47 votes

YouTube decides that homophobic harassment does not violate its policies

51 comments

  1. [3]
    dubteedub
    Link
    I am so disappointed by this decision by YouTube. I love Carlos' Strikethrough videos and have been following these developments on Twitter over the last few weeks. This is a pretty clear cut case...

    I am so disappointed by this decision by YouTube. I love Carlos' Strikethrough videos and have been following these developments on Twitter over the last few weeks.

    This is a pretty clear cut case of harassment and bigotry on the part of Crowder. The supercut Carlos put together shows numerous instances of Crowder calling him a lispy queer, mocking him for being latino, and a laundry list of other race and sexuality based insults, all while wearing a t shirt that he sells on his website with a homophobic slur on it.

    It seems pretty ckear to me that the only reason Crowder is not being held accountable by YouTube is vecause he has a channel with 3 million subscribers, and no matter what he does, YT will bend over backwards to keep him on for fear of being labeled as censoring conservatives.

    31 votes
    1. [2]
      Cameage
      Link Parent
      If Crowder's "harmless ribbing" isn't targeted harassment and hate speech, then what is?

      If Crowder's "harmless ribbing" isn't targeted harassment and hate speech, then what is?

      16 votes
      1. alyaza
        Link Parent
        the same speech, but only when it doesn't make youtube money and doesn't drive them traffic.

        the same speech, but only when it doesn't make youtube money and doesn't drive them traffic.

        25 votes
  2. [6]
    Bishop
    Link
    And I hate Crowder’s whole “he calls himself Mexican, he calls himself queer, why is it wrong when I do it??” bullshit. Like, yeah mate, but you’re using “queer” as the derogatory part of your...

    And I hate Crowder’s whole “he calls himself Mexican, he calls himself queer, why is it wrong when I do it??” bullshit.

    Like, yeah mate, but you’re using “queer” as the derogatory part of your insult.

    It’s like the difference between walking into, I dunno, a coffee shop where some Hasidic Jews have decided to come relax and being like “wow, lotta Jews here!” versus “Wow... lotta Jews here.”

    (Bad example but you get the idea.)

    He’s like that six year old little brother who waves his finger all around your face with that smarmy little grin and yelling “I’M NOT TOUCHING YOU I’M NOT TOUCHING YOU.” Then eventually you get annoyed and ask him to stop and he goes all, “heh 😎😎 typic

    typical liberal snowflake 😎😎 sorry I hurted your fefes.” (I’ve actually seen that last bit on a handful of reddit comments. Like the fuck?)

    25 votes
    1. [4]
      Bishop
      Link Parent
      Addendum – I'm conflicted. Obviously I'm disappointed with YouTube's stance on this. I am a current YouTube Premium subscriber. YouTube is my primary source of entertainment. I enjoy the ability...

      Addendum – I'm conflicted.

      Obviously I'm disappointed with YouTube's stance on this.

      I am a current YouTube Premium subscriber. YouTube is my primary source of entertainment. I enjoy the ability to watch ad-free whilst still supporting my favorite content creators. (And knowing that they earn more from my views than regular viewers.)

      Is this something that merits cancelling my subscription and switching to U-Block?

      Can I, in good conscience, continue to support YouTube to the tune of $10/mo. whilst knowing that these are the values they choose to uphold?

      What are your thoughts?

      11 votes
      1. [2]
        TheJorro
        Link Parent
        That's up to you. Do you want to support YouTube, the creators, both, or neither? I only want to support the creators. I've been adblocking YouTube for a long time now, long before Premium (or...

        That's up to you. Do you want to support YouTube, the creators, both, or neither? I only want to support the creators.

        I've been adblocking YouTube for a long time now, long before Premium (or Red) was available in Canada because a) I don't like their business policies, and b) I feel they are amoral and a net negative to society. I stopped bothering with whitelisting only for my favourite content creators as soon as YouTube decided that I had to watch all 30 seconds of an ad—I don't have TV, and I don't want TV.

