No, we should not ditch Sybil's, although if it is to be sold I would expect a considerable improvement/variation on the orignal concept for it to be sold. If the basic Sybil cut was sold for $5 I would not be impressed. Dan and Dave's Mecka or Jackson 5 is a major variation on this concept so I believe selling it is justified.
By my argument, I would not be complaining about effects that use a double lift. I would, however, be complaining about an effect that uses solely a double lift in an unoriginal way. For it to be sold, I would expect either a new handling of the double lift or use of the double lift in a way nobody has previously thought of.
To compare learning a swivel cut on Youtube to downloading Dangerous is absolutley absurd. The Swivel cut is a 'public domain' move that is widely available. Dangerous is a 2 hour set of new material (for the most part it is VERY original and uses original concepts and existing moves in ways I have never thought of using them). There's nothing unethical about teaching a swivel cut, downloading Dangerous would be both unethical and illegal.
I don't know how you can possibly use this as an argument, i'm sure you must know it's absolutley ridiculous.
That comment was directed at somebody who showed no intention of giving a logical argument. Taken out of context it appears to be very arrogant but I there was little else I could say to somebody who is basically telling me to shut up.
I have NEVER said (explicity or implicity) you can say what you want if you agree with me. Don't put words in my mouth.
Everybody's opinion is equally valid, what is annoying me is OTHER people apparently saying 'you can say whatever you want, but only if they agree with you. I am being told to shut up because I don't like the 1 on 1 yet it appears to be OK to comment on it if you like it.
I have never 'bashed' anybody, I have given my reasons for why I don't think it is appropriate to sell this.
Alright, let's see here... To be honest, I still don't see the problem if the original sybil were to be taught - or other unoriginal moves - of course many people know it, but that's not the point, I'd have absolutely no problem not buying it and leaving it to the people who don't know it to buy it. It's only like the predecessor to 1 bazillion cuts so it's important for a beginning flourisher, and for some, it would be an incredible download.
I also disagree with the need for any effect involving the double lift to necessarily have a different/unique handing/purpose for the double. There's a reason why the double, the classic pass, and other such moves, have been around as long as they have, and it's because they work. They may be unoriginal, the next DL you replace back onto your deck may be the same one used decades ago, but it works, and honestly, I don't see a problem with this either. Whatever works for the target audience. There's no need to force a reworking of everything for it to be accepted in the magic community - especially as a part of an effect, but even a basic DL one on one - that has its purpose too, and though it may not be yours, it's still a purpose that satisfies others. To some extent, the need to have moves reworked comes from our need as magicians - honestly, I don't believe laymen care if they never find out because it's convincing. Their needs come first, so if classic works, classic's good, and if beginners are the target audience, teach the classics that work, by all means a normal DL if necessarily, by all means, for flourishing, a sybil.
In hindsight, I accept your point about the comparison, it was exaggerated and I apologise/withdraw it. Nonetheless, the point about teaching still stands - beginners need to learn and if a video like this is made with good teaching, I don't see the problem, it's aimed at beginners, and it's better than the thousands on YouTube.
As for the last part, I can understand where you're coming from. I read the other person's post, and I did not feel that it came off the way you understood it, and hence I immediately felt it was unjustified. Nonetheless, again, I do understand where/why that came from.