Oh boy the debates are on the debates are on

+1

one issue with this site: HE IS NOT A BLACK MAN! HE IS A BIRACIAL MAN! SO THE BLACKS WONT TAKE OVER DUHHH!

+19

You're fiesty and I like that.

+12

Im afraid if he wins, we'll all become long legged.

+14

He's not even from the HOOOOD!

+6

lock up your white daughters!

+6

why cant mccain stop blinking omg he must be generating 50 knot winds with his eyelids

-10 [show comment][hide comment]

My Audio: I'm afraid if he wins- I'm afraid if he wins- I'm afraid if he wins-

+9

the poke-hood

+1

pfft, they've already taken over, although, black girls cant stay away from me tho, so it's all good.

-10 [show comment][hide comment]

IM WHITE AND IM EVIL

+7

http://rednecksareretarded.ytmnd.com/

your blue stain is showing

That's not even the best part of the clip- one guy says Obama "must be a terrorist", because "if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck!". He's giving ducks a bad name, and I can't stand for that sh*t.

+15

hes more white and arab than black, and his name is 100% arabic, not african

-7

I'm afraid if he wins the small business I work for will shut down due to added taxes, thus putting me out of work. I am also afraid is Democrats controlling the House, Senate, and Executive Branch. Are those ligitimate concerns? And I'm not even a plumber!

-6

im not voting for obama because hes a god damned n*gg*r but im not a racist

+4

¶¶¶______¶¶__¶¶¶¶¶¶____¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶____¶¶¶¶¶¶¶___¶¶¶¶¶¶__¶¶¶¶¶____¶¶¶____ ¶¶_¶_____¶¶____¶¶____¶¶__________¶¶__________¶¶______¶¶___¶___¶¶¶____ ¶¶__¶____¶¶____¶¶____¶¶__________¶¶__________¶¶______¶¶___¶___¶¶¶____ ¶¶___¶___¶¶____¶¶____¶¶____¶¶¶¶__¶¶____¶¶¶¶__¶¶¶¶¶___¶¶¶¶¶____¶¶¶____ ¶¶____¶__¶¶____¶¶____¶¶______¶¶__¶¶______¶¶__¶¶______¶¶_¶_____¶¶¶____ ¶¶_____¶_¶¶____¶¶_____¶¶_____¶¶___¶¶_____¶¶__¶¶______¶¶__¶___________ ¶¶______¶¶¶__¶¶¶¶¶¶_____¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_____¶¶¶¶¶¶¶__¶¶¶¶¶¶__¶¶___¶___¶¶¶____

+7

Hes got the best from both. Its funny how this issue is more important than medical care for most.

-1

She's Right, if Barack Obama wins, the black will take over, the black called Obama.

The average sub-Saharan originating black's IQ (measured everywhere in the world including America and Europe) is around 75 (legally retarded) to 82 (legally stupid). Whites measure in at around 100-108

I'm afraid if he wins the NWO will take over. www.obamamovie.tk

but hes not even from da hood

-6 [show comment][hide comment]

what about the A Rabs?

That is a rip from Al-Jazeera...

-1

might the bi-racials take over? those bi-racials are one mean bunch

+14

Too late: - Tiger Woods - Derek Jeter - Halle Berry GREY POWER!

+8

Damn Halfricans

+10

you're all confused. She means the darkness will consume us all. The sun will never show, which will actually me advantageous for moonman, who will reign supreme

+2

Moonman is not the actual moon, his dad is.

HE'S A LONG-LEGGED MACK DADDY.

+11

he's BY RATIO

+14

He's a nappy headed ho.

+9

this is quickly becoming HTPAT but worse because its uncited

-14 [show comment][hide comment]

Is it...

+5

source is here btw, say no to HTPAT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0

-4 [show comment][hide comment]

When this site takes over the top viewed for six months, then you can make that claim.

+12

HTPATism has nothing to do with view count, it's stealing the sound from somewhere else, doing nothing with it, and slapping it on ytmnd. based on what you said, everyone who downvotes HTPAT would just be jealous haters because of the high view count and have no substantial reason to dislike it

-17 [show comment][hide comment]

What are you talking about? He did do something with it. He didn't post the whole interview. He took one line and made it a classic-style site. As far as your second comment goes, that is one gigantic logic leap you took there. Your statement insinuates that, not mine. God, what account did you use to post under because I bet you were just as big of a retard under that name, too.

+11

meaning that he clipped out a portion of audio. oh wait...HTPAT clipped a portion of a radio show. at least HTPAT generated an original gif. my second comment, rather than address it substantially, you just dismiss it as a "giant leap" and resort to name-calling. you made the gigantic logic leap when you implied that no comparison whatsoever to HTPAT can be made until a site "takes over the top viewed for six months". its one thing for you to get overly obsessed with ytmnd like this, but be smarter about it

-16 [show comment][hide comment]

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the ytmnd debate 2008.

