Note: For some reason, people's comments are sometimes not showing up, and UA-cam is not notifying me of comments. I discovered newer comments after clicking the "Sort by" menu, then selecting "Newest First." Also, UA-cam is not displaying the correct number of views and Likes. I apologize if I don't respond to your postings.
I can explain that one: usually, UA-cam detects contents which it considers as obscene or harmful words. Sometimes, they get caught in the spam filters, because of which only the channel owner can view them and decide whether or not to accept that. In the event the comment is still allowed (or you manually authorise it from within the spam filters), these comments are still not displayed when the comment section is sorted by top comments. The only way to display everything is to sort by newest. This might explain why, on some videos, you see a comment with, for example, 5 replies, but upon clicking on it, you only see 3 replies: because 2 of them are hidden and can be visible only by sorting by newest.
@@HandgunSafe Small update: UA-cam recently changed how it works. Good news: Setting the filter into "newest" still allows you to see all comments. Bad news: Back then, the "replies" count to a comment allowed you to determine that some comments were hidden. Not anymore Example: There was a video on another channel on which I had commented. I received 2 replies, but only 1 was visible, because the 2nd one was using the B word (but I knew the comment existed, so I changed the filters to see it). Now, when I return to the video without changing the filter, the count only says 1 reply, making it look like the hidden comment doesn't exist. Good news: the total comment count isn't affected (yet). This video still has 12 comments (13 with this one), even though several are still not visible.
@@HandgunSafe Last detail: if you happen to comment on another channel, and someone replies to your comment but it gets hidden by UA-cam, you won't even be notified of the reply either. Only the channel owner will be aware that a new comment has been posted (and neither him nor the author will be aware that it's not visible). The only way to know whether or not a comment is hidden is to check out the comment section in private browsing (i.e. offline), because a comment's author will always see it.
@@replacesoundboard This is all a good thing for me. I'm trying to spend less time on UA-cam. Someday, when I get my new channel up and running, I'll interact more with people here. But for now, I need a break. Or, I should be taking a break.
I'm still waiting for one of the toy companies to defend their industry's honor by sending a 'pretend' safe that intentionally satisfies every requirement *except* the exclusive locking part, because that would be unsafe/frustrating for parents. Problem being that ovs. this would imply intentional merchantability for firearms and other secure storage, and I don't think any of them want to take on that liability. Even if the 'pretend' safe itself advertises on its face that: (A) In an emergency, the bypass 'lock' opens using key or probe w/ sufficient force or hidden push button (that can be replaced); (B) It is made of plastic which can be pried apart; (C) cannot actually be anchored or secured in place. -(Que references to previous examples which would fit the above criteria if only they had one fault -_-intentionally-_- .)-
I never thought of that. If you want to invest in security measures, I suppose leaving a handgun safe out might be a good idea. If you make sure it's not bolted down and put a heavy pellet gun inside it, that might be enough to convince somebody to run off with it. If you're really clever, you might also rig the handgun safe with a dye packet.
Note: For some reason, people's comments are sometimes not showing up, and UA-cam is not notifying me of comments. I discovered newer comments after clicking the "Sort by" menu, then selecting "Newest First." Also, UA-cam is not displaying the correct number of views and Likes. I apologize if I don't respond to your postings.
I can explain that one: usually, UA-cam detects contents which it considers as obscene or harmful words. Sometimes, they get caught in the spam filters, because of which only the channel owner can view them and decide whether or not to accept that.
In the event the comment is still allowed (or you manually authorise it from within the spam filters), these comments are still not displayed when the comment section is sorted by top comments. The only way to display everything is to sort by newest.
This might explain why, on some videos, you see a comment with, for example, 5 replies, but upon clicking on it, you only see 3 replies: because 2 of them are hidden and can be visible only by sorting by newest.
@@replacesoundboard Thanks. I just have to remember to sort by "Newest" when looking over comments and responding.
@@HandgunSafe Small update: UA-cam recently changed how it works.
Good news: Setting the filter into "newest" still allows you to see all comments.
Bad news: Back then, the "replies" count to a comment allowed you to determine that some comments were hidden. Not anymore
Example: There was a video on another channel on which I had commented. I received 2 replies, but only 1 was visible, because the 2nd one was using the B word (but I knew the comment existed, so I changed the filters to see it).
Now, when I return to the video without changing the filter, the count only says 1 reply, making it look like the hidden comment doesn't exist.
Good news: the total comment count isn't affected (yet). This video still has 12 comments (13 with this one), even though several are still not visible.
@@HandgunSafe Last detail: if you happen to comment on another channel, and someone replies to your comment but it gets hidden by UA-cam, you won't even be notified of the reply either.
Only the channel owner will be aware that a new comment has been posted (and neither him nor the author will be aware that it's not visible).
The only way to know whether or not a comment is hidden is to check out the comment section in private browsing (i.e. offline), because a comment's author will always see it.
@@replacesoundboard This is all a good thing for me. I'm trying to spend less time on UA-cam. Someday, when I get my new channel up and running, I'll interact more with people here. But for now, I need a break. Or, I should be taking a break.
Strangely enough, it reminded me of that one video where you said one cannot move from toy making to making handgun safes.
For any curious soul, it was the Aseline MQ201
@@replacesoundboard Yep. That was a toy, just like this one.
I'm still waiting for one of the toy companies to defend their industry's honor by sending a 'pretend' safe that intentionally satisfies every requirement *except* the exclusive locking part, because that would be unsafe/frustrating for parents.
Problem being that ovs. this would imply intentional merchantability for firearms and other secure storage, and I don't think any of them want to take on that liability. Even if the 'pretend' safe itself advertises on its face that:
(A) In an emergency, the bypass 'lock' opens using key or probe w/ sufficient force or hidden push button (that can be replaced); (B) It is made of plastic which can be pried apart; (C) cannot actually be anchored or secured in place.
-(Que references to previous examples which would fit the above criteria if only they had one fault -_-intentionally-_- .)-
Impressive innovation. Lose your keys, forget the combo, don't have fingerprints? No problem! Easily opened without tools, or credentials!
I have an unusual question: do you think it's a good idea to have a cheap decoy safe in the house?
I never thought of that. If you want to invest in security measures, I suppose leaving a handgun safe out might be a good idea. If you make sure it's not bolted down and put a heavy pellet gun inside it, that might be enough to convince somebody to run off with it. If you're really clever, you might also rig the handgun safe with a dye packet.