Viewing all threads tagged #competition.
Did you ever - as far as you're aware, of course - dream that you toss*-juggle?
*"toss" - or fly and catch a diabolo, or run a devilstick, or foot- or knee-juggle a soccer ball, headbounces, or also scarve-juggling, .. anything where you lose physical contact to your prop. And catching, or at least the intention to catch, should be included. - So, I'd like contact-juggling, contact-staff, spinning, twirling, balancing and alike to be excluded.
Competition type: Poll
Closing date: 26th Nov 2017
Select option to vote
I'm 7. Would love to improve over night, though. Also forgot to include the choice "Constantly, it's unnerving, I wake up from it everytime I drop." lol
I can - not while dreaming, but when awake - visualize throws (and then upto where they fly until I do the next throw to focus on, which is about to their apex), but then don't know where the balls are for catching (they sort of fade or vanish in a still life from where I last pictured them), .. so, when visualizing more rounds after launch, I have to take the catches for granted (and from seeing balls at launch before my mind's eye, I go over to instead feeling my handmovement + thrust + aiming or so). [ #dream #visualize ]
I think I've only ever dreamt of juggling once. I dream of juggling conventions fairly often. There frequently isn't any juggling in the juggling convention dreams, but I know I'm at a juggling convention. I'll give myself a 7.
Okay. Sounds more like "maybe, rather yes" to me(?). Then maybe 3. or 4, (both definite "yes"), if you're sure, you did, or 6. if you're you're not all sure, but positively think you did, would fit better? - 7. was really more meant as an "almost, but definitely not" .. everything is ready and setup to juggle, but you don't or can't or don't know how (the emphasis is not on the surroundings-story, but just to elude on "nearly could and should've but it didn't happen"). Actually, I meant the poll to find out how many are even able to juggle while dreaming. (But, hey, whatever you think! I'm happy about everyone who finds a choice that fits him.)
It's not all clear: does "you think" in
"I think I've only ever dreamt of juggling once." refer to "dreamt of juggling" or to "ever only once"? Do or do you not have a memory of indeed yourself juggling?
I have dreamt I was passing clubs at least twice. I don't remember details (like what pattern or passing partners) but I think I remembered a bit more right after I woke up. I believe I woke up in the middle of the pattern, not after dropping. Good dreams. :)
I'll put that as a 4.
Have definitely dreamt of juggling conventions a few times, too. At least more times than about actual juggling... As far as I can remember, of course.
...and shortly after I wrote that answer I slept and dreamed about working out new take-out passing patterns (on paper and by walking through the moves) together with another passer that I know from conventions. I know who the other juggler was but not what pattern we were working on. No actual juggling in that dream, though.
First without effort, and second when I was learning to lucid dream.
(I don't bother with lucid dreaming anymore)
Awesome. Can you still recall that ´´film´´, can you remember the pattern(s) and if you juggled same that you juggle when you really juggle (awake) or better and harder pattern(s), did it feel like real juggling with you controlling, acting & reacting, or did it somehow ´´hover´´, go all by itself, with you being able to watch like your own audience, was it °-.,~°happy°~.,.-°, did you ´´upgrade´´ first step to superhuman juggler, did it impact on your real juggling or did it rather seem as a fulfilment of your real juggling, a confirmation, a validation, a corroboration burnt by and into subconsciousness as affirmation?
What's the longest toss-juggling endurance you ever did?
(no matter which pattern, which prop)
I hope to find - if many of us vote - how popular or common enduring even is (and for how long).
About 25 years ago I worked for a juggling stall that had a competition which was to juggle 3 x 1.5 Kg Splats as long as possible. I think the winner was about 45 minutes. Shortly after that I tried to match that time with 3 x 1 Kg Absolutes. I matched it but killed my wrists doing it and suffered from tendonitis for quite a while. I'm not sure that endurance is necessarily the way to go but it made for an interesting competition.
