(no subject)

[vicarz]

(uncut for history)(edit)Wow, ok...never fucking mind. Hate me, cut me off YOUR list, fine. Comments annoying, frustrated, giving up now. You're right, I'm wrong, but I am sick of this.

New internet rule - posting embedded videos requires a cut. Fo' serious, instead of quiz abusers my f-list is filled with video links. Some rare few are entertaining, but most of us with JOBS can't view videos at work due to BLOCKS on our access. So we just have big squares, and frankly...they're not that fucking funny.

In other news, SHUT UP about those shoes. SHUT UP about that jacket. SHUT UP about that outfit. None of those things will make you look good. If you shove a potato into sexy boots, fishnets, a corset, and teach it hot dance moves - it's still a potato. The only salvation for your appearance is in the gym. The good news is when you make your body look good, it doesn't fucking matter what you wear.

Edit: Starving a dog to death in a gallery is art. Seriously. Animal caring people, don't click unless you really need a reason to be outraged.

Comments

[cweaselle.livejournal.com]

That's not funny since I've been getting a ton of comments on how bad I've been dressing. I do think that might be somewhat true since I live in this assisted living, but I wonder what will happen when I move.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Dressing is different than posting pictures of clothes on LJ all day.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_blackjack_/]

The only salvation for your appearance is in the gym.

You know what? Fuck you. That stopped being cute a long time ago.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

You have a point, but you also never let me talk about anything related to looks or exercise in your pressence. I'd totally buy an argument of "It's one thing to present what we like - you're just attacking what you don't," but not from someone who constantly interrupts me every time I try to engage in a conversation about phsique or exercise. Grr.

[bentrazor.livejournal.com]

I apologize in advance, as I plan on posting a video later today.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Damn! Make it a goodie ;P

[antarctico.livejournal.com]

The good news is when you make your body look good, it doesn't fucking matter what you wear.

Right hotshot, please feel free to prove this theory yourself by wearing your crew shorts and Buster Crabbe tee-shirt to that next big meeting at work.

I swear, if you were a woman I'd say you were PMS-ing. Lithium, much?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

You mean that song by Nirvana?

Hmm. You might have a point. Perhaps that theory only works through my eyes.

[redsteve.livejournal.com]

I'll believe that you're 100% committed to that theory the next time you show up at a club in your burqua. And not for Star Wars Night at Bound, either.

I mean, really, it's not like you wear those tight shirts because you can't afford ones that fit.

[judgefudge.livejournal.com]

Your cuts-for-video proclamation is wrong, and here is why.

There are two reasons to do an LJ-cut.

1) to preserve someone's employment, sanity or sensibilities (the SFW/NSFW dichotomy). This doesn't apply since all NSFW content I post is behind a cut anyway, so that *I* don't get fired.

2) to inconvenience myself (by LJ-cutting) to convenience my friends (if I have a series of huge images, a 20 page post, or a lot of content)

Let's take the second rule as the circumstance which you wish to enforce. NSFW doesnt come into play since all you see is a square that you do not interact with.

Here, you are inconvenienced by being forced to scroll past the content. The content you cite is a YouTube video, which is roughly 320x200 in size. Let's even be generous and say it is 640x480. On most monitors this can be bypassed by the following:

- one roll of the mouse wheel
- one click on the scroll bar
- one tap of "page down"

Total inconvenience time for you is approximately half a second to one second, assuming you are an able-bodied individual.

Whereas the inconvenience of clicking an LJ-cut to see a video is

- the time to click the link
- PLUS the time for the page (lj, headers, images, styles, Frank the Goat) to render
- PLUS the time to render the movie

On a fast connection this can range anywhere between one and four seconds, depending on the congestion of the Interblagtubes.

Now let us assume that it takes the same time to click a link and re-render the page as it does for you to scroll past a YouTube video -- which it almost certainly does NOT, but for argument's sake we will give you that benefit.

You are still asking a content poster to inconvenience many (my entire friends' list) to convenience one (you).

Versus you scrolling past YouTube content. This means inconveniencing one (you) to convnience many (the friends' list).

The latter scenario is more in line with the SPIRIT of what an LJ-Cut is about, which is ASSUMING THE BURDEN of an inconvenience on oneself, to convenience others.

When you now factor in the reality of the situation that it takes longer to click a LJ-cut link than it is to scroll past one or two videos, your argument seems more fallacious.

