next »

[ｂ∀ ｋｋｕｓａ]

And Jim Sterling is a generally unlikeable person. People like him don't help the videogame industry gain a better reputation. I'd really like it if he just stopped being terrible to people and went away.

earthworm jimmyjohn is a conservative christian. I don't agree with many things that he writes since i'm neither conservative nor christian. But attacking and boycotting him only because of his views looks just like a low blow to me. That was what i meant.

Jim Sterling may be good for someone, i sincerely don't like him, at all. But, really, can people avoid getting personal, at least?

what's your position?

[Alessio]

I thought that in this forum you could expose your opinion without being continuously humiliated and attacked. I'm justing getting just loads of hatred to something i've said. And that's what's unjust.
I'll just leave this for you as permanent reply about "TenNapel" subject. Read carefully though because these don't seem the words of an homophobe, to me. I also want to highlight this part: "One guy encouraged others not to read my work though he admits to loving Roman Polanski movies. Now, I know that being a Christian Republican is offensive to some, but worse than a guy who drugged-and-raped (sodomized)-an-under-age-girl?". TenNapel may have unpopular opinions but putting him into the same position of Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson is too much to me. Free to not agree with someone but as long as this someone doesn't bother others directly in the first place, it's fine for me. And TenNapel didn't do anything of so terrible to me.
Want to end it here, anyway, since the thread was about youtubers: one would open a new thread or send me a private message if someone had to tell me something, instead.

Reminder: Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson... ops, i forgot Bill Cosby.

what's your position?

My position is the one where no one should be mean to each other. Seems a fine position.

...

Roman Polanski, Mike Tyson and Bill Cosby.

[Landshark RAWR]

yeah lets not be mean to rapists that makes sense

also:

I won’t insult every “LGBT” by insinuating they all act like crybabies, victims and dictators. Some do, some don’t. Right wing gays don’t act this way, don’t use words like “homophobic” and don’t demonize the opposition.

"I only like gays who dont hurt my feelings by calling me out on my bigotry"

[gimymblert]

I thought that in this forum you could expose your opinion without being continuously humiliated and attacked. I'm justing getting just loads of hatred to something i've said. And that's what's unjust.

Well when you have an opinion about continuously humiliating and attacking some group of people who get load of hatred, that's also unjust. That's a contradiction, people react to homophobic content precisely because of that. How do you personally solve that paradox?

[Capntastic]

People are allowed to have opinions on this forum and that includes the opinion of "this person has really bad opinions".  Talk it out.

Please don't drag threads into meta-conversation or hyperbole by casually comparing people to known abusers or rapists.

[Alevice]

i wont call out a bully because hitler became ruler of germany and you didnt do shit about it

[LucasMaxBros]

DeFranco is guilty of clickbaiting himself. It's clear that he has no issues with using untruth to lure viewers:

Youtube isn't shutting his channel. He knew this. He then decided to title his video for shock value. I checked the video to make sure and this is when I got that this crook was trying to dramatize things for business. He also pleased his followers to buy merchandise in order to help him in this difficult situation. Has he got no pride?

I really hope Patreon becomes more of a thing to support youtubers. The investors can then tell DeFranco: "Hey dude, enough with the clickbaiting ok?"

It's really hard for me to feel like supporting people like this. Of course, they're not all like that.

This being said, the amount of people of integrity on youtube is alarmingly low. I feel that for a lot of creators, having ethics is more of a hurdle than something necessary.

OmegaSin thrives on hatespewing, he's an avatar of strife. There's nothing wrong with making videos about this but I certainly understand how advertisers wouldn't want their products linked to his videos. I kind of enjoyed seeing his feet on the fire a bit for this to be honest as he's throwing a fit over his endangered income. Nobody's forcing him to do anything, he can keep making his videos where he rants and bitch about anything under the sun but he won't be paid as much for it. Let's see if he keeps on going the same path.

Just be careful not to be swayed by their discourse about this. They are trying to convince you to support their own agenda for their own benefits. Be wary.

Whoa there, I ain't a follower of DeFranco. I'm just saying Alpha and him, regardless of their position within this losing money, have a point. I feel this is unfair to particular YouTuber's who're about News coverage or just discussing current events. You can say something about what they spew, but at the end of the day there will be things that happen in the world that ain't pretty. And I feel this whole system is saying that this ground-breaking news doesn't deserve to be covered well. That people who deliver this news to a community don't deserve to get payed for it(not saying anything about if DeFranco deserves to or not).

