Terio, “Oh Kill Em” Vine star, is NOT a star…..

Terio is a six year old boy who was apparently gone viral for his “Oh Kill Em” Vine video short.

Source: http://www.theroot.com/blogs/grapevine/terios-vine-takeover‎

I question the purpose and reasoning behind this though, especially after reading this:


It turns out that the kid is likely just being used as fame-bait to make money off of, or be pushed around to attract viral internet attention. I mean the kid’s six years old, right?

He made top list on Vine, and after hearing the “song” I have decided that this is just some overhyped, overexposed internet nonsense (as if there isn’t enough), and viral exposure of a kid, an attempt to make money off of morons, and an attempt to profit from a child(did I not mention that?).

Some may question whether or not this is appropriate on the part of a six year old, to go viral, make “star” status on the internet, and potential money?


Vine sure is getting its exposure as well from this, but I guess it’s all still up for debate by the liberals, conservatives, and Obama of course.


YouTube removes video responses from site … why???!!!!

YouTube has removed the video response feature it once had on its site for many a great years.

Source: http://youtubecreator.blogspot.com/2013/08/so-long-video-responsesnext-up-better.html

But I have some concerns … the click-through rate is only four out of every million, and I can give reasons for that:

    • 1.The thumbnails in the video response boxes were too small, and didn’t stand out enough.

      2.There was not enough promotion in regards to the video response feature.

      3.The video response feature didn’t have monetization features along with it.

  • Basically, YouTube removed the featured because Google can’t bank the bucks off of it, and it’s really easy to get rid of something that could have once been than to waste time improving it for the good of all. YouTube’s cheap way out instead of making adjustments doesn’t baffle me at all.

    Now the small YouTube users can’t get their publication alongside the big YouTuber’s videos, and you can pretty much say good bye to that opportunity now.

    Does Christina Grimmie hate gays because of her religious beliefs?

    Christina Grimmie is quite the upcoming, popular artist(who is not gay by the way). She has been involved with Selena Gomez, Disney, MTV, has over a million YouTube subscribers and views, etc. But is it worth pointing out that her very beliefs encourage the hatred of gays, or that she is contradicting herself for her very own outward projecting, self-opinionated sense of self? Let’s break it down and see… First of all, let’s quote this here from the Bible:

    1 Corinthians 6:9-10 New International Version (NIV) 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

    In layman’s terms, that means this, to be blunt: If you are gay you will not inherit the kingdom of God, AKA you will not go to heaven. According to this girl she claims that Christina Grimmie says she’s a “nondenominational Christian”, and that her favorite book is the Bible, the very book that quotes the aforementioned statement above: PROOF2 Source URL for image validity: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110624141416AAoU7Ay That pretty much sums up the most obvious questioning title of this post, but let’s keep the ball rolling while we’re at it. On her Wikifeet, a user quoted a response Christina apparently gave in to his questioning or request if she would post pictures of her feet. Here is the image for proof: PROOFF1 And here is the URL for proof of the page: http://www.wikifeet.com/christina_grimmie (You will need to scroll down to see Weese’s post and quote) Weese says, quote,

    This is a complete WIN! She has been opposed to ever showing feet in a video, or on twitter. When I asked her on twitter several several months back, if she would show her feet, she said “Sorry dude, but no. Why would I post a picture of my bare feet so guys can marvel over them in a weird fashion? >_____>” But now we get to see your big beautiful feet.

    , and quote. According to Weese’s post Christina Grimmie automatically assumed the request to see her feet would be

    “so guys can marvel over them in a weird fashion?”