+18

HTPAT is know for being a stolen radio skit that went viral and ruled the top viewed for months. When someone claims a site is another "HTPAT", that is what they are talking about. When people claim "youtube" they mean the person found something funny on YouTube and posted it here, usually unedited. This is edited, sort of like the line "you're the man now, dog" or "F*ck me gently with a chainsaw".

+9

To my right is hanktherapper. A user on ytmnd since 2006. Also, featured. To my left is...uhhh....some guy with a couple of Moon Man sites...uhhhh....

+15

and id just like to thank you for moderating, ryanmontana, and id like to thank max for creating this site, and id especially like to thank the audience out there and thank thank thank thank thank [begins blinking uncontrollably]

-17 [show comment][hide comment]

fail on the ad hominem btw

-17 [show comment][hide comment]

hank you missed the point, i don't think you were paying attention. understandable, as ryan points out you have spend your years on here instead of furthering your education. HTPAT was an edited clip (the sound byte was cropped and nothing else) from a radio show and yes it went viral, but most of the criticisms are about its style not its popularity. now are you trying to make a real point or attempting to troll by pretending to be stupid?

-17 [show comment][hide comment]

Your use of the word "quickly" is faulty, because this can't quickly being an unedited "stolen" site. Either it is or it isn't. Your final statement is again a projection about you, because you're the f*cking moron who has commented on this site more than anybody.

+3

tsk tsk you've degenerated to wholly semantic arguments and underhanded personal attacks. i was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you're only pretending to believe the things you say for the sake of entertainment. even if that's true, i think you can do better than this

-8

I like how nastybutler thinks he's the first person to try to change ytmnd via the comments section on some site.

+9

No, nastybutler, you are wrong. You're just another newbie who thinks you know everything, but doesn't. It is a full blown radio skit. Sure it was edited down from a four hour show, but it's a full skit. The criticisms is how it went viral. That's why it went from a 4.5 after it's first month to a 3.29. People were sick of it on the front page and reacted to it. That is why when people claim a site to be HTPAT it's after it's become heavily linked on digg and every where else.

+3

every tiny little victory can change one person's mind

-8

more anger from hanky. "it was edited" you said it yourself, so how is going from 4 hours to 5 minutes different than going from 4 minutes to 5 seconds? its the same concept. (notice that i wasnt perfectly accurate with the numbers. you can divert to arguing about that and save face!)

-9

If people didn't like its "stolen" style then it wouldn't have the high rating when it was still new. And yes, I'll call you names. You're a f*cking moron who has been here for "days" and thinks you know everything. You don't. You are wrong about this. You can claim you aren't all you want, but you are. I know more about this than you. If you don't believe me, then read through the dozens of comment page on that site and read how people reacted and why they changed their vote.

+3

$100 says no one's mind gets changed and both you guys waste time and energy bickering for at least the next half hour. I'm going to do something constructive (read: get drunk). Have a good night.

-3

^hank is as close as anyone ever comes to admitting they are wrong on the internet. "stfu im ryte ur rong n00b go look @ dis 2 proov it"

-8

clive i think we just said the same thing. meh i was entertained and i think i will also go be "productive" while hank stays up all night raging over a newbie :D

-8

I don't know, NB. What's the difference between HTPAT and taking one line from Finding Forrester and turning it into a website? If you don't know the answer to that, then you don't know the true meaning of this place. You can not like this if you want, but claiming it as another HTPAT is factually incorrect, now matter how you try claiming it.

+6

There is a clear difference between cropping out a single line to make a "classic style" site and uploading something in its entirety like HTPAT.

+6

The original HTPAT was a joke. The original interview here wasn't. Taking the line out of context makes a joke, much like the original YTMND or more recently the I LOVE ORTEGA'S TACO SAUCE site. In addition, this is not viral which is where much of HTPAT's criticism originates from. In conclusion, nastybutler < hank. Also, nb is a f*g.

+5

HTPAT is fine as long as Longmont Potion Castle is involved

+2

Stop fighting, guyz. he'll think that you guys are altz in disguise. HE'S ALTMAAAaAAAN!

-3

comment

joe the plumber

+2

soapalope with the obscure reference to one of my sites...heh. Also, I'm not convinced that nastybutler is new here. New acc't, sure, but few "newbies" make a CRAPTMND site in their first week. That said, he's certainly proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that he doesn't understand the first thing about the concept of "context." And as one of the few users here who has actually changed people's minds by arguing on the internet (or at least driven them insane enough to leave), I win.

+2

Vote Hanktherapper in 08!

nastybutler joined 10-04-08,end of discussion.