        There's a lot of excellent content on YT, but I'd rather support those people rather than the platform. I don't use Twitter or Facebook because I feel similarly about them—they all would watch the world burn because it makes them money now.

        Patreon has luckily been a great solution to that dilemma. I can support the people I want to support, and not the platform I don't want to. YT can die next week, and all the people I watch could pick up and move to, say, Vimeo and I'll follow them there. Maybe if Vimeo shows that they're trying to do good societally, I'll reconsider my monetary support.

        15 votes
        1. Bishop
          Link Parent
          You know, I've forgotten all about Patreon! And my favorite channel have just started their own Patreon page within the last week. I think I'll have to go this route instead! :) Thank you!

          You know, I've forgotten all about Patreon! And my favorite channel have just started their own Patreon page within the last week.

          I think I'll have to go this route instead! :) Thank you!

          12 votes
      2. dubteedub
        Link Parent
        I would cancel my aubscriotion peraonally. If you want to support creators on YouTube, the beat way to do that ia through patreon. I know I give a few bucks every month to my favorite channels...

        I would cancel my aubscriotion peraonally. If you want to support creators on YouTube, the beat way to do that ia through patreon. I know I give a few bucks every month to my favorite channels that way.

        YouTube has more than enough money as it is and I doubt those subscriptions filter down all that much to the creators you enjoy.

        1 vote
    2. etc
      Link Parent
      Reddit comments at this point can be assumed to be just as bad as comments anywhere, there are sufficient wannabe trolls that any comment that wouldn't be overtly removed due to a site or sub rule...

      (I’ve actually seen that last bit on a handful of reddit comments. Like the fuck?)

      Reddit comments at this point can be assumed to be just as bad as comments anywhere, there are sufficient wannabe trolls that any comment that wouldn't be overtly removed due to a site or sub rule (and even those being ones which would be too conspicuous to fly under the radar) can be assumed to be made.

      I wouldn't hold my breath hoping for a reversal in quality. It's well past critical mass and the site owners are too busy worrying about profits to care.

  3. [12]
    stephen
    (edited )
    Link
    Youtube may not like what you have to say but it will die fighting for your right to call Carlos Maza a "lispy queer." ....But it does mean we will continue to host it on our servers to drive up...

    As an open platform, it’s crucial for us to allow everyone–from creators to journalists to late-night TV hosts–to express their opinions (YT twitter)

    Youtube may not like what you have to say but it will die fighting for your right to call Carlos Maza a "lispy queer."

    Even if a video remains on our site, it doesn’t mean we endorse/support that viewpoint (More YT twitter)

    ....But it does mean we will continue to host it on our servers to drive up engagement metrics and use it to sell ads.

    This is such a bummer. Carlos is one of my favorite creators on youtube at the moment - even if it's for Vox. Seeing him come up against shit this and then getting no support in such a public way fuckin sucks.

    In unrelated news, does anyone know of a way to watch youtube which deprives them of ad revenue?

    15 votes
    1. [11]
      nic
      Link Parent
      uBlock Origin.

      In unrelated news, does anyone know of a way to watch youtube which deprives them of ad revenue?

      uBlock Origin.

      16 votes
      1. [5]
        dubteedub
        Link Parent
        Is there a simillar way to block YouTube ads on mobile?

        Is there a simillar way to block YouTube ads on mobile?

        5 votes
        1. Keegan
          Link Parent
          You could download NewPipe if you have Android. https://github.com/teamnewpipe/newpipe/releases Go to this link and download the apk for 0.16.2. Occasionally YouTube might break things in it by...

          You could download NewPipe if you have Android.

          https://github.com/teamnewpipe/newpipe/releases

          Go to this link and download the apk for 0.16.2. Occasionally YouTube might break things in it by updating how they serve videos, so you just have to wait a little bit for the devs to release a fix.

          It also has background play and downloading. You can't "sign in" per se, but you can import your subscriptions and playlists.

          11 votes
        2. cfabbro
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Firefox on Android has uBlock. I have no idea if that works on YouTube videos though, since I don't have an Android phone. But on iOS, there is no way to block YouTube ads that I am aware of...

