What kind of response does this deserve then?
http://www.videosift.com/video/Ann-Coulter-More-Lies-About-Obama-s-Health-Plan#comment-832086
"I heard from a reliable source that QM sucks dick left and right."
-budzos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not trying to be a prick about it and I have my disagreements with QM as much as anyone else; but if personal attacks like this are being tossed around and QM is made to be on the receiving end of them, open and honest discourse degenerates into a food fight in a middle school lunchroom.
I'm all for a heated debate, but we need to keep it civil, and it should be frowned upon especially in cases where the community is in strong opposition of the opinions of those being attacked.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Ann-Coulter-More-Lies-About-Obama-s-Health-Plan#comment-832086
"I heard from a reliable source that QM sucks dick left and right."
-budzos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not trying to be a prick about it and I have my disagreements with QM as much as anyone else; but if personal attacks like this are being tossed around and QM is made to be on the receiving end of them, open and honest discourse degenerates into a food fight in a middle school lunchroom.
I'm all for a heated debate, but we need to keep it civil, and it should be frowned upon especially in cases where the community is in strong opposition of the opinions of those being attacked.
and there's nothing wrong with sucking dicks. I like when girls suck dicks. I'm sure most gay men do it too. It's like me saying "I heard from a reliable source that JiggaJohnson drinks coke on Saturday night."
I also heard that Budzos is worth 1000000000 QM's. I also heard QM called someone a spook but managed to explain it away, yet Westy was hobbled for making a tongue in cheek comment.
I also heard that you'll find QM never makes a real suggestion as to a solution, but runs around downvoting things which aren't even anything but news reports, like Obama's public address statements.
I also heard "Fuck QM" somewhere. Oh yea, earlier.
So I guess it all depends on what Dag feels like doing, which is whatever.
If dogs can just do whatever they want completely unpunished, well then what kind of world is this? I think I'll start a sift talk post about it later.
Don't patronize me.
I'm sure a lot of the people here who disagree with what's happening in the town hall meetings around the country are eager to voice their opinions about why we should keep discussions civil in that context. But it's just as important, maybe more so, to respect the people who's opinions you don't agree with.
Unhobble him. This is silly and lame.
Dag never wanted to be Siftler and I respect him tremendously for that, but the collective "reasoning" here was that siftquisitions were bad and too much drama. Well guess what, the drama didn't go away. Bring back siftquisitions. Hell, make a whole separate tab for them and let more than one run at a time. Let people hash out their shit and let the community decide. People who want to avoid "drama" can just avoid clicking that tab altogether. Otherwise all you have is people bitching in sift talk or in video posts, all of which dag has to decide for us. If you made a poll that said "remove dag as emperor and let the community have control again" I bet the first person to click yes would be dag.
Yes, I realize this doesn't address this particular post, sorry.
Also, fuck QM. He's a cock sucking racist.
Add me to the hobble list.
EDIT - and Jigga, if you can't handle what ultimately amounts to a harmless (though very juvenile) joke, then you know what? Maybe the internet isn't for you.
I can handle it, and I let you know how I feel. Amazingly I was able to do it without 'juvenile' bullshit. You seem to suggest that you dont like drama but here you are, calling me out. I feel like there is a problem when people on the site are treated differently for what basically amounts to the same offense. You think differently? Let's talk about it.
edit .. first off, QM doesn't need you to defend him.
secondly there is something wrong with you if you don't understand the difference between a harmless jibe between men and racists jokes. Trying to pretend that you're defending gay rights now is just sad.
Soooo...instead you made a homophobic joke at my expense? And somehow that's a lesser offense because you're belittling a different group of people? I think you're confused.
Honestly I'm just sick of people picking on QM just because he's an easy target. Why is it ok to attack him but not ok to make a racist joke? Isn't the 'sucking dicks' comment playing off of a negative connotation of homosexuals?
Is that what this post is about? Well you know, you're right -- it sucks when someone gets picked on. But what are you going to do? Make a sift talk post every time someone is mean to QM?
Yeah I probably should have thought the original post through a little more but meh. I've been lurching around here since around 2006 - despite what my siftpocalypse join date says - and i've seen a lot of conservative bashing. So to answer your question, no I'm not making a sift talk post every time someone picks on QM. But I think the real problem here is everyone getting so riled up about me mentioning it at all. We agree it's a problem, correct?
No. We don't agree. This post is fucking stupid. You can't make up your mind what you are bitching about. Now it's because you're upset over conservative bashing? Who gives a shit. Next time get a coherent thought. Meanwhile, budzos is hobbled over nothing.
"What can't I say in a comment?
We love a good fiery comment thread, but sometimes they go overboard. Please avoid personal attacks. It's okay to criticize ideas but refrain personal insults. Please avoid blatantly racist speech, threats, or other verbal abuse. This goes for comments in public arenas as well as private member profile comments. If a comment is bad enough it will probably be deleted due to negative feedback. If these types of comments are regular occurrences, we will probably ask you to leave the community."