-1

"nastybutler joined 10-04-08,end of discussion." As gr33nscr33n said new account maybe, but not necessarily new person.

nastybutler is an alt, or at least he claimed to be when he was commenting one of my sites

lol by being a man in his mid-thirties with no college education, a dead-end job, and nothing of self-worth besides his SUV and his standing on a fringe internet site that he spent countless hours of his wasted life to earn, you lose. spoiler: you will finish living out your own personal version of death of a salesman (except more lonely) and then someone will make a sh*tty memorial ytmnd for you. [-]'d for truth :D

-6

Wow, you actually spent time looking up out-dated information about me in a some sort of plan to "own" me. Which you only did because you realized everything you said claim was wrong and you need some desperate attempt to save face. You sure showed us who the loser really is.

+6

__¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶____¶¶¶_____¶¶¶___¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_______ _¶¶¶__________¶¶¶_____¶¶¶___¶¶¶______¶¶¶____________¶¶¶¶________ ¶¶¶___________¶¶¶_____¶¶¶___¶¶¶______¶¶¶___________¶¶¶¶_________ ¶¶¶___________¶¶¶_____¶¶¶___¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_____¶¶¶¶__________ ¶¶¶___________¶¶¶_____¶¶¶___¶¶¶______¶¶¶________¶¶¶¶¶___________ _¶¶¶___________¶¶___¶¶¶¶¶___¶¶¶______¶¶¶_______¶¶¶¶¶____________ __¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶______¶¶¶¶¶¶_¶¶¶__¶¶¶______¶¶¶______¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶_______

+20

Have you ever read Death of a Salesman nb? Without Willy's family the entire story loses its impact. A more lonely DOAS would not be DOAS at all.

+3

it's a tad out of date you say....late thirties then? doesn't help your case. as for looking you up it was casual amusement, though the result was more amusing than i hoped. you're capable of nothing but ad hominem attacks so i thought id try it, and boy are you living in a glass house! so wait...if you call me a loser for seeing your info, then aren't you a loser for taking the time to look up how long i've been here? explain that one to me if you can. man your logic gets worse as you get more desperate

-5

yes i have read it, it's quite an interesting work on the seething underbelly of the world of pantyhose salesmen :D. though for great works of postwar drama, long day's journey into night is far more interesting

-6

It takes .5 seconds to click your name to see how long you've been here. I've never sold a pair of pantyhose in my life. Whatever, you've hit rock bottom. You've pretty much shown everyone how utterly pathetic you really are. Here you are, the next day still trying to start sh*t up. Yet I'm the one trying to prove myself and have the empty life. I suggest you look up the word "projection" because everything you are accusing me of doing is what you're doing.

+5

it took 3.8 seconds to 'get to know you better' as well ;) just so you know, the character from death of a salesman sold pantyhose omgitsnotalwaysaboutyouyaknow and the rest of your post is name-calling without substance. i honestly don't blame you, after all you got the bulk of your education from the middle school lunchroom but it's your fault for squandering the years between then and now. as for "rock bottom", read up: i only get down to your level when you were already there :D

-4

Hmmm, now I can't wait to find out who nasty really is. Decent trolling, sh*tty moonman sites, pseudo-intellectual flaming, half-decent grasp of modern playwrights, and fewer spelling errors than the average halftard. I may enjoy this. So c'mon nasty, gimme yr best shot.

+2

Lol, gr33nscr33n, who doesn't enjoy a good troll. The only thing that would make this better is some classic korf insight.

+2

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! no actually i'm not anybody's alt, we could go back and forth about this until somehow max has to verify this via ips or whatever, but then again if you won't believe me why ask? i've lurked on ytmnd since '05 because the occasional well-done site is funny, but i never got into the user community because i expected...well, this. "WAT U SAY IZ RONG CUZ UR ACOUNT IZ N00" :rolleyes: internet cliques are all the same, but there are still good sites being made now and then

-2

oh and for the record i think all my sites are pure sh*t and damn proud of it. hadn't checked recent ytmnds in over a year, then i come back and see that making sh*tty sites is all the rage so i figured "what the hell?" and made my first account. someone promised cake....

-2

oh wait it was you

-2

Soooooo we're to believe that you lurked here for about three years only to start making sites and get into a two-day long flame war on after a week? That may be a new record for pointless web-based bullsh*t. But like I said before, welcome to the neighborhood.

+1

ps. the cake is a lie.

+1

like i said, why ask if you'll instantly disbelieve the answer? in fact this is the first user account i've made anywhere in quite a long time. i admit it was tempting when i first saw ytmnd to jump into an account and start making crappy sites but back then i was really impressed by the effort people put into their sites and i just didn't have the time to do that myself. let's face it the quality just isn't there anymore, half the sites are either about other users or a repeat of a repeat of a repeat

-2

so basically i'd never piss on the mona lisa, but a thousand idiots are looting the louvre anyway then i'll just help myself to some ancient sumerian art

-2

*if

-2

But Mona's got a hot ass. I'd totally hit it. By the way, I'm going to keep asking you if this is your first acc't because it seems to annoy you.

+1

*arf

+1

So much for no personnal attacks

that's cool it will be like our inside joke and nobody will get it and then when we cuddle we will laugh at how confused they were <3 oh and I JUST ACCIDENTALLY THE WHOLE COMMENT PAGE IS THIS BAD

-1

I'm bored already.