What are Splats and Absolutes? I know Absolute rings but they are definitely not 1kg :p
Sounds very painful, can kinda relate, though what you did must have been worse. I did 3 beanbags with wrist weights for 1 hour once, beanbags were just 200g each and weights were 1.5kg each. Still very exhausting.
I did my longest endurance when I had only juggled for two years. It was 20 minutes of 3 clubs cascade. I'm not planning on doing any longer endurance of any pattern.
°oupps° .. a logical inconsistency in the poll again:
..ever did? versus
1. ..don't really now..
( 1. I don't really endure anything ) as "1. I never really endured anything."!
That is how I understood it.
I was thinking, though... If you want to find out how popular endurance is, it might also be interesting to know if people are planning/hoping to achieve longer runs in the future, and how long. I have no desire to spend a lot of time trying to get as long runs as possible any more, but I would like to be able to do patterns for, like, 5 minutes or something. But I guess that wouldn't really count as endurance, it would more be about getting the pattern really solid.
I'm not planning to do anything longer than my 3b 12 minutes. Yes, especially for important basic patterns, 5 minutes is pretty much okay for me too. Yet, with 5 min x 60 sec x ~5~6 throws/sec = ~1,500 throws, that I got near to once only with 5 balls, I still don't feel like really having ``mastered´´ the pattern, it's far from ``like walking´´. So either I'll have to get more runs over 1,000 or indeed do many more throws and minutes. But it's sooo time intensive while learning tricks and other patterns instead is much more rewarding (and hard and challenging enough and worthwhile too).
I have not been close to 5 minutes with any other pattern than 3 objects cascade yet. Could probably do it with a basic passing pattern with the right partner (6 clubs 4-count, 2-count or 3-count). Solo patterns... maybe 423 could work.
I'm definitely not even close with 4 objects, my personal record being just a little bit over 200 catches. But that might actually be a bit of an endurance thing, I do get tired when juggling 4 clubs. Arms starting to get tired before 100 catches, and my pulse is definitely high, too.
Yeah, it's more fun to learn new tricks and patterns than spending lots of time on the ones that already kind of works.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
Ey Marvin, I know I could easily add up the numbers myself, but would you consider posting the total amount of votes next time as well? (22 this time)
If you're interested, you could even go as far as showing the percentage of voters that voted for a particular option. (36% voted for nr6)
Yes, I can include the total number of votes cast. Totting up a few tiny integers for you is an excellent use of my mental capacity. Do you find percentages useful when the total votes is considerably under 100?
And no, I have never been interested in any of these polls.
Here I am, brain the size of a planet. Count they tell me. Call that job satisfaction,'cause I don't.
practise versus ``talent´´
(no matter which level you're on - just started or world champion ..)
How much do you think that all your skills are (to which part) a result of practise or hard ``work´´, perseverance, or else
(to which part) did they ``come to you´´ by a natural preference for juggling (or object manipulation or artistry oror) or by a natural predisposition or a love for juggling making learning easier (than e.g. for the average juggler, or e.g. than learning another skill or art of motion or sportive activity)?
A few aspects helping to answer:
Even Gatto said sth like, there's no such thing talent on his level or for him - it was all hard hard work.
Think of what you can't do even though you think you should.
Was your decision or how you got to juggling totally intrinsic (=absolutely "yours" and the only thing to do, ``necessary´´ in a way) or could it just aswell have been something else, another hobby or activity.
Do you see yourself improving and learning much faster than others (that's the point, not learning easy stuff fast only).
Do others admire the speed you improve or learn (while you yourself might not have noticed).
And a question that I'm interested in:
Do you think or have you experienced a hidden talent waking up after already having juggled for a good while? Do you think that's possible to ``wake up the natural inside you´´?
I myself am somewhere between 2 and 3, but sill blundering a real lot when not yet warmed up or when not concentrating, also failing over long phases, makes me say "2", even though I hope for it to become easier, maybe the natural skill inside waking up, some day when I've reached my goals and then not having to so much do at the limit anymore. I don't think I'd have gotten where I am without the inner decision to dedicate to the 7b cascade, which is maybe rather a preference than ``natural talent´´, who knows.
