viral channel appears to be without an owner at the moment -- and that's a channel that really needs someone to be looking after it since it's one of those channels that gets misused a lot. I think a lot of people assume that it's for any video that has gone viral or is trying to go viral, when really it's supposed to just be for viral ads. Of course, that's not an unreasonable assumption since the "viral" title is a bit too vague.

I propose that:

A) The channel be renamed to something like "viralads" for clarity, though mashed into one word "viralads" is also potentially confusing. Suggestions? I'm also not sure how feasible it is for an existing channel to be renamed.

B) Someone should volunteer to run this channel.

That is all.

Hello!

Like on http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/view/ ? It doesn't use object/embed codes.

Thank you in advance.

... and submit a video for our Siftiversary celebration. I know for most of you VideoSift is just a way to relieve the guilt between furious YouPorn sessions, but don't forget to submit your video for our February 16th celebration. At this point, a 30 second video of your flour sifter takes the grand prize.

I've held off asking about this since I figured someone would bring it up if it were a problem everyone was having, but maybe it's just me, so I'll bring it up. When I watch a video and it ends, it brings up the "related videos" screen. BUT, if I then click on the comments bubble at the bottom of the video, it takes me to youtube rather than opening the comments. The only way I can get the comments to appear is if the video is actually playing. What gives?

	Yes.	(19 votes)
	No.	(23 votes)
A total of 42 votes have been cast on this poll

The Siftquisition was a process wherein a member could "call out" another member for perceived violations of rules, etiquette etc on the Sift. Potential actions to be carried out against the accused were listed as votable choices, like a poll. People could vote on the outcome (if any) which would be carried out by the administrators (Dag and Lucky) at the end of the Siftquisition period.

Who has the highest average votes per video? Is there an easy way to find out? Can we give some sort of sift-honor for efficiency? I mean, we're all about quality, not quantity, so why not reward those that have consistently contributed quality videos....?

Okay, I'll be honest, I think I have a pretty high ratio (49.67). I'm just wondering if I'm special.

National Geographic has done a special on Camp Leatherneck and the 2nd MEB as part of their recent series. It will air this Sunday night at 10 EST, and I have heard it will be on again on February 2, though I'm not sure of the time.

It certainly doesn't sound all positive, but it does look like it will be interesting. Thought you guys might appreciate it.


http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/explorer/4832/Overview

COME one come all, HURRRY HURRY HURRY,!

Step right up and give this man his much deserved props, stroke the crown he so dutifully and reservedly deserved after having had to suffer the likes of others more daring than himself with more ruthless, self-serving ageeendas,

BUST his cherry with some new bling, HURRY HURRY HURRRY, celebrate the wonder of the man with 3 noses!! See her perform feats of unimaginable dexterity as it gliiiides on grease, through the Piaaaatza!

Ten cents, 5 pennies and five, one thin dime, a tenth of a dollar HUUUry Hurry Hurry!!

So....Why does the ©Videosift® need a channel called, Election 08'?

We just added a new set of features that are long overdue and will definitely be a fantastic addition to the Sift.

First, Silver Star members can use a new invocation. It's a little bit awkward to use, but necessarily so. The invocation name is *backup and is used as follows:
*backup=[<embed...>]
Essentially, you just type *backup=[ then paste your embed code then type ] and there can be no other contents in the comment (because it gums up the works).

The other way backup embeds are added is automatically when *dupeof is completed on a duplicate post. It's embed will automatically be added to the dupe's original video post.

On a video's detail page below the video, any/all backups are listed as links (for logged-in members only). If you click on a link, the page will reload with the backup embed displayed in place of the current embed code. On such a page, Ruby and Diamond members are able to swap the backup embed code into the post. If a video has any backup embeds and *dead is invoked on it, rather than being flagged dead, one of the backup embeds will automatically replace the current, dead embed code.

Any time the current embed is replaced with a backup, if the current is flagged *blocked, it will be unblocked since it's unlikely the replacement is also region blocked.

Everything should already be in working order, but if there are any issues, please report them here.

Hi!

I cannot seem to submit the embedded video code on http://ted.com/talks/nick_veasey_exposing_the_invisible_1.html ...

VS just sits there forever to validate the code. Any one else?

Thank you in advance.

In light of recent discussions, we though it prudent to make some adjustments to two very powerful invocations: *discard and *dupeof.

Originally, the *discard invocation was created to allow privileged members to flush out of the Sift duplicate videos and videos that violated the guidelines. In the years since it was introduced, the *discard invocation has really become unnecessary when used on other members' posts, so it now will only work on a post of your own. If a duplicate video needs to be dealt with, *dupeof is available.

Speaking of which, as of late, it's been very clear something has been needed to make it a little more difficult for members to invoke *dupeof because there are times when the duplicativity is contested. To aid in the valid use of the invocation, once a member invokes *dupeof the post becomes nominated as a dupe. Then another member (Gold Star or better) will have to invoke *isdupe to second the nomination and fully activate the duplification process.

Have a nice day.

[edit]
*Discard can be used on another members post (by Silver Stars and above) if the post submitter is banned.

February 17th marks the 4th Siftiversary of the beginning of VideoSift. We're going to celebrate the occasion like we usually do with a maudlin retrospective and flagons of red wine. But this year, we thought we'd try a bit more. Here's the plan:
... more inside ...