What qualifies as a 'regular occurrence?' 3 posts on the same sift talk?
Or is this youtube?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what I'm talking about, I dont understand why you're getting so angry. You're the one throwning insults around, gay bashing, and giving me a piece of your mind. I just want to talk, really.
>> ^burdturgler
EDIT
And if so what would those rights be? Calling people cocksuckers?
Last I saw budzos had a remote up his arse.
Comparing 'I hear you suck dick' to 'black people are monkeys' is pretty stupid.
>> ^EndAll:
I don't think we should allow individuals to base a hobbling off their own subjective interpretations of what is offensive. The rules should be redefined to not allow any gray areas. We need precise limitations so that we don't end up squabbling over the differences like this.
That's why we had Siftquisitions.
I didnt change my mind, they were just various points that came up during discussion. Also, does saying "it should be frowned upon" equate to "I think he should be hobbled?"
EDIT
I'm still trying to understand what you're saying.
It's NOT ok to attack a group of people like blacks - Check
It IS ok to make a personal attack against someone - ..check?
Hobbling should not be a catch-all for any "sift-crime".
Why is it pretty stupid? Why are they dissimilar? If anything I think what Westy said was a lesser offense since it didnt target a specific person.
I didnt change my mind, they were just various points that came up during discussion. Also, does saying "it should be frowned upon" equate to "I think he should be hobbled?"
Title of this post:
"If westy gets hobbled ....."
Doesn't that mean if westy gets hobbled shouldn't budzos too? Semantic games now?
I'm not going to argue about westy's post. That shit has been hashed out and resolved. But you're logic on how budzos' comment is "worse" is wrong.
By your standards I could say: "Niggers are nothing but a drain on society." because I'm not attacking a specific person. That would be OK compared to "That nigger is lazy!"
If you want to go that route, budzos never said that all gays suck dick .. just QM.
I'm a member of this community too, and I dont deserve to be talked to that way.
Or, as I said before, Is this youtube?
It's too bad we cant finish our discussion. I'm still eager to hear why in your mind personal attacks are justifiable.
Also experience points.
First to get over 9000!!! becomes ruler of Videosift
Why once I even called blankfist a pigfucker.
Jesus didn't strike me dead for it, so obviously it was okay with him.
Jigga, why are you more of a tightass than Jesus?
Maybe this would make sense if you were putting forth the argument that it's demeaning to gays, since the premise of the insult is that there's something wrong with QM's promiscuous cocksucking habits.
Personally, I don't see any problem with QM sucking any consenting dicks he can get his mouth around. It's his life, and I don't think we're in any position to judge him so long as he's not hurting anyone (if he's clumsy with his teeth though, that changes things entirely).
Let it go.
PS: Don't be too down on schoolyard insults, they're often far more effective than eloquent soliloquies for getting your point across in informal settings.
Why do you hate the letter M so much! Fk you, M!"
I also heard that Budzos is worth 1000000000 QM's.
Is this more Ca$h for Clunker$ propaganda?
I also heard QM called someone a spook but managed to explain it away, yet Westy was hobbled for making a tongue in cheek comment.
QM cut-n-pasted a quote from a popular movie, in response to an individual who was going out of his way to act like a butthole. End of story.
I also heard that you'll find QM never makes a real suggestion as to a solution, but runs around downvoting things which aren't even anything but news reports, like Obama's public address statements.
Well, while we're all here, I'm curious as to why you have nothing better to do but downvote my comments, VL--not sifts, but comments--on my own little nook that I force no one to read. I'm just kidding, I know why. You're on a crusade.
I gots plenty of 'open-ended' solutions tailored for anyone, and no one to listen. I admit it gets rather tedious, even to type it: 99 out of 100 times, don't trust the government to solve your problems, take responsibility, read history, let the peeps who make the $$$ keep most of it, read, America First. But they'll be none of that, eh? Because the world is an UNJUST place and someone's gotta DO something! As the Africans say, 'A fool tests the water with both feet'. Maybe you shouldn't pour that gasoline on the fire, even though it qualifies as TAKING IMMEDIATE ACTION.
I also heard "Fuck QM" somewhere. Oh yea, earlier.
Take that, M! And no, I don't hate you, VL. Never have. You go on doing what you feel is right, even if it's left.
Don't know budzos. Had nothing to do with hobbling him. He got angry, which happens. Or he's one of these paid shills for the insurance companies, sent to disrupt VS town meetings.
Jigga J. is one of my most loyal...opponents. He doesn't like what I have to say, yet here he is. If you can't respect me or my foolishness, don't diss him for being tolerant. The only mistake he made in opening the door to this inquiry is now everyone has to suffer more blankfist comments.