          Firefox on Android has uBlock. I have no idea if that works on YouTube videos though, since I don't have an Android phone. But on iOS, there is no way to block YouTube ads that I am aware of (other than being behind Pi-hole?). :(

          edit: iCab Mobile on iOS does have some measure of ad-blocking capabilities using its "Filter" feature, though sadly it doesn't block YouTube ads.

          8 votes
        3. Kelsier
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          You can try YouTube vanced. No ads and all the default app features are there. You can also play things in the background.

          You can try YouTube vanced. No ads and all the default app features are there. You can also play things in the background.

          3 votes
        4. Diff
          Link Parent
          A variety. NewPipe lets you watch YouTube videos without comments or ads, you can get the uBlock Origin extension on Firefox for Android, or you can block ads system-wide with something like...

          A variety. NewPipe lets you watch YouTube videos without comments or ads, you can get the uBlock Origin extension on Firefox for Android, or you can block ads system-wide with something like Blokada and keep using the first party client.

          3 votes
      2. [4]
        Hypersapien
        Link Parent
        Does that actually get rid of video ads before the video you're trying to watch?

        Does that actually get rid of video ads before the video you're trying to watch?

        2 votes
        1. [2]
          Amarok
          Link Parent
          Yes. On desktop or in a browser, it'll block every single ad from any source transparently and seamlessly. It eats all of youtube's ads, despite there being several delivery mechanisms for ads in...

          Yes. On desktop or in a browser, it'll block every single ad from any source transparently and seamlessly. It eats all of youtube's ads, despite there being several delivery mechanisms for ads in play already.

          If you're watching with the youtube app (say, on a set top box/htpc/smart tv) there's no way to completely block the advertisements without switching to a different 3rd party youtube app that is designed to block the ads. It may be necessary to root the device and unlock it to install some of the better ones.

          A pi-hole can block some of the ads, but not all of them. As time goes on, I expect youtube will find a way to directly insert the ads into the video stream, which is the only way to make them truly unblockable. Even then, a clever client could buffer ahead, and delete the ad from the buffer before it ever gets played.

          Youtube isn't interested in making sure everyone always sees every ad. They just want the ads to be hard enough to avoid that most people most of the time can't find away around them.

          10 votes
          1. deciduous
            Link Parent
            To add to this. A good way to get around youtube ads on mobile is to watch the videos through a browser that has adblocking. Kiwi Browser (my personal favorite) and firefox mobile both can have ad...

            To add to this. A good way to get around youtube ads on mobile is to watch the videos through a browser that has adblocking. Kiwi Browser (my personal favorite) and firefox mobile both can have ad blocking capabilities (and kiwi browser can even play videos in the background if you install an old version).

            4 votes
        2. TheJorro
          Link Parent
          Yes, I've been using it for years. Just make sure you're subscribed to the lists in its settings.

          Yes, I've been using it for years. Just make sure you're subscribed to the lists in its settings.

          7 votes
      3. stephen
        Link Parent
        Bless your heart good friend

        Bless your heart good friend

  4. [10]
    alyaza
    Link
    update on this: crowder just got demonetized presumably because the media picked up on this story, which is a step i guess. it's not that useful i'm pretty sure since crowder is probably not...

    update on this: crowder just got demonetized presumably because the media picked up on this story, which is a step i guess. it's not that useful i'm pretty sure since crowder is probably not reliant on youtube for money and he'd be stupid to have it be his main source of income, but at least they did something.

    14 votes
    1. [5]
      Deimos
      Link Parent
      Another update: YouTube has made an official blog post about it now, saying that they... might consider updating their policies in the next few months, I guess?...

      Another update: YouTube has made an official blog post about it now, saying that they... might consider updating their policies in the next few months, I guess? https://youtube.googleblog.com/2019/06/taking-harder-look-at-harassment.html

      @dubteedub

      9 votes
      1. dubteedub
        Link Parent
        Thanks for the update. Geez, what a bunch of weasel words in there. They really are trying everything they can do to appease the bigots on their platform. No one is asking for every "potentially...