    Did Christina purportedly assume that only guys would marvel over them because she expects only males to be attracted to her, as a female, and as being heterosexual? Is Christina saying that foot fetishes are “weird”, possibly shaming or disgracing people who are naturally born attracted to feet, such as by, perhaps, calling foot fetishists abnormal? Or did she assume males because she deep down, first assumed a male would normally be attracted to her feet because she believes males should be attracted to females, and vice-versa, opposing homosexuality? She never considered that another girl, foot fetish or not, would marvel “in a weird fashion” over them. Could this just be coincidence, ignorance, inconsideration, or secretive anti-gay thoughts she’s covering up? I can already see this post is not the first to raise concern over her possible anti-gay feelings: http://tiny.cc/AntiGayGrimmie Christina Grimmie’s beliefs may seem subtle and unimportant, but when we analyze the depths behind that religion we come to a further possible conclusion that Christina Grimmie is contradicting her own beliefs, whether or not she hates homosexuals, by reading and believing the Bible, which is against homosexuality.

    Lilah Richcreek, rising actress keeps booking roles!

    Lilah Richcreek is a new actress who has already booked several national roles. You can see Lilah Richcreek highlights in her ABC pilot Work Mom, which is unfortunately not being premiered:

    She was also a guest, credited role on CBS’s Criminal Minds series, and she will be making an appearance in Two and a Half Men, another CBS series which will air September 26th, 2013.

    The Hollywood Reporter reports that she’ll now be a series regular in a new show:


    She was also in Two Broke Girls, and has several other roles under her belt. She has a decent portfolio, and I expect to see her doing nothing but improving her acting career from on onward.

    Remember to check her out! 🙂

    You can see all of her acting reels, demo reels, and other footage on her YouTube channel:


    Alternatively, you can also see her complete roles here on her IMDb:


    Why you shouldn’t give references on job applications

    Far too often do employers want references, and far too often is the fate of your hiring status terminated because one doesn’t have any references, or has no social contacts.
    Unfortunately, some people don’t have references, and some do not want to give any for a job.
    Point is if you’re proving you’re the one capable for the job yourself to the interviewer, why should you have to give contact information of someone to them for them to “verify” your qualities from another person’s perspective, opinion, or hearsay? The worst thing is that this rejects the massive majority of those with social phobia and the related conditions. Don’t people with social anxiety need money, food, and deserve chances? Apparently not, based on the pathetic system.

    She didn't have references


    It’s a bogus system; you need social contacts to win, and who you know gets you in mostly, not what you know. Jobs clearly state that they prefer you to have skills, but having references, knowing the right people, and being in the right time makes all the difference between a good employee and a working employee. Nowadays, in the social media world it’s even more pathetic. You can be barred from a job based on your Facebook status, fired because someone Tweeted a photo of you at a night club, in your underwear in bed, or eating a suggestive looking food, even without intention of it looking “bad”. The employee-employer model has been failing ever since the 1970s, and keeps getting worse. People who can barely read, have terrible grammar, don’t know a thing about computers besides Firefox and Google, and who have poor work ethic are the majority of people you see working in fast food restaurants with stable salaries. Then, of course, you never see that good employee with nice grammar, good work ethics, hard working drive, and great potential working because he/she wasn’t qualified for whatever reason, didn’t do it at the right time, or didn’t have references. Is it logical to eliminate a smart, hard working, great person with ethics, but without references in a job, but hire a high school punk who has no prospects at all? Does it not make you wonder why this often happens? You’re smart, you have the skills and then some, you show up in time, you work harder than most employees you see, but you’re just not falling in with the crowd. You are told that you will be “called” while the punks were hired the same or following day.

    Typical-ish workers

    The problem is the corruption in the hiring process. Employers are supposed to hire based on skills and likeness, not just on likeness, that is not hire someone they like, but who has no skills, and not hire someone they don’t like who has excellent skills. So, you don’t have a job because you don’t fill their quota, but that illiterate kid is making a stable income as we speak. What can we do about this? First of all we must boycott, of course.

    If nobody will work for fast food restaurants, employers will have to compromise somehow or their businesses, franchises, and the whole corportations of these companies will downgrade instantly. If 100,000 people boycotted McDonalds right now watch how big problems will get within the coming weeks.
    They will BEG you back, and that’s when you deny them, start a business, and hire people the RIGHT way.