You're asking multiple questions at once, which makes it hard to answer correctly...
I think I have some but little natural talent in learning object manipulation skills. However I am extremely predisposed to love juggling which makes it incredibly easy to spend countless hours on practice. So effectively my natural affection for juggling makes me a good juggler?
Yes, [>>"multiple wording"<<], wanted to include a wide range of viewpoints for "talent\\not talent".
Okay, that makes it a bit difficult ("little natural talent, but love for juggling making practise easy"),
but, as the question is scaled along "talent vs. practise", I'd say, your description says, that your love for juggling sort of enables or helps you to make up for little natural talent. But you don't sound, like new skills ``come to you´´ or that your natural afffection for juggling makes learning (notably) easier than for the average juggler or than another activity - at least not in a way that would spare you to still having to practise a whole lot. That would be a clear "2", I'd say.
So, @ all, if in doubt, feel free to read the options as roughly ..
1. 0-5% talent - 95-100% practise (hard work only)
2. 5-25% talent - 75-95% practise
3. 25-45% talent - 55-75% practise
4. 45-55% talent - 45-55% practise (equal)
5. 55-75% talent - 25-45% practise
6. 75-95% talent - 5-25% practise
7. 95-100% talent - 0-5% practise (pure talent, just do it and it will naturally succeed in ridiculously short time)
I put myself down as a number 2. I think I'm very similar to Daniel, I got good at juggling because when I first started I enjoyed it so much I did nothing but practice. Perhaps because of my enjoyment I didn't realise it was 'hard work'.
Agreed. The choices are made a bit complex by the 'love of juggling' part, which I think makes the vote lose focus on the nature vs nurture argument. I think that any natural aptitude is very small, but I voted 2 for the same reason as you.
Interesting Gatto's comment that he thinks it was all hard work. Where does that quote come from? On his own forum years ago he said that he believes he has some kind of natural advantage and sees things "in slow motion". Although I don't believe that at all I do think that believing it helped him a lot.
I always thought that seeing things in slow motion is acquired. When you first start attempting 5 balls it feels frantic and crazy fast and impossible. After a while (perhaps a few years or more), it can seem slow and simple. Gravity obviously hasn't changed but your perception has.
Sometime after I was pretty solid with 5 balls, I remember when it really clicked even more and became truly effortless. I fondly remember that as my juggling nirvana.
That 'love of juggling' wording is due to me trying to exclude, that ``talent´´ (which anyway is hard to seize as notion) need be determined by some genetic predisposition, let alone by a distinct ``juggling gene´´. And I tried to allow, that a wunderkind could feel as a natural without a need to have genetic evidence, without the need to have been ``born as juggler´´, just with love of juggling, then. Also, I wanted to avoid any discussion about whether ``(genetic) talent´´ even exists or not.
That Gatto statement is nothing like a citation with a source; I had it in mind, read it somewhere - it might be a mere rumour or misinterpretation (alas, I have no idea, where I got that from).
I'd put me somewhere between 5-6. When I can dredge up enough time to practice daily, I feel my progress goes by leaps and bounds, and it seems like I could be /very/ good if I were to try to make a career of juggling (or prioritize it higher).
There are certainly people who pick things up faster than me, but that population seems to be somewhere between 10-25 % of jugglers I know. There's probably some selection bias in there.
I'm a 2. I find it very difficult to understand juggling patterns and I've always learned everything slower than most. My love of juggling has helped me keep up the practicing.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
How much do you a c c e p t h e l p, hints or helpful feedback for improving? (no matter wherefrom, video tutorial, or person to person, shown or told or written, ororor)
I voted 4, I'll try most things suggested by better jugglers, but I don't keep working on it if it's too boring (for example, I have not learned 4c fountain on singles, even though I have been told it could help improve my 4c fountain on doubles). I don't really come up with many ideas by myself, either. I mean, I can come up with a new combination of throws, but I don't really invent anything completely new.
As a club passer who usually passes with someone better than me, option 5 would not have been wrong either.