        Thanks for the update.

        Geez, what a bunch of weasel words in there. They really are trying everything they can do to appease the bigots on their platform.

        If we were to take all potentially offensive content down, we’d be losing valuable speech — speech that allows people everywhere to raise their voices, tell their stories, question those in power, and participate in the critical cultural and political conversations of our day.

        No one is asking for every "potentially offensive" video to be taken down.

        I hate how these companies and the free speech bros they enable always use these slippery slope arguments to defend their hate or try to position it as normal political discourse.

        Taking down hatespeech is not going to lead us into some Orwellian future where we cant question authority. Come on guys.

        14 votes
      2. [3]
        alyaza
        Link Parent
        i don't know how it's possible to fuck up what should be a PR slam dunk in pride month as unbelievably badly as youtube has in the span of three days, but what irritates me the most is that...

        i don't know how it's possible to fuck up what should be a PR slam dunk in pride month as unbelievably badly as youtube has in the span of three days, but what irritates me the most is that youtube is obviously not going to pay socially or financially for this PR fuckup since, even if they lose money over it (which is not likely in meaningful ways), google can still just subsidize it with all their other services that do make money.

        11 votes
        1. [2]
          hackergal
          Link Parent
          That's what they've been doing the entire time. Last I checked, YouTube has been a money pit. It hasn't turned profit yet.

          google can still just subsidize it with all their other services that do make money.

          That's what they've been doing the entire time. Last I checked, YouTube has been a money pit. It hasn't turned profit yet.

          4 votes
          1. Cosmos
            Link Parent
            Hopefully at some point they'll realize it's no longer worth protecting.

            Hopefully at some point they'll realize it's no longer worth protecting.

    2. [4]
      alyaza
      Link Parent
      update 2: team youtube is fucking stupid, lol. why am i not surprised it was something petty like this and not them having any sort of balls

      update 2: team youtube is fucking stupid, lol. why am i not surprised it was something petty like this and not them having any sort of balls

      5 votes
      1. [3]
        moocow1452
        Link Parent
        Not sure if you have the right link there... Unless the sheep is a metaphor?

        Not sure if you have the right link there... Unless the sheep is a metaphor?

        11 votes
        1. [2]
          alyaza
          Link Parent
          oh, oops, although that is a cute friend and far better than the shit youtube is pulling so i'll keep it up. here is the correct, more infuriating link: To clarify, in order to reinstate...

          oh, oops, although that is a cute friend and far better than the shit youtube is pulling so i'll keep it up.

          here is the correct, more infuriating link: To clarify, in order to reinstate monetization on this channel, he will need to remove the link to his T-shirts.

          13 votes
          1. dubteedub
            Link Parent
            Wow, what a joke. So that pattern of egregious behavior TeamYouTube mentioned is selling his slur ridden t shirts? The same slur ridden t-shirts that are visible in all of his videos?

            Wow, what a joke.

            So that pattern of egregious behavior TeamYouTube mentioned is selling his slur ridden t shirts? The same slur ridden t-shirts that are visible in all of his videos?

            8 votes
  5. [3]
    Bullmaestro
    Link
    Apparently neither did using your YouTube career to groom minors until A) YouTube faced a media backlash and B) Austin Jones actually landed himself a 10 year jail sentence for it.
    9 votes
    1. [2]
      Keegan
      Link Parent
      I feel like that issue was way more severe and still isn't exactly fixed. By all means they can fix the slurs and such, but I won't really think YouTube is an okay place until they get rid of the...

      I feel like that issue was way more severe and still isn't exactly fixed. By all means they can fix the slurs and such, but I won't really think YouTube is an okay place until they get rid of the pedophiles there.

      2 votes
      1. Bullmaestro
        Link Parent
        It's far from fixed. Several months ago, a YouTuber exposed that you could enter a wormhole of innocent kid videos by either browsing YouTube whilst logged out or by logging in to a brand new...

        It's far from fixed.

