Jacque Fresco-Animal Behavior, "Instinct", Modifying Values  Proofreading Notes

JonYodice Proofreading Round 1:

I decided  to add Roxanne saying "Nuturing" in parentheses.  Timestamper may want to adjust this time, or future proofreader may decide to delete this instead.

06:16.835 And they feel 'on cloud nine'. And they have appetites for (Roxanne: "Nuturing. . .") unusual things.

nomada timashifting 

00:03:27,413 --> 00:03:31,720
Roxanne: "Do you know if birds bring their food back to their nest even if there's no babies. . ."

00:03:31,860 --> 00:03:34,524
Jacque: "No, they do not." Roxanne: ". . .when there's no babies, they don't, is that what you're saying?"

These strings are too long and fast reading. If we correct the guideline of speaker identification it should improve it. In some other parts of this video we can do the same, but for nowI leave it as it will serve as a reference for feedback and discussion on this.
Agreed, Nomada.  The speaker identification quidelines have not been followed here.  I'll direct proofreaders to check the Wiki here: http://wiki.zmlingteam.org/w/Linguistic_Team_Guidelines/LT_English_Language_Guidelines#Speaker_Identification

00:04:32,048 --> 00:04:36,575
Questioner: "I feel I don't fully understand the mechanism that drives that. . .
Same thing here. Maybe it does not need "Questioner:" but only a "-" and the string won't be 80 characters long anymore?
Guidelines state to use an identifier, so I would choose to leave (Questioner)

00:04:56,476 --> 00:05:00,986
cause they can't count. They don't know whether one's missing, or three's missing.
Too long string but not manyoptions to fix it better than it is now. I say the translators have many different ways of saying the same meaning with less words, so we leave it for them to solve. They can use numbers instead of words.

00:05:09,813 --> 00:05:13,791
. . . and some respect them a little more. That tribe survives.  
Inspect instead of respect?

00:05:16,707 --> 00:05:20,429
So, there are only minor degrees of protection.

00:05:20,569 --> 00:05:26,282
And if they're born with more internal flow, of a certain secretion,

00:05:26,422 --> 00:05:33,123
and they retain being fed when they were young. They tend to imprint on that.

00:05:33,263 --> 00:05:37,415
But they don't take care of their young because they care.
Needs punctuation corrections for clearer understanding of the meaning. "And" and "But" are not used in begining of sentences, right?

00:05:47,474 --> 00:05:52,379
that  have young offspring, and when a bigger animal comes in, they eat their young.
This string is 84 characters. Quite long for most languages to fit their translations in 2 lines of text (Bulgarian is one of the anguages with this problem). But they can choose to include "that have young offspring" or not, as this part is not necessary for the whole meaning. Do you agree? Or what shall we do?

00:06:16,255 --> 00:06:19,543
(Roxanne: "Nuturing. . .") unusual things. . . Questioner: "Its Oxytocin, isn't it?"
It might have a good reading time, but it could need some "cleaning" so it is not so messed up for the eyes to read between all those symbols and people talking. We could even eliminate some parts of the speech if they are not important. I couldn't come up with nothing.

00:07:33,848 --> 00:07:37,193
and there are women that say "Jesus Christ, I haven't been to a concert in years...
Long string to fit the text in 2 lines whenin other languages, but I couldnt improve it. Maybe the translators can simplify it and conserve the meaning.

00:08:53,936 --> 00:08:55,987
He doesn't know all that.  String added. He wispers this, I think.