+1

I'm already bored of this site. Unless nastybutler is going to make thisn an everyday thing...

hmmm...i won't not make it an everyday thing?

-3

Shut the f*ck up, dude. You f*ckin' rule because you can point out a typo. Great job. I'm not even going to get into this petty bulsh----------zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

+1

i was correcting my own post because i left out a word :

-3

now i am correcting it again because my emoticon didn't show up. [colon followed by a backslash]

-3

i just reread that, thought you were referring to the *if...i understand you now but still don't see how you thought i was correcting a typo. you typed correctly and i wouldn't correct it if you made a mistake. i was just paraphrasing a lame simpsons joke. "homer you're not licking toads again are you?" "i'm not NOT licking toads..." or have i just fallen victim to an incredibly subtle troll?

-2

hey now

+1

Just as you all are winding down I suddenly have new energy: because I'm now at work and am getting paid to f*ck around on the internet, I reread this whole thread (well, it was better than The Da Vinci Code) and have decided that nasty missed the point of the argument right our of the gate.

1. The telemarketer site was lifted in its entirety and re-posted here. Hence the introduction by the DJs also heard laughing throughout the "skit." The site's author created no new context by merely reposting that already well-known prank call on this website.

+1

2. YTMND is not funnyjunk nor ebaumsworld nor collegehumor, etc and thus, nasty, people here didn't jump down your throat because you're a "n00b" but instead because you are misunderstanding what makes this place unique and not simply gifdump: recontextualizing found audio/visual/text/etc. If you've been here since 2005 then you've certainly seen this argument before. Granted, many users, even featured (and formerly featured) ones, still don't get it but...

+1

...what max did with the first site was not simply post a joke he'd heard somewhere else, or an email he got at work or from his Aunt Bubbe or whatever. He isolated a pop cultural moment *not meant to be funny* and recontextualized it in a way the writer/actor/director/etc could never have intended. In a spirit of Duchamp, Dada, the Situationists, Fluxus, and pretty much my entire graduating art school class, YTMND is about recontextualizing ideas, rather than merely repeating them.

+1

3. That said, 235,100 users can in fact be wrong. The worst of YTMND is when people call this place a "humor site," thus totally ignoring what made it different. Nowadays, the place is more a forum for people who know each other and make weird sh*t. I guess if you want every site to be MasterSitsu/syncan/fearcondom-ish jokes, then the place has run its course...

+1

...but if like me you first stuck around here because of users like adverb, inkdrinker, typogra, J-Man & Pianist, klasky and others who saw the gif/audio/text format as a medium rather than a limitation or a personal reposting blog, well, then the place is doing just fine, despite the loss of most of those early contributors. As far as original material goes, there's more being produced here now than ever before, I'd argue. Just not as many LOL COBSY POKAMON WIT THRILER SOGN!!! jokes, thank god.

+1

And if you really want that cake, well, just post your mailing address and I'll make sure you get it. [insert esoteric emoticon here]

+1

guys this guy is fourest i saw him on spy.

hmm not winding down, but i have spent the day arguing with embassy folks about my visa app which certainly takes the wind out of any potential flaming. nonetheless you make excellent points, damn you. still, on #1 i must point out that its "entirety" would be an entire radio broadcast - we're talking about a 5 second clip versus a 2 minute clip. neither was truly taken "out of context" as hank tried to argue but if i didn't change people's minds by arguing on the internet

-2

then i at least driven them insane enough to leave, I win teehee. anywho, maybe i didn't give "today's ytmnd" a fair shake and i'll keep my eyes open for the good'uns. the sites have certainly become much more esoteric OMGFUNNYWORD but it's still just as hilarious when someone takes too seriously "the true meaning of this place" when it's all they have in life. i guess that's part of its charm

-2

Still here. And yr still wrong about the context thing. Sorry. But in other news...damn my neck hurts!

+1

hmm i thought ytmnd was dead because the front page, thought id see if any comments updated. nope i'm not wrong about the context thing, you have to better than the "because i said so" defense. the context was an interview with a particularly idiotic american and it is presented as such

-2

You know, the only thing more annoying than the "because I said so" defense is the "I refuse to accept your logic despite your clearly demonstrated point" offense because now you're just being difficult. By definition the entire story about a McCain/Palin rally in a battleground state, with numerous clips of fervent, racist conservative and religious voters, a narrator, b-roll, etc is different, contextually speaking, than a single line cut from that story and paired with a still image.

+2

Like the site, hate the site, who cares. But if you disagree with what I just said, then I really am wasting my time, as then we're merely mired in a misunderstanding of what constitutes "context." And as much as I love wasting time, especially now that the site creator is broked, well, I don't enjoy bickering over semantics.