        Several months ago, a YouTuber exposed that you could enter a wormhole of innocent kid videos by either browsing YouTube whilst logged out or by logging in to a brand new account. The pedophilic comments on these videos are downright disgusting. It actually caused yet another adpocalypse and led to YouTube pledging to disable and remove comments from such videos.

        Four months later, the New York Times picked up on a more recent story, where a Brazilian mother had uploaded an innocent video of her ten year old daughter playing in the backyard pool. It quickly garnered hundreds of thousands of views, and hundreds of predatory comments towards her daughter. YouTube's recommendation algorithm is simply too good at recommending similar content, so if you're a pedo that's been watching videos of prepubescent kids in bathing suits, it's gonna recommend those kinds of videos to you.

        In my eyes YouTube's recommendation algorithm has done far more harm than good to the site. It's killed animation channels, it's turned into an easily gamed system and now it's being used to fuel pedophilia.

        4 votes
  6. [3]
    JXM
    Link
    I can't tell if they are backtracking, but it seems like they are changing their policy regarding "supremisist content".
    8 votes
    1. [2]
      moocow1452
      Link Parent
      It's kind of like a Reddit Rollout, where White Supremacists™ are what's in the news right now, so YouTube doesn't support that, but anti-quiltbag+ bigotry isn't getting mainstream attention, and...

      It's kind of like a Reddit Rollout, where White Supremacists™ are what's in the news right now, so YouTube doesn't support that, but anti-quiltbag+ bigotry isn't getting mainstream attention, and nets good ads and eyeballs, so they can plausibly say they're keeping an eye out for it.

      9 votes
      1. deciduous
        Link Parent
        Youtube can change their guidelines all they want, but until they actually apply these policies in practice, it doesn't mean a thing. They've had rules against harassment for a while, but that...

        Youtube can change their guidelines all they want, but until they actually apply these policies in practice, it doesn't mean a thing. They've had rules against harassment for a while, but that clearly hasn't done anything here.

        4 votes
  7. Nep
    Link
    thats.... disappointing. I assume this also goes for transphobia. Horrible thing to hear on pride month.

    thats.... disappointing. I assume this also goes for transphobia.

    Horrible thing to hear on pride month.

    3 votes
  8. [12]
    papasquat
    Link
    It's homophobic, but is it actually harassment? Carlos Maza is a very public figure. Crowder mentioning him, even in a mean spirited and bigoted way doesn't constitute harassment. He's not...

    It's homophobic, but is it actually harassment? Carlos Maza is a very public figure. Crowder mentioning him, even in a mean spirited and bigoted way doesn't constitute harassment. He's not directing people to his home address, he's not calling his phone over and over, he's not even communicating directly with the guy. He's just making fun of him publicly. I fail to see how that constitutes harassment.

    3 votes
    1. [10]
      alyaza
      Link Parent
      being a public figure really does not figure into whether or not something is harassment. if you're repeatedly being a shithead to someone else over an extended period of time in a way that is...

      It's homophobic, but is it actually harassment? Carlos Maza is a very public figure.

      being a public figure really does not figure into whether or not something is harassment. if you're repeatedly being a shithead to someone else over an extended period of time in a way that is socially unacceptable regardless of how small or not small that person is, that can constitute harassment, and that's what crowder's doing.

      5 votes
      1. [9]
        papasquat
        Link Parent
        Does that mean that Donald Trump is the most harassed person in the US? No, obviously not. If you're a public figure, being talked about, negatively or otherwise, is part of your existence....

        Does that mean that Donald Trump is the most harassed person in the US?
        No, obviously not. If you're a public figure, being talked about, negatively or otherwise, is part of your existence. Obviously bigotry is bad, and if Youtube decides flat out that bigotry of any kind, constitutes a ban, that makes sense, but expecting to be in the public eye but not be judged negatively by anyone otherwise it's harassment is ridiculous. Someone being a shithead to you is not the definition of harassment, and even if it was, Crowder wasn't being a shithead to Maza. He's never even talked to him as far as I know. He said shitty things about him, which definitely doesn't constitute harassment.