...and I have not learned 5 ball cascade, even though I'm trying to learn 5 clubs.
I'm somewhere in the 3.5 camp. If I can be particular about the phrasing "when the hint is good and applies" to be "[...] as interpreted by some all-knowing being," then I'm comfortable with it. Sometimes I don't realize the hint is good until a while after it was given.
Hmhm, I see; maybe we can meet on "if a hint gets you thinking or rumors around in your mind not knowing what rhyme to make of it", then it can still either puzzle and irritate you beyond threshold, or else, you can be ``happy´´ on there being a new way waiting to be discovered some given time later. Or even else, it's stored somewhere in the unconscious until it pops up again at a given moment or remains there forever until the ``hard disk´´ (=memory) is cleaned and overwritten. ( Which still leaves the decision "happy or not about such an unclear hint" to you :o] ) .. but, yeah, if an all-knowing being knows before, read as: "If a hint will apply, later (and I will be happy about it, later)."
.. or just read "3." and "4." as:
3. Happy for help "under condition". (not "any and all the help you can get" unrestrictedly)
4. "Give it all over to me, I'll sort it out." = Any and all the help there might be is welcome. (without any restriction)
Basically the scale goes from 1. "no input whatsoever" over 2. "little help accepted", 3. ``Some´´ or ``a good deal´´ or "under condition" help accepted, 4. All, every, any help (more than) welcome, upto 5. "only with help, can't do without".
btw i'm not sure what to vote myself .. been through like all of the options 1. to 4. before, i think, and now it seems to "depend" on which pattern, which ajuggling (few ball stuff, e.g. Kraken, or else numbers techniques). Even 6., "I don't get info on what exactly is going in the brain and focus and where attention lays in distinct milliseconds." is partly true.
Guess I'll land on 3. or 4. too, as there's yet so much to discover (clubs, 5b s'swaps, selfthrows and fountains, more body range e.g. bbb, for me), .. why not spare time and effort by getting all and any help I can get to get where I want sooner.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
How much of you, your time, being sportive, self-chosen active, (no matter if overall a lot or just a little), goes into juggling?
Not counting ``necessary´´ activities like work, travelling, footwalks or so, only leisure.
I'll leave it upto you, if biking to the baker or having to do like school sports, or fitness prescribed by your doctor, pumpin' up stairs instead takin' the elevator or so is ``necessary´´, unavoidable (would then not count) or ``self-chosen´´ or ``leisure´´ (then would count as ``self-chosen sportive activity´´).
Hope, it's somewhat logically consistent - it's not about "how much" you juggle, and also not about "how sportive" or "how active" you are, but w h i c h p a r t juggling takes a m o n g any of your other sportive activities taken together. Thx 4 voting! :o)
I'd guess about 80%. A normal week has 7-8 hours juggling, and 1-2 hours other "sport activities" (going to a gym, a BodyBalance class, a long walk or something like that). I didn't count walking to and from work, though I could choose to go by bus or car instead but it's just 15-20 minutes walk.
During summer a normal week has less juggling (no scheduled practice), but then there are juggling conventions, where I don't do any sports but juggling.
I used to go for walks to relax or just get some physical activity, but most of those volontary walks have been replaced by juggling during the last years.
Haha, okay, "How much of your arty activities or any activity at all goes into juggling?".
Hard one to judge. My two other main hobbies, (dancing & roller hockey) are much higher in intensity so they feel like they make up a much higher percentage of my active time than they probably do.
I also want to count hand balancing as juggling but that shouldn't be the case.
Funny you should say that, as I have been playing tennis for 10 years but I still find juggling a far, far more intensive activity.
With juggling the better I get the less effort is required. With the other two the better I get the more energy I can put in without catastrophic failure.
With dancing being in control allows me to be more exuberant & exciting which is more fun for me & more fun for most of my partners. With hockey being in control allows me to be faster which is an obvious performance advantage. The same could be true of my juggling, but when I juggle I just want to be in control, aside from playing combat I feel there is no incentive to apply unnecessary energy to my juggling.