Also, this whole monetizing thing is dumb to begin with. Do you see how many people who make money/have a high-user base who make videos that are NOTHING but them reacting to other videos? Reaction videos? Something that could be so easily set up and fit within most of the newly enforced rules that many people are doing this to make easy cash. And I don't need to mention Animators...

What else is stupid was the fact that (I can't remember his/her name) had a video discussing Sonic Adventure 2... which was demonetized because it was considered controversial... Sonic the Hedgehog, controversial. Hilarious.

Definitely a good idea. I can see how people will complain however: "How come I have to go the adult channel, my stuff is family-friendly" etc... etc...

Another question: why does this whole "We want to look family friendly so we're not going to pay people who make videos consisting of unfriendly things" need to happen for YouTube? Again, if they just refined the rules for different age restrictions and added a feature to uploading a video to say whether the video was general, may need guidance, etc. then they can have ads for appropriate videos be shown, have the option to safely view only videos of certain types/suggest similar videos to avoid conflict. And if a video didn't meet the criteria (as in a vulgar video was switched to a General Rating by the uploader) they could set up a system that people could report it.

My problem with YouTube doing this is that they are literally the only site that does what they do within a league of their own. One could say it's a monopoly since I see no competitors that can take them on and the television department is only getting smaller as they get bigger. Because of this, I feel there's no place for more mature YouTuber's when we really need the diversity. Yes they can still make videos but without profit. And of course, many are unworthy. But... YouTube will only be losing out when it comes to more mature audiences and ads.

Yet here we are with YouTube's cruddy suggestion system, where I'm constantly suggested things that don't even come close to what I like or wish to see. I can't even change that around and am limited to what I don't want to be suggested, even if sometimes the main suggestions are something vulgar. I just want OPTIONS.

[s0]

I won’t insult every “LGBT” by insinuating they all act like crybabies, victims and dictators. Some do, some don’t. Right wing gays don’t act this way, don’t use words like “homophobic” and don’t demonize the opposition.

"I only like gays who dont hurt my feelings by calling me out on my bigotry"

"Also it's unjust that people disagree with me."

[Zizka]

Interesting message, LucasMaxBros!  

Whoa there, I ain't a follower of DeFranco.

Never said or thought you were.

And I feel this whole system is saying that this ground-breaking news doesn't deserve to be covered well.

Every demonetized video can be appealed. Ok, it's not the best solution but I'm assuming they'll eventually get familiar with news channel who cover events with professionalism. I won't get DeFranco's case and his "news" coverage though but I realize that's not your point.

Also, this whole monetizing thing is dumb to begin with. Do you see how many people who make money/have a high-user base who make videos that are NOTHING but them reacting to other videos? Reaction videos? Something that could be so easily set up and fit within most of the newly enforced rules that many people are doing this to make easy cash. And I don't need to mention Animators...

I don't think youtubers are to blame here. They're providing something people want. As a side example, Kadarshian isn't to be blamed, she's milking people who have interest in shallow, superficial things. Same thing for reaction videos. If people didn't watch them so much, there would be no demand for it and youtubers wouldn't make videos about them. You could probably push the analysis further as to why so many people invest time in drama/gossip channels/video tabloids but I wouldn't really know where to begin. It's sometimes best not to delve too much into the human psyche unless you are willing to permanently settle for being a misanthrope.  

Another question: why does this whole "We want to look family friendly so we're not going to pay people who make videos consisting of unfriendly things" need to happen for YouTube? [...]

Watch the video I put in the OP, the guy explains how the youtube inner mechanisms work very clearly.

My problem with YouTube doing this is that they are literally the only site that does what they do within a league of their own. [...]

I honestly think we'll always have people who make videos about mature topics, even they don't end up being paid for it. You have tons of artists who draw and make pictures because, well, they like it! Not every one of them does it only if they're paid. Making videos is a form of art and you'll have video creators who keep doing their thing no matter what happens, I'm certain of it.

The rest was a bit off-topic so I'd rather reply to the points you brought on the topic at hand.

[FK in the Coffee]

I won’t insult every “LGBT” by insinuating they all act like crybabies, victims and dictators. Some do, some don’t. Right wing gays don’t act this way, don’t use words like “homophobic” and don’t demonize the opposition.

"I only like gays who dont hurt my feelings by calling me out on my bigotry"

"Also it's unjust that people disagree with me."

https://streamable.com/tag3

[Landshark RAWR]

People are allowed to have opinions on this forum and that includes the opinion of "this person has really bad opinions".  Talk it out.

