gorillaman
Member Profile
Bio:
I am a human being and humanity is the shining pinnacle of the universe. My word is truth and my touch shakes the stars.
Member Since: 2006-09-20
Favorite Sift: Monkey Learns to Move Robotic Arm Using Only It's Brain
Favorite Tags: british, japan, top gear, bill bailey, david mitchell, shatner, goes horribly wrong
Last Power Points used: never • Available: now
Max Power Points: 1
Favorite Sift: Monkey Learns to Move Robotic Arm Using Only It's Brain
Favorite Tags: british, japan, top gear, bill bailey, david mitchell, shatner, goes horribly wrong
Last Power Points used: never • Available: now
Max Power Points: 1
Comments
Subscribe
Military Videos Submitted by gorillamanNavigation
- profile
- unsifted videos (2)
- personal queue videos (4)
- sifted videos (76)
- promoted published vids
- promoted queued vids
- promoted Sift Talk posts
- promoted blog posts
- blog entries (0)
- Sift Talk posts
- discarded posts
- dead/deadpool videos (1)
- my playlist bookmarks
- my post bookmarks
- playlists bookmarked by others
- posts bookmarked by others
- voted up
- voted down
- playlists
Member Stats
Member's Highest Rated Videos
http://www.videosift.com/video/Billy-Joel-Piano-Man
to restore balance in the siftiverse
(this is the correct video incidentally!
This way no bad feeling about my star point awarded for a wrong fix.
Cheers.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
Bullshit. Not fixed.
*discuss
I have to admit, I'm enjoying this discussion. But I'm currently stuck at exactly how you determine who to cheer on during a contest before it is complete?
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
You have not understood me.
Let 'most skilled' or 'most competent' mean 'most capable at the task to be tested'. This can include such things as determination, strategy, training discipline, as well as raw talent and mechanical proficiency.
It is possible for a lesser-skilled competitor to triumph, in a flawed test.
It is possible to celebrate an undeserved victory, but one should not.
In reply to this comment by Lolthien
As far as why would I bother supporting a 'lesser skilled' competitor, well, honestly, I don't mind losing. The one who wants it the most and works the hardest for it, the one who does not quit despite the odds or what those who live and die by them say, the one who continues, perseveres, and finishes regardless of his place is the one that deserves my admiration.
The one who had been told he was going to win, knew he was going to win, and felt there was no chance of losing has risked nothing, and thereby gained very very little with his accomplishment.
That is why I would root for the underdog, or less skilled, in a test of skill. I don't cheer the sun when it rises every day because it is a foregone conclusion and therefore, it is an event of little (though not empty of) excitement.
Now if a guy were to say that through force of will he could keep the sun from rising for a few seconds. Well, despite my better judgment, I'd have to root for him just a little.
I would hope that explains my point of view. And I would hope you'd be less likely to label those who's experience differs from yours as 'insane' in the future. But again, to each his own.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
I don't know why you would want a test of skill to be won by anyone but the most skilled. Insanity, presumably.
In reply to this comment by Lolthien:
To only support the most 'competent' contender is to only root for the favored athlete in any competition.
And that my friend, is decidedly un-American ;-)
Rooting for the underdog, ESPECIALLY from your own country, is a well practiced tradition than pays off so much more rarely than pulling for the dominant player, but when it pays off, it pays off big.
Talent gets you to the Olympics, but in a close race, heart wins it everytime.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
800 years ago when this pope got elected people noticed he was slightly creepy looking, which was slightly amusing for about three seconds.
Your video is entirely without merit - it isn't clever, funny, meaningful, relevant, interesting or even well executed; hence downvote.
In reply to this comment by mas8705:
Why so serious? This video wasn't suppose to have a point other than how the pope and sidious look the same...
Interesting, I do see some likness.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
Do you know your avatar makes you look exactly like John Sessions?
I'm thinking Vic Reeves, definitely
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
Utterly retarded and pointless video.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
Do you know your avatar makes you look exactly like John Sessions?
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
Your avatar is glorious beyond words.
When there is a way to prove the intent of the man upon delivery, then we can talk about enforcing a man's wishes (including allowing the man to abdicate parental responsibility and rights) until then, in the interests of the child, we must have things be "unfair"
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
We're not adjudicating in the interests of the man; we're adjudicating in the interests of correct moral principle.
Whether a child is disadvantaged by the lack of a father is not the issue; there is no law or, more importantly, moral imperative against single parenting. Neither is the man the issue, he had nothing to do with the decision to have a child.
This needs to be elaborated upon. Having sex with or without birth control is not in itself a procreative act. There is always the option of abortion in the case of pregnancy, even in uncivilised (anti-abortion) or poor countries one could always 'leave the baby out for the wolves' or similar. Therefore, a conscious or unconscious decision not to abort, i.e. the deliberate decision to have a child, is an integral part of every birth. Unintuitively, simply conceiving does not make one a parent.
I agree with you when you say that a person who takes action leading to the birth of a child is responsible for that child. In the example we are discussing, only the mother has taken that action, only she has refused an abortion, therefore only she is responsible for the child. Consider that if both the mother and father agreed to abort, neither of them would be responsible for the support of a child that wouldn't exist. The father's actions are the same in both cases, consequently his responsibilities must be the same.
It is not acceptable to force the burden of a child on someone who hasn't chosen it. Far better to force an abortion on the woman if that were the only other option, but I'm suggesting it isn't. Where a person chooses to have a child without a partner that is their decision and their responsibility alone. If they can't afford to support that child as they would like, that is unfortunate. You can only legislate so far against bad decision-making.
In reply to this comment by smibbo:
because then you are adjudicating in the interest of the man and THE CHILD suffers. your suggestion puts it as if its "person who opposes abortion" versus "person who doesn't oppose abortion" or mother versus father etc but its not about them, its about the child.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
I don't see why men who don't want children shouldn't say exactly that, smibbo. If birth control fails, have an abortion. If the woman refuses an abortion, the man should be able to make a legal declaration refusing parental rights and responsibilities to the child.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
I don't see why men who don't want children shouldn't say exactly that, smibbo. If birth control fails, have an abortion. If the woman refuses an abortion, the man should be able to make a legal declaration refusing parental rights and responsibilities to the child.
In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
No.