The same could be true of my juggling, but when I juggle I just want to be in control, aside from playing combat I feel there is no incentive to apply unnecessary energy to my juggling. Humh, is that,, you're ``done with improving´´ and you're happy with what you have under control. Or else, is that exactly your way to best improve fromout controlled ajuggling, even without ``pushing´´ any?
That makes sense, but for me the better I get the longer runs I do and the harder and more energy intensive tricks I do. I've never been one for getting easier tricks totally solid really. I don't think I'll ever reach a point where I feel good enough, because I'll never be the best so it's just a matter of being as good as I can be.
Yeah, please feel free to vote by "time invested" OR by "intensity" (or effort or zeal or dediction) put into the juggling part in compare to all other activity.
The poll should find out, what I think is interesting, if juggling is among if any or among all other your most prominent ado or activity or physical exercise or moving artistically or getting one's bottom up from the couch at all. Its priority, its importance, its significance among ``being in motion in one's free time´´.
I like to count any kind of balance - unless most focus goes into strength and balancing is the least challenging, a negligible part of the act - .. count it as very much a juggling exercise. After all, a well juggled higher pattern is always also well balanced in your airspace and relative to one's body axes.
I myself used to wander, and upto the day bike like daily (thinking of quitting that, even I think it's very healthy), sometimes for leisure swim a bit, give a nice frisbee or so, and for a while jog 5 km or run 800 m almost daily (many years ago). Now, apart from just a few minutes doing some gym, stretching, bending, or from time to time maybe doing pushups or pull ups or situps for general form and flexibility, I try to not waiste any energy that I can save for juggling. = clearly "1".
Aside from 2 annual juggling conventions and 1 music festival that I go to for the juggling booth, I spend approximately 0 hours/week juggling. Oh, I may get 10 juggling shows/year these days, but that's insignificant (though I do break a good sweat). I spend about 10 hours/week doing sports (tennis, running, biking). I spend around 10 hours/week with online juggling adventures.
What he said (but with less time playing sport during the week and a lot more walking - minimum of 10Km a day)
I should pull my finger out and start running again, or get back down the gym. My middle age is spreading
A big reason that I do other exercise in my life is that I find it so substantially improves my juggling. When I'm practicing hard, it's about a 50-50 split between juggling and other sporty activities. When I'm being lazy, juggling makes up ~70 % of my sporty activities (despite other activities and juggling both decreasing in time).
This poll has now ended. The results are:
Do you like \ not like to t e a c h (not just give a hint, but take the time and get involved, and real life person to person) ?
Thanks for voting!
[ #teaching ]
Voted depends: I usually try to spend about 20 minutes at club practice focusing and getting some really good practice in. During that time, I don't want to teach, talk, listen, etc.
Other than that, I'm normally happy to teach.
The last one. I like it, but I don't want to spend my precious juggling time doing something else than juggling (at least not too often). And regular juggling club meetings is usually the only place where someone is interesting in letting me teach them some juggling, so... I don't really teach much.
I should try to give some workshops on juggling conventions, though. I can't juggle all the time there anyway, and I tried it as a co-teacher in a passing workshop at the last BJC and really liked that. Now I just need to find something that I think I can actually teach well enough for a workshop.
Ah, yeah, I like to teach non-juggling things, too... As long as the person/people learning wants to learn, not if I'm trying to teach a whole class where some people would rather not be there at all. Though I usually don't have time or opportunities for that, either.
This poll has now ended. The results are:
Do you find it easy or hard to stand on one leg for a while while juggling an easy pattern?
This poll has now ended. The results are:
How do you launch your numbers basic patterns?
Don't lots of jugglers do the opposite of 1? They throw the first ball higher and all the other throws are at regular height.
Never seen this. Very interesting; it seems to earn a moment to prepare and get back in position for the steady launch with one ball less.
He should then vote "4.".
