YouTube Video Reporting Changes

Edit:  YouTuber Bearing had his channel deleted.  Numerous supporters have made videos about this.  In YouTube’s search box you can type in Bearing and find them.  These do a good job of explaining how arbitrary and unspecified the flagging and striking process I describe here is.

—————————-

Mostly my answer to the upcoming question is that it’s too early to tell.

Google/YouTube has “upgraded” their reporting guidelines.  The process by which people wound up too tight can flag a video for review to see if its a violation of community guidelines.  Now instead of just flagging a video and letting the powers that be decide to try and read your mind you can whine about what exactly is the content that offends you.

I’m already pinned as a paid shill of the dark cabal so I don’t care about what “they” think about how I found this.  Instead of trying to to flag videos, which as you will read I find to be useless at best and counterproductive at worst, I approached this the same way I do when I get a new computer game.  To hell with reading the rules, just start messing around.  The graphics had changed, like the thumbs up and down buttons are huge now, and I wanted to see what else was going on and pretty much clicked on everything.

It used to be you only had a few options to choose from which was silly since even if you could further choose from the four menu items they didn’t have all the possibilities covered.  Now you can be a lot more specific.  Nine menu options, then a drop down menu (except for child abuse and terrorism - guess they figure those are self-explanatory*) and then a dialogue box that you can provide additional information.  And if you’re really being helpful it automatically throws in the time stamp when you flagged the video.

Now, is this a good idea?  Too early to tell.  But if I have to choose between yes and no, I’m still at a big fat “NO”.

Long time readers recognize I’ve addressed this before and my thoughts haven’t changed.  Flagging videos is useless because it just pisses off the flagged person and since they are already convinced they’re right and have a proven track record of not being able to understand reality they get more annoying than they were before.

If the flagging process was ever taken seriously Zachary Hubbard Channel #15 never would have existed.  Somewhere around the 3rd or 4th they might have gotten a clue that they’ve been down this path before and it’s not going to end well.  A huge waste of their time as well as Hubbard’s.  And the blame rests 99% on the shoulders of Google for this. So, I’m actually kind of on “their side” on this.

This *could* be a start and of more changes that need to be followed through.  I have my doubts.  The key ingredient that is different now is the dialogue box for additional information and what happens with it.

For comparison, the old days before The Box.  The flagged party, as a requirement of the Truther Articles Of Confabulation, is obligated (apparently) to call the Wahmbulance! and whine about it.  With only four options the strike from Google always appeared as “violation of our community guidelines” on hate speech, bullying or copyright infringement.  Section 3 of the Articles requires pointing out that Google is wrong and the video is clean.  Insert pretty adjectives to spice up the whine.  Nothing says you’re right like spiced whine.  Genuinely amazed or just trying to save face we’ve seen this ad infinitum.

Now if Google really, really cared, don’t you think they could be more specific?  Like point out exactly what was the offensive three seconds in an hour long video?  You know, so the same mistakes aren’t repeated?  It would save everybody a lot of time.  Videos could be produced ahead of time forearmed with the knowledge of what to avoid.  Flaggers time is saved knowing that complaining about trivial bullshit is a waste.  And Google can spend less time as a result.

I imagine I’m not the only one that’s pointed this out and The Box could be the missing link.  “You talked about red jellybeans starting at 1:27 of the video.  These are protected under our hate speech violations per the Illawarra Jellybean Consortium Of 1936.  Please don’t do it again.”  Second violation, “We told you about the red jellybeans.  Knock it off, we’re serious.”  And on the flaggers side, instead of just ignoring them, “Don’t tell us about the red jellybeans.  They’re just fucking jellybeans, get a life.”

This may be the intent, but the time and resources to police it.  Pffffttt.

Looks like lip service paid to appease government pressure.