        5 votes
        1. [7]
          alyaza
          Link Parent
          yes, people like donald trump can be harassed. do you think people don't get arrested for harassing the president or other politicians? death threats are a form of harassment, and people get...

          Does that mean that Donald Trump is the most harassed person in the US?

          yes, people like donald trump can be harassed. do you think people don't get arrested for harassing the president or other politicians? death threats are a form of harassment, and people get arrested for sending them to politicians not infrequently, dude. we're not talking some revolutionary new paradigm i'm putting forward, here.

          but expecting to be in the public eye but not be judged negatively by anyone otherwise it's harassment is ridiculous

          it's a good thing we're talking about someone being repeatedly being insulted about their sexuality over a prolonged period of time, and not someone having legitimate gripes with another person.

          Someone being a shithead to you is not the definition of harassment, and even if it was, Crowder wasn't being a shithead to Maza.

          it is literally the definition of harassment. it is the definition of harassment as given by google, which is "aggressive pressure or intimidation"; it is the one given by wikipedia, which is "a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behavior that demeans, humiliates or embarrasses a person, and it is characteristically identified by its unlikelihood in terms of social and moral reasonableness"; it is the one given by merriam webster, which is " creat[ing] an unpleasant or hostile situation for[,] especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct"

          He's never even talked to him as far as I know. He said shitty things about him, which definitely doesn't constitute harassment.

          are you trying to argue here that if i do something like say "everybody, go call @papasquat a nigger on tildes", or in some way signal to people to harass you without directly saying so that's not being a shithead because i didn't directly talk to you?

          3 votes
          1. [4]
            papasquat
            Link Parent
            If you said that, it would be encouraging other people to harass me. Crowder didn't say that though. He called him slurs, and made fun of him on his own show. If I constantly called Donald Trump...

            are you trying to argue here that if i do something like say "everybody, go call @papasquat a nigger on tildes

            If you said that, it would be encouraging other people to harass me. Crowder didn't say that though. He called him slurs, and made fun of him on his own show.
            If I constantly called Donald Trump and said "You're a shithead" over and over, that would be harassment. If I had a public TV show, and every night I said "Donald Trump is a shithead", that's not harassment, because I'm not talking to Donald Trump. I'm telling other people that he's a shithead.
            If Donald Trump was a random private citizen minding his own business, then you could make a case that calling him a shithead on a public TV show to a bunch of people would be harassment, but he's a public figure, and people calling him a shithead is something that comes with the role. Same goes for well known journalists writing publicly available articles. Making fun of a public figure is never harassment, it doesn't matter which specific words you use to express that.

            4 votes
            1. [3]
              alyaza
              Link Parent
              so... harassment then? that hits the bill of "a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behavior that demeans, humiliates or embarrasses a person, and it is...

              Crowder didn't say that though. He called him slurs, and made fun of him on his own show.

              so... harassment then? that hits the bill of "a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behavior that demeans, humiliates or embarrasses a person, and it is characteristically identified by its unlikelihood in terms of social and moral reasonableness" and "creat[ing] an unpleasant or hostile situation for[,] especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct"

              If I constantly called Donald Trump and said "You're a shithead" over and over, that would be harassment. If I had a public TV show, and every night I said "Donald Trump is a shithead", that's not harassment, because I'm not talking to Donald Trump. I'm telling other people that he's a shithead.

              good thing crowder isn't a TV show host or anything comparable, he's a dipshit on youtube who's mildly popular going up against a reporter who is probably less popular than he is. i also like how you backed off of the point of merely being a public figure making you essentially unable to be harassed and retreated to "making fun of a public figure". i'm going to guess that you realized that the the former is an actually absurd argument to make given that things like stalking exist and given that you can be arrested for threatening public figures?

              but he's a public figure, and people calling him a shithead is something that comes with the role. Same goes for well known journalists writing publicly available articles. Making fun of a public figure is never harassment, it doesn't matter which specific words you use to express that.