Please don't drag threads into meta-conversation or hyperbole by casually comparing people to known abusers or rapists.

Sorry, i was trying to refer to his implication that bill cosby just "had opinions" im sorry if i came off as comparing

[s0]

i think he was complaining that doug tennapel (idk why that was even brought up tbh) was kinda-sorta being compared to rapists or something. idk.

[gimymblert]

Who brought Tennapel in the discussion anyway?

[LucasMaxBros]

Every demonetized video can be appealed. Ok, it's not the best solution but I'm assuming they'll eventually get familiar with news channel who cover events with professionalism. I won't get DeFranco's case and his "news" coverage though but I realize that's not your point.

You were trying to explain to me how he was a crook, which really doesn't matter to me. I just haven't gone out of my way to seek many videos about this subject. While it's certainly a concern for some of my favorite YouTuber's, I'm just not into getting into the whole drama thing. So I've mentioned the ones I did because they were the only ones that popped to mind as a reference. You can say what ya want about Alpha, but I do like the guy. Even if I disagree with things he says, it doesn't make what he or others say all invalid. And yeah, a better system needs to be figured out but I can't really think of a better one other than organization and options.

I don't think youtubers are to blame here. They're providing something people want. As a side example, Kadarshian isn't to be blamed, she's milking people who have interest in shallow, superficial things. Same thing for reaction videos. If people didn't watch them so much, there would be no demand for it and youtubers wouldn't make videos about them. You could probably push the analysis further as to why so many people invest time in drama/gossip channels/video tabloids but I wouldn't really know where to begin. It's sometimes best not to delve too much into the human psyche unless you are willing to permanently settle for being a misanthrope.

 

But this just helps one of my other points; if there's something in that that people like (in fact Kadarshian is a good example)then people will look for it... and therefore you can advertise/profit off it. There are plenty of people who break the rules enforced by YouTube with this yet have a large following or audience. I haven't looked at the full analytics of who is who or who all watches what for YouTube, but even if a majority of it was already for family-friendly oriented audiences, there would still be a large portion for more mature ones. There is a large base for business there regardless.

And I ain't blaming YouTuber's (cause hey, I watch some reactionist's too), I'm blaming the system.

Watch the video I put in the OP, the guy explains how the youtube inner mechanisms work very clearly.

Yet the opposite has happened to me before. I've watched grim ads before peaceful videos or colorful kid-friendly games. I can understand the idea of something like "Snicker's doesn't want to show their brand on a war video" yet I see that on television commercials after watching reports of the news.

How about putting the advertisements into specific groups? Like this commercial would likely be shown and get positive results for a general audience while a more mature crowd would like this horror film. In fact, they could step it up a notch and make ads for specific audiences of each group so they have a better chance of making a sale.

I honestly think we'll always have people who make videos about mature topics, even they don't end up being paid for it. You have tons of artists who draw and make pictures because, well, they like it! Not every one of them does it only if they're paid. Making videos is a form of art and you'll have video creators who keep doing their thing no matter what happens, I'm certain of it.

The rest was a bit off-topic so I'd rather reply to the points you brought on the topic at hand.

Animators. YouTube changed how monetizing worked and it hurt them. Yes, we have Patreon and various animators still doing awesome animations but it doesn't make this any less difficult. There is passion and awesome dedication but when we get down to it if it ain't going to help you much with paying bills, it's a hobby with more than likely less focus because it isn't going to make you anything.

Now if you give an incentive, more can happen. More focus, more art, more expression, and more to discuss. This type of stuff is how many large communities in general and on YouTube began. Do I think every YouTuber deserves the cash they net? Perhaps not, but there are many who don't or are worthy and will find themselves in the pits with these new rules. And it certainly doesn't help those who wish to aspire to be better. Not that YouTube is the only place, but it's HUGE.

And my other points were about YouTube and how this all contradicts what they say. There is clearly money to be made with the more sensitive material. There are better options yet they don't wish to use it or do the age restriction idea I had. And of course certain videos are taken down while others are not. This is due to the lack of human element, and I'm well aware of the fact that hundreds of millions of videos are being uploaded all the time making it difficult. But this is ludicrous. There needs to be more interaction, there must be more feedback.

Which only makes me suspect them. If they weren't going to do what I elaborated, they couldn't be stupid enough to say no to extra cash nor dumb enough to get so many mixed messages from large YouTube channels. Something is not being said. My only guess as to what, is control.