No, serious: I see two slight disadvantages in that method (regardless of how much these might be outweighed by the advantages), at least when still learning: a) the very high first ball comes back very fast, thus is a bit harder to catch or at least ask for a different first catch, and b) it's out of tact and out of pattern and tact, so timing your launch to it, matching both, seems a skill on its own, maybe comparable to kicking into launch.
The advantage is that it makes the first throws easier when there's a lot of weight in the hands. Perhaps Anthony developed that method because he started numbers so young. I tend to do it a bit with clubs.
When flashing high numbers I prefer 1 or 2. The advantage being that they separate out in the air making the catches further apart. When running numbers I prefer 3.
I like the first two pairs of throws notably lower and wider, to have the middle free to fire the rest up keeping a slight crescendo. (Clearly "1." then, and for 9b and 7b) My 8b wimpy, I do it in a `robotic´ way all to same exact height - there's just much more time to swing up thrust in synch.
This reminded me that Anthony could juggle 5 clubs before he could even hold 5 clubs!
To me it makes a lot of sense. The first ball is hard because the hands are heavy. You can make the first high throw easy by using the legs, and the legs add so much push that you can even make enough time to slow down the next one or two balls. With more time you can also put more force in these.. Until you quickly need to get your hands empty to make the first catches, and then stabilize into pattern hight as you only need to deal with 1 ball weight..
Ah, yeah .. ``hop´´ the first one up - forgot about that one.
And, true, yeah, .. once they're all up, be it only halfway aligned, spaced and timed, you can still correct into pattern dealing with one prop each rethrow, which makes up a bit for a flawly launch - I need that a lot ;o) .
This poll has now ended. The results are:
Hey folks! Is everyone still theeeeeere?
Where to best upload any juggling video ( be it tutorial, 'show off', stage act, practise, a record, a trick clip, .. ) for any purpose ( feedback, present oneself or a pattern, talk about the vid, get most attention, ask for analysis, park it there, .. ) ?
Where would you want a l l juggling videos gathered?
I think it depends where your audience is.
Juggling TV is great if you want general jugglers to see it.
Facebook is great if you want your friends (or a members of a particular group) to see it.
Other sites are great if you want a general audience to see it.
It's worth talking about the amount of "friction" involved in viewing a video. There are so many competing calls for attention that it's worth making it as easy as possible for someone to see it.
For instance, I use Facebook via an app. If I see a video I fancy, then if it's a Facebook-hosted video, I can watch it immediately. If it's hosted elsewhere, a different app is loaded to view the video, taking 5-10 seconds. And chances are when I return to the Facebook app it's lost my place in my timeline. So personally when browsing Facebook I'm ten times more likely to watch a Facebook-hosted video than a video hosted anywhere else. The same goes for Twitter (with Twitter-hosted videos).
So I'd definitely recommend hosting the video on the same platform where you will be publicising it, for that reason.
On the web, it's a little easier, as many platforms embed videos in the webpage. For the web I'd recommend YouTube (and to a lesser extent Vimeo) as most forum software, etc, recognises them and embeds them automatically.
Make it easy for people to see the video and you'll get loads more views.
But ultimately, pick the audience first, then use that to decide where to publish.
But ultimately, pick the audience first, then use that to decide where to publish.
This. Publish it where your intended audience expect to see it.
If your audience is in multiple places (eg split across facebook and youtube) publish in both places.
If there were an agreed upon (best) 'central' platform for juggling videos, the audience would be right there.
So your audience is *specifically* people who are already looking for juggling videos?
Seems a bit narrow to me.
What if your audience is the general public, who don't know they want to watch a juggling video? How would they know to look in your 'central' platform?
Isn't that mostly the case ("people looking for juggling are the audience")? How would general public find a juggling video on e.g. youTube other than by hitting "juggling" into search bar, or by a juggling video being proposed in the "see also"s? Sure, you can upload it 'out of context' to any platform.
But you can just aswell link an uploaded video anywhere, your audience hangs out (being uploaded on a preferred 'central' for juggling videos doesn't mean, it's viewed only from there, and posting it somewhere doesn't require it to have been also uploaded there).
well, they apparently do find them given how many non-jugglers have told me about juggling videos
the last one someone told me about was the solving 3 cubes while juggling them, but they were solved so fast I am pretty sure it was faked or gimmicked
Depends on the type of video.