              "making fun of a public figure" is a pretty disingenuous way to frame this whole ordeal considering the definitions i gave you, and i'm pretty sure if we were talking about steven crowder calling shaun king or some other darker skinned person of dubious public figure nature a nigger or a negro "in jest" instead of some white gay journalist a queer and a faggot to tens millions of people you wouldn't be trying to argue that it's all in good fun, because it's pretty obviously not.

              2 votes
              1. [2]
                papasquat
                Link Parent
                Yeah, I never said that. Never said that either. You're arguing in bad faith at this point. I think I'm done with this one.

                i also like how you backed off of the point of merely being a public figure making you essentially unable to be harassed

                Yeah, I never said that.

                you wouldn't be trying to argue that it's all in good fun

                Never said that either.

                You're arguing in bad faith at this point. I think I'm done with this one.

                3 votes
                1. alyaza
                  Link Parent
                  ironically, i didn't say you said that either. but there's really no other way to interpret "No, obviously not. If you're a public figure, being talked about, negatively or otherwise, is part of...

                  Yeah, I never said that.

                  ironically, i didn't say you said that either. but there's really no other way to interpret "No, obviously not. If you're a public figure, being talked about, negatively or otherwise, is part of your existence." when how you're being talked about in the context we're talking could and does literally fit the bill for harassment as it is generally defined, as i've said and demonstrated multiple times here. you might not have explicitly said it, but you also don't need to say things for that to be the point you're basically making and arguing.

                  Never said that either.

                  this is also something you don't have to explicitly say for it to be basically what you're unintentionally (or otherwise) saying. if your whole argument is that calling someone slurs and making fun of them isn't harassment, i think it's pretty reasonable to then assume it would fit the verbiage of "all in good fun" seeing as you've basically set it up as if it's a riff or a bit crowder was doing on maza and compared it to someone on late night television doing a bit on how donald trump is a shithead every night?

                  2 votes
          2. [2]
            Keegan
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            You completely changed the scenario here to further your argument. Death threats are much different than calling someone names online, and are much more serious. The people that get arrested for...

            death threats are a form of harassment, and people get arrested for sending them to politicians not infrequently, dude

            You completely changed the scenario here to further your argument. Death threats are much different than calling someone names online, and are much more serious. The people that get arrested for those typically say "I'm going to kill ___". Those arrests are because death threats aren't legally harassment, they are threats.


            Also, you're coming off extremely poorly here. Quoting definitions and saying "is this your argument" in such a manner seem very rude and are poor ways to act in a conversation anywhere.

            2 votes
            1. apoctr
              Link Parent
              Given that a disagreement over the definition of harassment is a big point of contention between the two, quoting the common public definitions seems reasonable enough to support their point.

              Given that a disagreement over the definition of harassment is a big point of contention between the two, quoting the common public definitions seems reasonable enough to support their point.

              1 vote
        2. apoctr
          Link Parent
          Yes, he's constantly being harassed for his political stances as well as being mocked/insulted for things like physical appearance. That's pretty constant harassment. It may be part of their...

          Does that mean that Donald Trump is the most harassed person in the US?

          Yes, he's constantly being harassed for his political stances as well as being mocked/insulted for things like physical appearance. That's pretty constant harassment.

          No, obviously not. If you're a public figure, being talked about, negatively or otherwise, is part of your existence.

          It may be part of their existence, but that doesn't preclude it being harassment either. There's a difference between being "judged negatively" (judged implying something of merit is actually discussed) and being constantly referred to by homophobic slurs.

          1 vote
    2. Cosmos
      Link Parent
      He's the catalyst that drives people to harass. Same exact thing that happened with Beyonce fans sending someone death threats because they thought she was annoyed. The only way to deal with this...

      He's the catalyst that drives people to harass. Same exact thing that happened with Beyonce fans sending someone death threats because they thought she was annoyed.

      The only way to deal with this issue is to take care of it from the top. They need to be held responsible for the actions of their fanbase. That's what happens when you are an "influencer".

      3 votes
  9. mrbig
    Link
    That's a shame. If only YouTube had the power to change YouTube's own policies...

    That's a shame. If only YouTube had the power to change YouTube's own policies...

    3 votes