However, not all is lost. There are diminishing returns and your argument actually takes hold after, say, three YouTube videos. In other words, if I were to post three or more videos, it is actually to my benefit to put them behind a cut. I must admit I have been guilty of not doing this in the past, but I will do so in the future.

[turbogrrl.livejournal.com]

I just don't get why people just wouldn't post a *link* to the videos, rather than doing the embedded thing. People who want to click the link will click the link, people that don't just have yet another link to scroll by instead of this stupid box. The whole embedded-video-in-a-lj-post just doesn't have that much value to me, I guess. Doesn't do it for me.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Damn logic...waht are you, an attorney?

[eriss.livejournal.com]

Ok, I'll validate you.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

STAMP

I know you secretly love my outfit

[railwaymadness]

Yes, image and video content is mildly annoying. But if you can't be bothered to change your settings to use placeholders for video and/or images, SHUT UP. Here, I'll even make it easier for your lazy ass by giving you a link.

If that's too much work, get over thinking it's somehow beneath you and just take those people off your default view. You don't even have to *make* a filter, it's already there. Or just unfriend. Whatever. I don't believe you're being forced to read any of these journals.

The bad news is when you act like a petulant, whiny prick, nobody worth knowing cares what your body looks like.

Re: I know you secretly love my outfit

[kelowna.livejournal.com]

The bad news is when you act like a petulant, whiny prick, nobody worth knowing cares what your body looks like.

That, I consider, a slam dunk. Half way between a wow and a yeeeouch.

--k

Re: I know you secretly love my outfit

[antarctico.livejournal.com]

Da-a-amn girl! :D

Re: I know you secretly love my outfit

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I use placeholders, but they're still a page big (for video, not pictures). WIth the placeholders set, you still have big blocks for videos.

Point 3 is valid. No fixing that.

Whay do you hate America?

[redsteve.livejournal.com]

Well, at least we can all agree with you that dog torture is bad.

Wait. I just re-read your post and you don't actually come out AGAINST dog torture.

Admit it, Jose, you hate imbedded video, fat people, dogs and apple pie.

[turbogrrl.livejournal.com]

...imbedded video, fat people, dogs and apple pie.

that does just about sum up a lot of Amerika, doesn't it?

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

None of those things will make you look good.

This is incorrect. Granted, you can't make a sack of potatoes look good with clothes, but you can make an already attractive body look even better with proper attire. To be honest, I've always found it weird that you put so much importance on how your body looks, then stick it in a beat up old old t-shirt and shorts when you go out. If you shove an Adonis into ratty clothes, it may still be an Adonis, but its appearance is greatly diminished, and after you get to a certain point in health isn't appearance the point of working out? A nice frame greatly enhances a piece of art, while framing it with rotten 2x4's and leaving it leaning against a corner definitely makes it less appealing.

Nice clothes enhance a nice body.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Well I don't know how to dress, now is that the source of my bias or because of it?

[anarcha.livejournal.com]

I find it very interesting that umpteen people have been apparently been offended by your references to body type and embedding of videos, but few seem all that terribly enraged about the poor dog at the art gallery.

[Edited to acknowledge that redsteve commented on the dog thing]

Thank you.

[redsteve.livejournal.com]

Although I do have to mention that my urge to comment on a link is usually inversely proportional to the amount of comments (356 on the dog torture link at this time)included in that link. I feel like every conceivable opinion and level of intelligence has already been expressed on the original site.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_blackjack_/]

And, I'm sorry, this potato looks damn good dressed up:

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Huh...actually, yeah. That outfit is pretty sharp. Works.

[(Anonymous)]

I was just passing by and don't know you from Jack Black, but was curious as why you'd assume that the only way a person "looks good" is by working out and developing a "body beautiful." I take it you yourself visit the gym a lot and thus like to look that way, and maybe have a preference for others who look that way, but "looking good" is very subjective. Many people including myself would prefer someone with slight "figure flaws" who presented themselves in a nice or interesting way through grooming and dressing, to somebody with ripped abs wearing gym-rat duds. To be honest I don't even like ripped abs or gym-rat bodies, and when the person goes even further and implies (perhaps you were joking?) that those are the only bodies that look good, I just write them off as a jerk. I'll take the fat guy or girl in the nifty Goth outfit any day over that.