If your video is of you doing siteswaps in your back garden, and your anticipated audience is "other jugglers" then yes, it's reasonable to assume that people who want to see it are going to be searching specifically for juggling videos.
If your video is a promo video, promoting yourself as a professional entertainer looking for business - then people who want to book you aren't likely to be looking specifically for a juggler, they're more likely to be looking more generally for entertainers.
If you've set out to make a well produced video, that happens to feature a juggler (Like for example the stuff Norbi puts out) then the sort of people who appreciate that style of video aren't likely to be searching specifically for juggling - but if it pops up in their instagram/tumblr feed they'll watch it.
If you're setting out to make a video that gets a lot of views so you can make some ad-revenue off it (like for example Bob & Trish do with their trick shot videos) then posting them in a central juggling video repository makes no sense - the viewers who are likely to watch/share it aren't searching for juggling, they're searching for "funny" or "awesome" or whatever.
If all your friends use facebook, posting a video for them to watch on Bebo makes no sense.
See what I mean?
Just because *you're* watching juggling videos by searching for the word "juggling" doesn't mean every potential viewer is.
Hm. I see. That makes the poll somewhat futile, if people post their juggling video as "see what I did"-video or as "Hire this artist"-video anywhere anyway.
@ 1 - Any server doesn't offer hashtags, categories, juggling related chat or forum, no features.
@ 2 - vimeo lately shuts my browser (mozilla 16); and when it worked before, it had staggered framerate on my system.
@ 3 - Woe! .. lemming's mainstream .. I was on our tube before it was google+. My account got inaccessible unless I gave google+ my mobile phonenumber. Hey, What?! .. I'm not giving them my mobilephone number! How about people worldwide in poor countries, or people who just don't use mobile, all people with PC, but without mobile (for whatever reason that really isn't google+'s business) .. they're being excluded. How dare they even ask for your number!?
That streaming doesn't always work well, sometimes the videos freeze and don't skip and not replay anymore on my system. Search function and results are imo a catastrophe.
@ 4 - JugglingTV - haven't found any flaw - there's hashtags, comments, categories, sortable, everything. It's upto uploaders to set the hashtags and choose a title or description for their vids to be found later again. And it looks like ("from jugglers for jugglers") .. looks like the full rights remain with the uploader.
@ 5 - I don't see why I should register and-or install any instagram-software just to watch a video. My puter does perfectly fine watching videos (in some common old formats lol). I'm in general not pumping my machine full with updates on every switching it on. You can't watch a video as "guest"? You're 'welcome', when you register and use their software only ( for watching a video!!??? Are the pics for free lol? Will the text get crypted soon? )
@ 6 - personal homepage is different: it's only your videos, not a collection, not an all juggler's plattform. Doesn't seem to make sense on behalf of a 'central for all juggling videos'.
@ 7 - FB.. same as uTube and instagram .. you can't watch as guest, have to be registered .. mainstream for 'insiders' excluding 'outsiders'?
@ 8 - no idea what that could be .. a 'futuristic juggvid upload and sharing platform' ? That's JTV, right.
JTV's search function could be better, maybe, .. just full plain text with option (+ - "" "every \ all \ any") and show the matches. ( Again it's up to users to enter meaningful words in their desriptions if they care for their vid be found ). Not them cursed "did-you-mean-algorithms". (But i don't know)
.. and btw .. I have core-blocked google, google analytics, google-syndication (what the heck is that?) in my HOSTS!! (and I believe, machine is double as fast browsing, but I can't prove for sure) .. just to be clear on this. ( I'm also not on FB - you can't even find worldwide doublegangers there ;o]) )
For those that tried to vote for option 4 before 13:00 GMT today (Thursday 11th), your vote was not counted due to the autolinking of jtv to jtv. I bodged a fix during my lunch break that allowed voting & put a proper fix in just now.
As you were.
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports