To whoever voted no: You can use channels to suppress content as well as to seek it out, what were you thinking?

Yes, so we can filter them out.

Too bad audiosift.com domain is already taken.

I like the idea of an audiosift channel. Now, I have to take up tag space to say audiosift. I would rather use that space for something else.

I usually abstain from voting on the channels. I feel like there are way too many right now. But since I don't use them to look for content, it is no skin off my nose if there are 600 channels.

But an audiosift tag? That actually conveys some useful information. At least to me.

This is just preliminary, to feel it out, @Dag will post the official poll, I had to use a poll to see if I should go ahead with the other poll.




Seems like this is good enough, this is the one and only, so vote and speak now or forever stfu hold your peace.

Not feeling it.

I like the idea of an audiosift channel.

Especially if it allows soundcloud embeds....

I can't see the harm. And if it means i can filter out music videos, i might actually be able to look through some videos without seeing a load of mass-music-videos posts. I'm a miserable cynical bastard though, and if you could remove any video that i thought only served to raise star levels, the sift would probably be 1/10th as big.. so up with diversity and up with me not having to trawl through crap

Yep. This is definitely the only poll we'll need for this.
>> ^BoneRemake:

This is just preliminary, to feel it out, @dag will post the official poll, I had to use a poll to see if I should go ahead with the other poll.


Seems like this is good enough, this is the one and only, so vote and speak now or forever stfu hold your peace.

An audiosift channel is a no brainer. I would like it to be be bigger, so that people can sift music articles and webpages of musical interest.

Make it happen.

Voting for this poll ended with the majority of users voting Yes.