+1

Depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. We do not torture. And more of your favorite hits, all on one record! All by the original artists for only $9.99 (plus $3 shipping and handling) from K-Tel records and tapes. Call the number on your screen and ORDER NOW!

+1

You're being more difficult than I am, as with hank I simply respond in kind. You make good points about ytmnd as a whole and I acknowledged that, but you still haven't shown me how this is substantially different from HTPAT. Had you used the context of "I still disagree but I can see your side" instead of the more final and personal "'you're wrong" I might have acquiesced. If I'm making you so crazy that you quit as well, then I'll just take my empty victory and go while you appeal to popular support.

-2

Imagine if Max cribbed the entire scene from "Finding Forrester" where Forrester is encouraging Jamal to write (or type if you want to get technical) instead of posting the line "You're the man now, dog" where the line came from. NB doesn't get the difference. Which is why he fails and doesn't understand why. Eep².

+2

Like you said this is a shortened version of a popular youtube clip. HTPAT was a shortened version of a radio humor show. Both are popular ytmnds that people are enjoying in context, not because it's something original or recontextualized. I enjoyed the original youtube clip (even though al-Jazeera selectively chose which interviews to show) but seeing part of it again is just blah. It's not that a big deal, but if someone can demonstrate why I'm wrong without argumentum ad personam then I'm open to it.

-1

You've been told many times. At this point you need to sit down, get over your own stubbornness and literal thinking, and figure it out yourself. For starters, stop thinking of HTPAT as a small part of a radio show and think of it as an unedited radio skit. When you can realize that difference, then you might be able to figure it out.

+2

but it's not the entire show, radio broadcasts are several hours long and that was only a clip of it, just as this is a clip of an interview and shown in the same context. since you refer to the comments of HTPAT i read them, there is no legit complaint about the content that can't be applied here. the pot calling the kettle stubborn doesn't help when you keep coming back with faulty logic, but if you want to prove that you're the more open-minded then apologize for the ad hominem attacks and see my point

-3

Your point is the faulty one. It has been explained why many times by many different users. You don't understand the concept of re-contextualizing an idea. That's what this site does. It takes something that was not meant to be a joke and turns it into one. Where HTPAT was taking an entire radio bit (learn the difference between a bit and a show) where the idea is "Hey guys, I heard something funny on the internet or radio so I'm going to post it here in the same context you can find elsewhere."

+1

hey we're goin to the bar after the argument if anyone's down.

+3

You other flawed logic is that you thought HTPAT was hated because it was stolen. It wasn't. It was hated because it was on the #1 spot for so long. If it was around for a week then disappeared like most sites it would still have its 4.5 rating. People were not jealous because of it's view count. People were sick of seeing it. Sites were made about it. Max made a news post about it and the letter from Tom Mabe. If you have really been lurking here since 2005 you would have known that.

+1

I should add, there were people who hated HTPAT because it was stolen, including myself, but the majority of people didn't care.

you get funnier every time, it would actually make a decent ytmnd. i am convinced you're just trolling now because you contradict yourself so many ways. first comment: you are trying to describe HTPAT but it sounds like you're describing this site - something funny uploaded from the internet. second comment: you're saying that people hated HTPAT for its view count not because of content; then read the HTPAT comment page as you told me to. third comment: utter backpedaling, make up your mind man!

-1

Can't help you with the context. You will never get it. I was clarifying my statement so it didn't sound like I was making an absolute. There were people who hated it all along. They were in the minority. The majority didn't care. A good chunk of those people changed their vote when they became sick of seeing it. I was clearly talking about those users. Keep in mind this was 2 yrs ago when there were more people here. K. Thanks. Bye. Sorry Ryan.

+1

the context did not change, you can keep repeating it but when you don't argue with substance...hell you aren't capable if you haven't by now. i made it pretty clear, the context for both site and video is the same. people hating HTPAT and yelling at the site creator for its popularity and not for the content is just plain stupid

-2

you said you aren't one of those, you hated it from the beginning for its the stolen content, yet again you haven't substantiated how this is any different. but if you want to take the coward's way out and run away then i cannot help you

-2

nasty, at this point your logic would suggest that anything ever taken from the radio is the same as HTPAT merely because radio is on 24 hours a day and thus all context is the same. I realize that you will simply write this off as an ad hominem attack but, damn man, yr dense. Or you're simply enjoying the attention. So please excuse me while I go do something other than move piles of dirt from one side of the yard and back.

+1

can I get this in .pdf format, I need something to read ON THE TRAIN FROM LOS ANGELES TO SHAMBHALA

+4

nedm

+2

You went out of your way to forestall any discussion of defining "context" but now your point hinges on just that, otherwise you're just making the "because I said so" argument again and lack all substance. I've made my point pretty clear, this doesn't recontextualize anything it just reposts 5 seconds of somebody's youtube clip in the exact same context. Whether the image is one frame of that clip, two frames, or a few thousand is irrelevant.

-2

No, I don't consider your last post ad hominem because you aren't using the personal attack as a replacement for your lack of substance as hank did. (However attempting to preempt my saying so could be considered fallacious by occupatio. http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/rhetfig.html) Walk away if you are indeed closed to the opinions of others, have no substance on which to prove your own point, and have been made crazy enough to quit.

-2

Here you go! http://rapidshare.com/files/155573827/lolytmnd.pdf.html

Replying in a TLDR; comments section.

+1

nastybutler is a 4chan f*ggot. Just ignore him.

+2

Not closed minded. Just clearly debating with someone who is getting off on the argument rather than the logic.

+2

Now you're back to ad hominem or at least evasion. I made a point, no one has substantially addressed it other than mudslinging and "it's out of context because it's out of context". If your position is so weak that you can't offer logical support for it then perhaps you should either acknowledge that I'm right or take the less honorable path of just leaving. Either way you haven't shown me how HTPAT is simply stolen content but this somehow isn't when they are in fact both without change in context.

-2

Imagine all the people Living life in peace You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world wide web will be as one

go back to skeeting off to moon man.

-1

I just died in your arms tonight...... it must of been something you said.... I just DIED in your ARMS TONIIIGGGGHHHHHHHHHTT!!!!

+1

nasty, the fact is that you're arguing, essentially, that: despite a change in context, context remains the same. What can I say to that other than I'd prefer to spend my time talking to people who don't speak in rhetorical circles. If HTPAT were a site that took a single line or phrase from that skit and isolated it, you'd be correct. But it isnt. The whole skit (or interview), in its entirety, is not the same as an isolated sound bite. It just isn't. What else can one say to make that point with you?

+2

nastybutler, you've been wrong ever since your initial claim that "this is quickly becoming HTPAT...". It wasn't and it never will. So your whole argument has become null and void. You have lost this debate. I bid you farewell.

+1

Hey guys im here wheres the weed at

+1

Now you're back to the "because I said so" argument. There was no change in context, none whatsoever, except the site it's hosted on. This has been the central point this whole time and it's never been addressed. So simply saying "you're wrong" is meaningless. You went to great lengths to dodge any discussion of defining context, but you haven't offered an alternative to substantiate your side. I have. Assuming I am "getting off" on the argument is also incorrect and an ad hominem retreat as well.

-3

You seem to be implying that I am incapable of admitting I am wrong; this is not so. Rather I would welcome an explanation of why the complaints against HTPAT cannot be addressed here. However I do expect to see more than the typical internet arguments of attacking the person (ironic when you don't know the person) or basing a person's value on how long they've been in a particular internet social circle. Give me substance or leave it alone, but simply repeating invalid arguments does nothing.

-3

Last night I dreamed that Obama won the election...or was that the night before?

Here's why: Once the election is over, and the blacks haven't taken over, this will no longer be relevant. It will die slowly, and eventually be phased off the top-viewed. Ironically all your arguing has probably brought this site more views, giving it endless Most Viewed status. Way to go.

Let me know when you guys are dead so I can give myself a handjob.

+2

BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH

+3

This thread was funny to read. Nasty I can see where you are coming from, and you are somewhat right in the fact that this site uses a screenshot from the video, whereas Max's site uses a picture of Connery pointing that was unassociated with the audio clip. So in that sense there is no recontextualization. However, the audio here was taken from a video clip that was presumably made with serious intentions, and isolating this one line for "humorous" effect.

I watched the original. I saw this YTMND. Then I saw rule.ytmnd.com and came here to see what was going on. Now I see why. And all I have to say is... What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. And I don't like it any more than you men. (Source: "Captain, Road Prison 36," who was played by Strother Martin. In Cool Hand Luke.)

+1

What NB fails to realize is that when he cites the comment page of HTPAT, he is looking at replies. However, if he truly is from 2005, he would know that the reply feature had not been implemented yet. Thus the actual hate from the time being because of the view count and how the increased traffic caused max to have to pay big money to keep the site running. Anyways, i feel dirty for reading this whole argument.

+1

someone transcribe this and call the Smithsonian, this sh*t is better than the Lincoln-Douglass debates

+2

most replied to comment ever

About damn time there was a dramatic reading, not to imply that was the purpose of this but I laughed at the surprise. Needs more Loblaw. Improviser I am glad you see where I'm coming from even if you don't agree, but I think that the "point" of the al-Jazeera segment was the same as the "point" of this site. However I do see where you would differ. zabijam I was aware, timestamps are obvious - however most claim content, not popularity as the issue. If most were lying, then so be it.

-2

By the way I seem to remember some issue with the HTPAT creator offering to take it down if it was a money issue. I looked it up and those who didn't just tell him "F*CK URSELF N DIE KTHX" said it wasn't the popularity, it was lack of creativity.

-2

NB insists that we (meaning all of you) have failed to prove how this is not HTPAT-esque. What he, however, has failed to prove is how any other site is not HTPAT. How the original YTMND (from which the name is derived) is not HTPAT. How the greater span of YTMND, which at many points has become so much more than a tiled image and a looping quote, has not been various foxholes and bunkers on a FIELD of HTPAT-like images.