[rj]

I thought that in this forum you could expose your opinion without being continuously humiliated and attacked. I'm justing getting just loads of hatred to something i've said. And that's what's unjust.
I'll just leave this for you as permanent reply about "TenNapel" subject. Read carefully though because these don't seem the words of an homophobe, to me. I also want to highlight this part: "One guy encouraged others not to read my work though he admits to loving Roman Polanski movies. Now, I know that being a Christian Republican is offensive to some, but worse than a guy who drugged-and-raped (sodomized)-an-under-age-girl?". TenNapel may have unpopular opinions but putting him into the same position of Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson is too much to me. Free to not agree with someone but as long as this someone doesn't bother others directly in the first place, it's fine for me. And TenNapel didn't do anything of so terrible to me.
Want to end it here, anyway, since the thread was about youtubers: one would open a new thread or send me a private message if someone had to tell me something, instead.

Reminder: Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson... ops, i forgot Bill Cosby.

what's your position?

My position is the one where no one should be mean to each other. Seems a fine position.

...

Roman Polanski, Mike Tyson and Bill Cosby.

what












is









this







post

[Torchkas]

This isn't really a discussion about Ten Napel. You're allowed to think of him whatever you want. You claimed though, that social justice and games need to be seperated because they sometimes dislike people you don't dislike. That video by Jim Sterling, for example, had practically no "social justice" in it at all.

[Zizka]

But this just helps one of my other points; if there's something in that that people like (in fact Kadarshian is a good example)then people will look for it... and therefore you can advertise/profit off it. There are plenty of people who break the rules enforced by YouTube with this yet have a large following or audience. I haven't looked at the full analytics of who is who or who all watches what for YouTube, but even if a majority of it was already for family-friendly oriented audiences, there would still be a large portion for more mature ones. There is a large base for business there regardless.

Yes, that's a good point. I've talked about this before in a previous post however; people should have the freedom to have some control on their investment, even if it doesn't end up to their advantage in the long run. In other words, even if people like to look at a porn star talking about the people she has slept with, an investor should have the choice to have his ad show up on that video or not.

Here's what's important to understand here: views don't necessarily equates to sales for an advertiser. I would assume that it's generally the case but to be fair, I don't know much about marketing to make assertions about this. There's also the product image from what I understand. Advertisers like a squeaky clean image of their product, which is why a jar of mayonnaise might not show for OmegaSin, because they don't want to be related to this sort of content.

Advertisers often have the resources to make their own ads, they could invest money in making the most outrageous ad which would go viral. They don't it do it however because they want to preserve a certain product image in the customer's mind. That's a very important aspect to keep in mind in this whole issue.

Now if you give an incentive, more can happen. More focus, more art, more expression, and more to discuss. This type of stuff is how many large communities in general and on YouTube began. Do I think every YouTuber deserves the cash they net? Perhaps not, but there are many who don't or are worthy and will find themselves in the pits with these new rules. And it certainly doesn't help those who wish to aspire to be better. Not that YouTube is the only place, but it's HUGE.

I disagree. There are tons of art communities on the net which solely focus on the art (I know, I'm a member in quite a few of them) with no monetary income whatsoever. Those communities are thriving. When you're an artist, you just want to create. You don't stop creating because there's no paycheck coming.

Youtubers are using fearmongering as an argument here: "If you don't give me what I want, I'll stop doing it." and people are buying it without being skeptical about it. While it's true that some of them will disappear, others will take their place. I guarantee it. It certainly won't be the end of youtube. Talented youtubers will get sponsored by third parties outside of youtube by working out their own deals outside the community after generating their own following on their own time. There's also Patreon and in-video advertisement (I hate it but some youtubers are doing it with loot box). They just need to adapt by finding other ways to continue doing what they want and end up being paid for it. This requires effort though.

[ｂ∀ ｋｋｕｓａ]

Youtubers are using fearmongering as an argument here: "If you don't give me what I want, I'll stop doing it." and people are buying it without being skeptical about it. While it's true that some of them will disappear, others will take their place. I guarantee it.

Same thing is happening amongst artists (whether they use patreon or any other mean).

And i think people tend to forget that youtuber are entertainers and they put their face and person into public, which is like giving up on privacy, while artists usually tend not to mix private life and their work.

[gimymblert]

Let's sum up the point:

Don't take the devil's money for him to make you his bitch

[Zizka]

I don't know, it's pretty common practice for artists to find sponsors to support their creative endeavors and it's been the case for a really long time. Royalty used to sponsor artists in order for them to create and now the phenomenon has become more of a mainstream thing thanks to the internet.