No Videos! er, Yes Videos! well, actually...

I can't decide. Flickr have started letting 'pro' users upload 90second videos. This is causing a HUGE controversy amongst the people who care. There's the NO VIDEO ON FLICKR!!! group (currently 12,908 members)and the We Say NO to Videos on Flickr group (30,118) and the We say YES to Videos on Flickr group (260)... apart from feeling like the opening sequence for Battlestar Galactica I don't think this does anything useful. My first thought was, "Of course no videos on Flickr. that's what YouTube and stuff are there for. Flickr does all it needs to do!" But then it occurred to me that video is art (well, it can be) and that perhaps video has it's place on Flickr too. Except. Well, firstly the videos in question can only be up to 90seconds which, to me, is more restrictive than useful. Second, there are already an unending stream of video hosting sites. Each uses a slightly different encoding or has a new interpretation on the 'standard' player thing, so they're horrendously annoying at times. Third, this is just asking for a never ending stream of wedding videos, holiday videos, children-running-around-in-the-garden-aren't-they-so-ADORABLE videos... Oh god please no... Most importantly, of course, one needs the latest Flash player to make it work, which fucks it all up for anyone who might want to do anything in a restrictive work environment or who for any other reason can't get it. At least YouTube and Google Video are a bit behind the technology. So, really, I'm in favour of Flickr Video in principle but in actuality am horribly opposed. We have video sites multiplying like bacteria for video, places like abinoblacksheep etc. for animation, deviantart for, er, art, and Picasa and Flickr for photos. Generally. So I'd like to keep them a bit separated please. Please?