And since NB cherry picks what he reads and does not perceive, the main difference between HTPAT and this is that the man in question was putting on a performance. He knew what he was doing, and the performance itself (not the greater show) was what was cut. FURTHER, he was selling this particular content as it was, sans radio chatter, of course. So it's akin to posting pirated movie clips on YouTube. This is different. This is a slice. A moment of humor, which is funnier w/o the context of the Palin rally

-1

Holy comment reply chain Batman!

This might sound strange in a loooooooong comment chain, but even here your writing comes across as puffery. Aside from grandiose yet unsubstantiated statements, you use a common but flawed argument tactic: displacement of the burden of proof. You seem to think I need to prove how each of the >500,000 other sites is or is not stolen content, well that's just plain crazy. My comment stands on its own this was as unoriginal as HTPAT - which is the (presense of the) majority of complaints against it.

-1

You said "NB cherry picks what he reads and does not perceive" but I responded to every serious reply in kind, in fact the reaction to this thread length suggests that this is uncommon here. So, maybe you can explain better what you meant? I must caution you also against committing intentional fallacy: you claim to "know" what the HTPAT creator meant to do and what this site creator meant to do. Even if you could, your argument is still unfounded because AJE was putting on a performance in these interviews.

-1

I laughed out loud at jetz's random CUFFZ comment. It was the best case of being out of place for comedic value I'd seen in some time.

+2

Ironically, this is the HTPAT of comment threads.

+2

Pseudo-intellectualism is a defense mechanism for the inherently incorrect. Man, am I a hypocrite or what?

Aw thats all right you can tell yourself you're just "being ironic". It is hard for us inherently-incorrect people to know we are when dozens try yet no one is able to refute the claim substantially.

Your claim is just an opinion, I don't think there's anything we could say to substantially refute it.

heh i wont even touch the self-contradiction of your last two posts, even i know when im being trolled :D

darkness is spreading

+3

its true the darkness of biased journalism and selective sound bites is spreading

-9 [show comment][hide comment]

No, what we're seeing today is the death gurgle of the destructive chunk of our species in America. After the republicans die off and radical islamists all kill themselves, their tamer ancestors will have to endure a few eons of peace before all pinky fingers and toes devolve.

-3

didnt read the whole rant but youre right your country is quite chunky

-6

...Because a complete sentence spoken in a flat and serious tone is a selective soundbite, especially when one considers that it came from the same interview where she hysterically decries Obama for "not being Christian" and claims that "America is a Christian nation."

+4

@fredzy it wasn't a good response of mine, that one and only that one i will retract. however be aware you are committing the same fallacy seriously that i was using sarcastically: you generalize because it is easy to do so and because you want a scapegoat. back in 2003 it was like heresy for an american to criticize bush no matter how many civilians were killed by US troops, then a few years later US gas prices went up and everyone hated him...solution: blame 'those bush cronies' because NOW it matters

-2

sorry omni, i used the wrong term, 'selective interview' would have been better. al-jazeera clearly pulled a michael moore by interviewing hundreds (thousands?) of people until they got the response they wanted. they didn't exactly conduct a quantitative survey of a statistically representative cohort. i was amused when i saw it on youtube but you shouldn't draw any serious conclusions from it

-1

I disagree: You can walk into a bar in the right neighborhood in any state and interview 10-15 people to get this same response in less than a half-hour. Doesn't take Michael Moore tactics. Americans are racist and disturbingly quite proud of it. You give al jazeera too much credit if you assume they put in overtime to get someone saying this. Where I live in Brooklyn, they're worried some psycho will kill Obama. 3 or 4 trains stops away, there's a guy trying to figure out how to get away with it.

+2

I just don't think that this applies so generally, but all we have is anecdotal evidence on both sides. I've been nearly everywhere and the one thing I have to show for it is the realization that human nature is universal. The only differences between us are cultural, but you can't generalize Americans because they have no culture. That's not an insult, but 200 years is not enough time to develop "culture" as commonly defined. As for some psycho killing Obama, only if John Hinckley Jr. busts out. [rimshot]

-1

Black people can run faster because of that knee-ligament thing. I know this because Jesse Owens embarrassed Hitler that one time at Adolphe's place in Berlin when they were playing "olympics." But it's all OK because Asian people can't drive and blonds aren't good at math, so that evens everything out.

gr33nscr33n we're going to have to deport you back to Kenya

+1

i heard on the olympics the black skined people have genes that make them run quicker. i recon white people swim faster cause white skin weighs less than black skin

lol http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_can_white_swim_better_and_black_men_run_faster

So are my *ss cheeks

The BIRACIAL ARE GOING TO TAKE OVER!!!!! CAPZZZZ!!!!!