Personally, I agree with GWIZ... maybe a card system should be implemented?
EDIT: And in my opinion, I really don't care for the statement, but I don't want to have someone be able to just hobble him. What if someone gets a certain number of downvotes, they get a warning? And after that, they get hobbled? I dont know, has that already been tried?
Drama is inevitable not because of this site or siftquisitions but because of human nature. You're not going to have a large community where everyone agrees and no rules are broken. Or where everyone even agrees on the rules. Any of the other larger community sites have moderator teams. Dag's genius was to create a site where the community had control. There were no moderators here. There was just us. But VS rejected it and decided on 'one moderator to rule them all and in the darkness ban them'. The only thing that changed was dag got all the shit dumped in his lap and now everyone can bitch or agree with him on however anything is decided. Sucks don't it?
Since this post has essentially become a complete free-for-all, I'm going to respond to this here even though it's pretty much off-topic at this point. I agree that drama is essentially human nature, but not necessarily in the way that it has manifested itself here -- in most online communities, if one member has a problem with another, they will hash it out between themselves. If it's something really serious, such as a truly offensive racial slur or the like, then the offended party might go to a moderator. Here, on the other hand, if someone is even moderately offended by another member, the immediate inclination seems to be to go to sift talk and to share a private dispute with the entire community. That's the difference.
From the Abuse Guidelines in the FAQ
"Harassment or personal attacks in any form (comment, ST post, blog, submitted video, etc.) are forbidden"
The problem is the rules apply to some people but not others because people accept attacking sifters like QM as commonplace. This sift talk is a perfect example of personal attacks run amok. Instead of having a decent discussion, people are shitting in their hands and flinging it at each other. I've said enough.
Either the rule needs to be updated, done away with, or exchanged for
1. My comment was in support of Throbbin's point to QM that the onus of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. I was making it in an offensively humorous way, which is a trademark of my persona here. The need to explain this is sad. To say I am making an attack on homosexuals is fucking ridiculous.
2. My comment is only a personal attack if you are homophobic or think there is something wrong with sucking dick left and right. Otherwise see above about scathing humor.
3. Take a look at my unsifted videos. I posted something to the gay channel yesterday.
And finally, if you look at section 30 (Hobbling) of the FAQ it says (summarizing) that hobbling is for members who are abusing their star priveleges to the detriment of the site or community. Making a single inappropriate comment does not fall under this heading.
Furthermore, section 32 states that a comment found particularly offensive by enough members of the community will be deleted. Nowhere does it state this earns an instahobble.
EXCESSIVE FORCE!
EXCESSIVE FORCE!
I DEMAND RESTITUTION!
Suggesting I dont know the difference between the two is just a shoddy attempt to discredit me. Of course there is a difference, but we dont even list racism under the abuse guidelines here. We do however have a listing for personal attacks under abuse guidelines.
And burd, I want you to look carefully at all of my posts here. Not one of them includes a personal attack. I'm not even going to bother to count your infringements, and I dont particularly care. It's just a shame we couldn't have a better conversation.
Since this post has essentially become a complete free-for-all, I'm going to respond to this here even though it's pretty much off-topic at this point. I agree that drama is essentially human nature, but not necessarily in the way that it has manifested itself here -- in most online communities, if one member has a problem with another, they will hash it out between themselves. If it's something really serious, such as a truly offensive racial slur or the like, then the offended party might go to a moderator. Here, on the other hand, if someone is even moderately offended by another member, the immediate inclination seems to be to go to sift talk and to share a private dispute with the entire community. That's the difference.
I think in most online communities you know your comments are being monitored by moderators or subject to being reported to a moderator, usually via a handy button button to do just that. That does modulate a lot of what people say. Here, there are zero moderators. So people in general speak freely, like adults, which I think was the point. It was supposed to cultivate a mature community that would moderate itself and people who were offensive would find themselves banned or shunned into leaving or shutting the fuck up. For the most part it's worked really well. But there are going to be times when people disagree and what you may think is moderately offensive might have someone else totally pissed off. There are no moderators to report to, and since we have no siftquisitions, it comes to sift talk. There were frivolous siftquisitions but there's plenty of times people hit a "report to moderator" button on other sites that weren't right either. I guess I'm just saying that the reason people do this shit here is because we're supposed to be this community that moderates itself and so that means the community gets to see (and resolve) all the shit that moderators have to put up with. I don't think there's any more drama here than anywhere else, ours is just in the open.
I believe I made a distinction between the two above when i said "I'm not saying that either is ok, just that i personally feel that one is worse than the other in this community situation."
Suggesting I dont know the difference between the two is just a shoddy attempt to discredit me. Of course there is a difference, but we dont even list racism under the abuse guidelines here. We do however have a listing for personal attacks under abuse guidelines.
