Check it out!!!

[DrTickle]

New on YOUTUBE, at least I've never seen it before...

http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=Dia...r/ticktlrrade&feature=player_profilepage#t=75

Enjoy!!!

 

[sirbeartotickle]

wonderful post, thanks for that one

 

[trepak]

knew this one already...

great clip, but you should damage the link or youtube will take the clip offline really fast.

 

[highwing]

Now the link doesn't work

 

[cmdr]

http://www.youtube.com

/user/ticktlrrade&feature=player_profilepage#t=75

Combine the 2 lines (e.g., copy/paste) for the URL address. It seems to work.

 

[dtrell]

thats ticklehaven's exercise tickle, and its copyrighted. i dont think hed be happy posting a link to it. and not only that, but quit spreading the misnomer that youtube removes videos that people hot link from other sites..that is simply wrong. they pull videos with copyright claims and videos that the user removes or have too much explicit sex without an adult warning. thats it

 

[trepak]

dtrell

you were a bit too late. the actual clip this thread was about in the first place was a french renfaire kind of clip. definitely non-professional. now the link leads to a youtube-channel-thingie with other clips on it as well.

and about the pulled videos: you are right of course. so it's the user who removes the clip after getting a huge trafficblast from our little community here. who cares about the exact details? providing a working link leads to a removed clip.

 

[cabalist]

and about the pulled videos: you are right of course. so it's the user who removes the clip after getting a huge trafficblast from our little community here. who cares about the exact details? providing a working link leads to a removed clip.

False. There's never been any good evidence that youtube clips have been pulled as a result of being direct linked from this forum for any reason, period.

Why would a user remove his or her clip after getting a "huge trafficblast"? If you're going to make claims like this, please offer some kind of evidence to back them up or, at best, you're just spreading unconfirmed rumors....or talking through your hat, if you prefer.

 

[user 15]

thats ticklehaven's exercise tickle, and its copyrighted. i dont think hed be happy posting a link to it. and not only that, but quit spreading the misnomer that youtube removes videos that people hot link from other sites..that is simply wrong. they pull videos with copyright claims and videos that the user removes or have too much explicit sex without an adult warning. thats it

its only a preview clip

 

[trepak]

to each his own...

False. There's never been any good evidence that youtube clips have been pulled as a result of being direct linked from this forum for any reason, period.

Why would a user remove his or her clip after getting a "huge trafficblast"? If you're going to make claims like this, please offer some kind of evidence to back them up or, at best, you're just spreading unconfirmed rumors....or talking through your hat, if you prefer.

Let's just agree to disagree - or maybe I like spreading rumors

 

[cabalist]

Let's just agree to disagree - or maybe I like spreading rumors

You're just plain wrong...or mistaken, if you prefer. As is everyone else at this forum who helps to perpetuate this silly myth. Can you at least explain what evidence you think you've seen to support this belief, or do you just repeat what you may have heard with no other basis for it at all?

In fact, there's been as much connection established between direct linking of youtube clips posted here to their removal as there is scientific evidence for the effectiveness of a rain dance in ending a drought.

 

[avethibaltus]

I have to admit that clips which are directly linked do SEEM to be pulled by Youtube quicker than the ones where you have to "correct" the damaged link. That is not a scientific opinion though.

 

[cabalist]

I have to admit that clips which are directly linked do SEEM to be pulled by Youtube quicker than the ones where you have to "correct" the damaged link. That is not a scientific opinion though.

Unless you've kept an actual accurate count so as to have some meaningful statistics, correct, it isn't scientific. In fact, the only really plausible connection I can think of (if there was one, which I haven't seen established), might be if readers of this forum are themselves reporting them to Youtube as possible violations of the latter's TOS, and are more likely to watch them in order to get the idea to do so, since it's a little easier for them to just click on a link than to reconstruct it first.

But given the countless web sites, forums of all sorts and many other types of sites, where people have probably posted literally millions of youtube links, the people at Youtube would have to be far more obsessive than the most obsessive tickling fetishist to single out this particular site as of special importance to them. But even if there might be a slightly greater chance of vids which are "hot linked" here getting removed, that doesn't establish a causal relationship between the two. Far more likely it would only be because the vids which people post links to here are just the sort that are more likely to get flagged for removal regardless. This is a fetish forum, after all, and fetish vids may likely just be at a higher risk of removal, regardless of where or how they're linked.

In short, breaking the links is essentially like throwing salt over your shoulder.

 

[jmsdarke]

Unless you've kept an actual accurate count so as to have some meaningful statistics, correct, it isn't scientific.

As far as science is concerned, you may be correct that we have no controvertible proof.

We do however have a long history (of at least 3 years) of videos getting deleted by youtube within 24 hours of being linked into this forum. It would be irrational to ignore this, and yes, I am a scientist.

I can accept that you may find those who believe in the link-delete connection to be imagining things. But there are those times in life in which 'action A' and 'action B' are actually linked.

So like many here, I chose to err on the side of caution.

JD

 

[cabalist]

We do however have a long history (of at least 3 years) of videos getting deleted by youtube within 24 hours of being linked into this forum. It would be irrational to ignore this, and yes, I am a scientist

With a three-year history of getting your videos deleted by youtube, it might not be too much of a stretch to think they may be specifically targeting you.

Although if anyone wanted to bother checking it, it might be easy enough to do go through, say, the mainstream subforum and count the number of broken and unbroken links and compare them as to the number of each no longer at youtube. I think I'd be willing to bet that there wouldn't be a significant difference.

 

[trepak]

this is...

...kind of a useless discussion. Noone will convince anyone here. I'm with JD that it would be too much of a coincidence, so caution would be appropriate. After all, a non-direct link here doesn't hurt anyone.
An another thing. This thread was about a video of a girl being tickled by a renfaire guy and then her father. Probably shot by another family member or a friend. Maybe they weren't just too comfortable with the idea of having thousands of fetishists jerk off while watching their daughter/friend/sister, as I'm certain lots of other people aren't as well. Not everyone is in the net for traffic and exposing himself - even if on youtube.

signing out

 

[cabalist]

...kind of a useless discussion.

You started it.

Noone will convince anyone here. I'm with JD that it would be too much of a coincidence, so caution would be appropriate. After all, a non-direct link here doesn't hurt anyone.

No, but seeing people being castigated here for posting links to youtube videos, as people do all over the 'net, gets a bit tiring. If people want to break their links, fine, but people who choose not to aren't doing anything "wrong" that requires castigating them for.

An another thing. This thread was about a video of a girl being tickled by a renfaire guy and then her father. Probably shot by another family member or a friend. Maybe they weren't just too comfortable with the idea of having thousands of fetishists jerk off while watching their daughter/friend/sister, as I'm certain lots of other people aren't as well. Not everyone is in the net for traffic and exposing himself - even if on youtube.

Then they weren't very bright in posting the video publicly, when youtube allows any video to be posted privately so that only those one wishes to view it can. If they're posting it publicly, presumably either they want to have a lot of viewers or they don't care. Again, unless they were too stupid to even consider that posting a video publicly would allow the general public to watch it. Never mind the question of how they could know that thousands of fetishists are "jerking off" while watching it, if in fact that was the case. In fact, how could anyone know that?

 

[sirbeartotickle]

sheesh, ok, I only going to comment again on the vid, was a nice vid