+2

There will riots no matter who wins, so I'm excited for that. Too bad I won't be in the country for it...

she has a beautiful voice

+7

You got this off of BET?

+3

my mom isn't voting for obama for the exact same reason. i told her that she was stupid.

(singsong) I'm-afraid-if-he-wins..... (demonically) THEBLACKWILLTAKEOVER

+1

lol and that watermark is from al jazeera btw. they usually run stories making americans looking like racist morons. sometimes i wish they were farther from the truth.

heheh I interpret this to mean that she thinks that if obama wins he will morph from a biracial to a black man

THROW HIS *SS OUT, HE'S A N*GG*R!

+5

im convinced too now grannie

+2

What if McCain wins? The left cheeks will take over.

+1

hahaha....people over 60.

+1

This would work better if it was a picture of Obama and McCain playing Othello.

*supremacist

Ohio is progressive.

Hey, that's not Spotz's grandmother

+1

You do know the only reason this is so popular is because your name is pink?

-5

Is it...

+3

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO

-1

The Boo Box

+2

nooo!!! not the boo box! nooo noooooooo!!!!

+3

That's what everyone says about my sites too.

Hi grandma!

Classictmnd

+1

needs more ostrich

+1

This sounds like a very good movie idea...

+2

scandalous

The blakkletickover.

+2

You're feisty and I like that! But...you're wrong!

+2

Someone's grandma saw Birth of a Nation one too many times.

+1

Me too

OH DEAR LORD I FEEL THE BLACK TAKING OVEERRRRR!! -MUST. STOP. CRAVING. CHICKEN! AND. BIKES!

+2

I'm black if he wins; the over afraid take will.

+1

I HOPE SO MOCCHACHINO BE LOOKIN SO FINE

This makes me sad for the States. If he wins... the black folks takes over? What kind of idiotic logic is that? Lady, grow up! The segregation of the black people is over! They're free to do whatever they want. Sure. Go ahead. Flame me. Call me "N*gg*-f*cker". I don't care. It just saddens me that some people don't have an ounce of intelligence to think straight. Will a black President really makes that much of a difference? There's a lot of black Presidents in Africa, yet, it sounds normal!

-3

Some crazy haired racist old lady really isn't that big of a deal. Some people actually believe in Scientology you know.

+2

yeah and creationism

+1

Solax, I hope yr not French. Or German. Or Dutch. Or Canadian. Or pretty much from anywhere. As much as I agree with your concern for American racism, especially in this election, we've hardly cornered the market on blind hatred. Ask the Japanese about how they'd feel about electing a Chinese Prime Minister.

+3

dear solax, have you taken a look at africa latley? yea, ya know there doing real good over there right?

She meant the black in him will take over, amiright?

+1

What, Obama's some kind of racial Jekyll and Hyde? When THE BLACK *does* take over, will he be all like, "I AM NOW A BLACK MYAAAN" and start race riots all up in my grill?

+7

Damn straight.

The weird thing is that she's talking about McCain.

+9

I just seriously Lol'd

+2

The Black will take over and blot out the sun creating a nuclear winter full of starvation, violence, suffering, and rap music.

+2

wu tang!

-1

Sounds like someone's being raped in the background.

That's her public voice talking. Deep down, she saw that Obama wasn't down-and-out and caught the vapors à la Biz Markie.

dumb c*nt

+1

3

but he's not a black myyyaaannn!!!!! or are you talking about mccain?

But he's NOT a BLACK MYAAAAN!

+1

He's not even from da hood!

And there will be no. more. bikes.

+2

SO WE GOTTA EAT THE BOCKS TO GET THE FIBRE?

+1

Old lady white supremacists are the best. By which, I mean, the worst.

where is this from?!?!? >_>

+1

ryanmontana`s home movies!

+2

ryan you better watch out because i have craploads of pictures from when we were 15. i just need a scanner.

+1

Have you ever opened two YTMNDs at the same time without knowing? Trippy stuff.

she will be dead in a week. whatever, who gives a sh*t.

+2

I lol'd for bit.

http://fpgcb1.ytmnd.com/

I'm afraid if he wiiins.....

This is from Al Jezeera network. The segment seemed to set up people to look bad.

How so, by playing clips of the most crazy people rather than the least? When do you see people on CNN say this? Never! It's not because it doesn't happen, it's because they choose not to air the worst of it and typically avoid "those people." Hell, even Fox News does it, if to a lesser extent. These are the crazy types, as in the ones in the clip. "Palin is filled with the holy light" came out, if memory serves.

Problem is, these are rare, crazy nutjobs and al Jazeera couches it in normality which can be misleading. I just don't get why this is a big issue now, Amurrikin-bashing was hashed out years ago and it's old news now. AJE isn't normally this overtly biased, even as a joke, but every news corp has its bad editors I guess. Then again back in Oct. 2001 there were American senators saying that no arabs should be allowed to board airplanes and CNN had no problem airing it. = Also, Bob Loblaw.