And burd, I want you to look carefully at all of my posts here. Not one of them includes a personal attack. I'm not even going to bother to count your infringements, and I dont particularly care. It's just a shame we couldn't have a better conversation.
You made a distinction when you titled this post. Westy was hobbled for racist remarks which you call a "joke". You don't get it.
As far as racism not being addressed in the FAQ: "... Please avoid blatantly racist speech ..."
(actually had something constructive to say here, but after re-reading the thread I think enough certain aspects of this have been discussed)
We have not made a distinction in the rules on the sift. My question is, if Westy gets hobbled for an unspecified amount of time, why should you get away with half of the things you said to me in this sift talk?
^sort of like the original question except now I have a more blatant offender (you burd) to use as an example.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT!?
Yeah and it also says, again, "Please avoid personal attacks. It's okay to criticize ideas but refrain personal insults. Please avoid blatantly racist speech, threats, or other verbal abuse."
We have not made a distinction in the rules on the sift. My question is, if Westy gets hobbled for an unspecified amount of time, why should you get away with half of the things you said to me in this sift talk?
^sort of like the original question except now I have a more blatant offender (you burd) to use as an example.
I guess you don't want to address that whole thing about how you think racism is a joke?
Westy was hobbled for a very specific amount of time btw.
(30 days since you obviously don't like reading)
Secretly I agree with you, we should siftquisition and ban me not just from VS but the internet altogether.
Unfortunately we're stuck on your stupid quasi-siftquisition of budzos.
Maybe start a new post about me now?
Sarzy said it best:
"Jigga, if you can't handle what ultimately amounts to a harmless (though very juvenile) joke, then you know what? Maybe the internet isn't for you."
Can't you all just get along?
>> ^budzos:
If someone doesn't unhobble me soon I am going to shove my remote up my ass and/or whack myself in the head with a shoe!
IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT!?
QM, I'm sorry sorry about these guys, please continue to suck left and right dickage
...Yawn...
If you don't like what's on TV, change the channel. You don't have to listen to it. This whining "but, but, but, he did this and didn't get punished, while he did this and did" bullshit has got to go. Unhobble everyone and let them be who they are. You only provoke and validate their actions by calling attention to it. People inherently WANT to belong to a group/tribe/etc. If they get ostracized, they will eventually conform, leave or wallow in isolation.
You've got to be SMARTER THAN YOUR OWN EGO. Let the drama go. I learned my own lesson with BillO. Now I just laugh at all of you.
I wouldn't mind if someone suggested I eat pussy left and right. In fact, I would be proud that my reputation had preceded me so. We should all calm down. Accusation of homosexual behaviour (which isn't inherently bad) is nothing compared to blatant racism (particularly if I am coming to understand westy ain't so bad).
QM picks left-handed ducks. Pass it on!
I resent that remark!
Maybe we're not so different after all. I guess I'm on a crusade to stop his crusade. But why is he on a crusade to say things that go without saying? Why am I? Ahhhh!!!
I think I just increased my internet efficiency while blowing my own mind.
Now for QM to do his part
*unzips*
just kidding.
im not wearing pants.
but I love niggers!
my IE8 browser is freezing hard loading this page. and now VS just crashed or something. "The service is not available. Please try again later." I didn't do it. But I did try again and it worked after a few minutes.
"JiggaJonson", have you seen this site?
http://jiggaboojones.com/
http://www.likeaniggasaydo.com/
About JiggabooJones, the #1 Nigga in America!
*zips down*
*plays Flight of the Valkyries*
But let me just add that hobbling was never meant as a punishment and should not be used as such, including the westy affair and this here debacle concerning budzos. Going with the judicial analogies, hobbling is more akin to holding a suspect in custody.
Westy - racist, talked his way out of it and got a rediculous punishment for the wrong crime.
QM - racist, talked his way completely out of it cos no one wants to be too harsh on the black sheep.
(yes i know and pointed out it was a film quote from QM, but as i said on the westy debacle - it doesn't matter how you mean something to be taken, it's how that something is taken)
budzos - says that he HEARD that someone sucked dick left and right, WHICH MAY BE TRUE, and was CLEARLY sardonic anyway, and he's currently being pseudo-sifto-quisitioned.
What the fuck are we coming to? We can't see how a clearly racist comment is racist, and we can't see how a clearly sardonic comment was sardonic?
Budzos just fucking call "irony" mate, what you meant was he DOESN'T suck cock left and right. Apparently it works for everyone on this site. SEE THE IRONY GUYS? FUNNY RIGHT?
I also really hate to say this, but it's the guy currently being deployed to Afghanistan who jumped the gun and used too much force when nobody was even asking him to. Nothing personal MGR, just callin' it how I see it. Remember this: "discretion is the better part of valor".
A 90% probability is not 100%.
Enjoy your AIDS.