The hulutube bullshit.

[Archael]

Do you really know if will be too late to do anything about it, before actual evidence comes out? Who is working on providing actual evidence? Exactly when will be out? What if the evidence comes out contrary to your claims? What if it comes out before its 'too late', irregardless of whether it supports your claims or not? You'll look like a real dumbass then.

The point of the video is to try and take action before it becomes too late.

I think the purpose of the video isn't very worried about "looking like a dumbass" if it's wrong, Doku.

If the video turns out to be wrong, the video wins. That it's purpose. To force Youtube to listen and NOT go ahead with their plans.

The video makes it's claims based on Youtube's past behavior. If Youtube doesn't go through with the repeated behavior, then the purpose of the video was fulfilled.


(And since you did not respond to my examples stating that sometimes it is actually a pretty good idea to act based on past behavior, and that not every call to action requires 100% factual evidence to be valid, I'm going to assume you agree).

Except you've provided no evidence that IOC creators will even be negatively affected in the first place.

Did you read my reply to you where I mentioned:

They did it on the DMCA Reform, they did it for capped video size / lengths, they did it for World Music Group, they did it for Universal, they did it for every single record company who has filed false IP claims that violate the law of Fair Use. In every single one of these cases, Youtube did the same. They screwed over their users and they helped the big companies that can otherwise RAPE YOUTUBE IN COURT. And you're telling me this video has no foundation for it's claims? Yeah that's what I thought.

???

Or did you just skip over it because you couldn't refute it?

Every single instance mentioned there negatively impacted IOC's.

Every single one.

They were all the result of Youtube ass-kissing to it's corporate masters, and ignoring the users.

They were all the result of observable, predictable, repeated behavior on Youtube's part to side with the corporate.

They were all instances which negatively impacted IOC's. Are you aware of what it means for Youtube to be letting corporate partners (but not users) get away with: False DMCA takedowns, violations of the Fair Use law for entertainment, education, observation, and analysis and the like? It's not only censorship, it's illegal, and guess what; it negatively impacts IOC's in ways even worse than simple corporate programs.

Are you gonna ignore this too and say it's not conclusive enough evidence for you?

[gojoe]

And?

[DarthPaul]

Doku this reminds me of an old saying they taught us in Primary School "better safe than sorry".

[Dokurider]

IE: Hey we haven't added the Hulu IP's yet, just give us a few. And our links split aren't on the actual site yet, but they will, and then HuluTube is complete and everything on Youtube ATM gets moved over to the "Subcribtions/videostablol" where your views will become.. exactly like therealweeklynews said!

I think the importance of the split between "$$$Corporate-backed Intellectual Property Rental Streaming with Ads thrown in" and "Everything else" flew right by your head with regards to the impact it will have on the Youtube user.

What do you mean by "IE"? Imaginary Example? Are trying to sum up what the actual article says? Because if you are, then goddamn, you fail at reading. The article doesn't even so much as MENTION Hulutube. Were did you, or therealweeklynews, even find out that Youtube is becoming Hulutube, anyways? Besides, you are missing my original point anyways. My original point was that Youtube does announce it's changes. It's not some scattered in the wind bullshit like you were saying.

You already agreed that entities like companies have predictable behavior, especially when you are able to understand their reasons.

lrn2read. I was not stating that as an fact. I was stating that as a opinion. Just because I would believe something, that does not make it true. At no point did I tout that as a fact.

Things like Youtube's decision making being split between their own survival as a business (read: has more to do with users than money) and their appeasing of the corporate world at the cost of users are examples of this.

If you can understand that, the claims in this video are far from unfounded.

How does who Youtube consider in it's decision making suddenly validate any claims made in this video? Remember, Intent =/= Actual evidence.

That is like me telling you the following:

IMAGINARY EXAMPLE: Zodiac has always closed the first topic of the month on the 1.3 forum for the past year. Next month, if he does it again, things are going to change. Everyone is tired of when he does it. You as a small 1.3 forum reader need to consider how it will change things this time. That's what the video is saying.

Are you saying it is unfounded to make a statement (video) that talks about the consequences of Zodiac acting in the same, predictable, observed behavior that he's always had?

Your example falls apart because you've have yet to establish that the changes Youtube is making are bad in the first place! If Zodiac closes the first topic of the month, that would be...slightly annoying. I mean, I'd have to remake my topic again.

You keep saying the claims in the video and my arguments to support them fall because they are unfounded, but the only reason you perceive it that way is because you don't (or seem to refuse to) understand that they have, in reality, a very good backing based on Youtube's past behavior.

No. The reality is that the video's main claim is unfounded. You are the one that is failing to (or refusing to) understand this. Once again, quit trying to substitute intent for actual proof. Just stop it. No amount of perversion of logic and reason can make it real.

Like I said before, not everything revolves around "Show me X Numerical Factual Proof, or it's unfounded and I just can't do anything about it, sorry".

If you seriously think this is how the behavior of Youtube, it's users, and other entities (everyone else) is formed, then you are sorely mistaken.

But this video does need Numerical Factual Proof. When you make a report, YOU HAVE TO CITE YOUR EVIDENCE, OTHERWISE PEOPLE (or at least people with a brain) WILL ASSUME YOU ARE JUST PISSING IN THE WIND! Don't you remember having to make reports in school about something and you had to cite your evidence? How is a video different from that?

He mentions at some point in the video that "the amount of views get will drop by 25%." How does he know this? Does he have the data on hand or knows where it is? Why doesn't he show us then? Or maybe he was just pulling numbers for his asshole.

By your logic, we should never do anything about anything, because we have no factual evidence to prove that a predictable, observable pattern is going to fuck us in the ass yet again.

Nice strawman you got there. Think he'll scare away the crows?

Why prepare for Hurricanes? Weather patterns are impossible to predict with 100% accuracy. Why prepare for them Doku?

We don't have 100% conclusive evidence that the hurricane will come this way, do we?

Let's just go to the beach!

You have observed that every few months of the year, some small island in the caribbean gets wrecked to fuck in an extremely violent, high-category freak of nature storm.

Why WOULD YOU prepare for it? Let's just do nothing about it and sit on our asses.

The TV Reporters telling everyone to get the fuck off the island or die are just being alarmists. They are making unfounded claims based on past behavior!!!

Fuck that observable, predictable, and repeated past behavior! I can't be bothered to make decisions based on observing it!!


Why call child abuse? The father beats his kid every friday night he comes home drunk. Everyone has seen him do it repeatedly.

BUT WAIT! We have no 100% conclusive evidence that he will do it NEXT Friday, or ever again!

Let's do nothing about it. They are just being alarmists.

Hurricanes, by their very nature, are unpredictable. We can predict when they'll start forming, but were will they go, we have a general idea, but it's not reliable. They can suddenly change course on a dime. That's why we watch it's every move, with satellites, doppler radar and other meteorological shit like that.

You also have a great understanding of familial law. Child abusers don't get thrown in jail because they beat their children on a regular basis, they get thrown in jail because, get this, they beat their children, period. There is proof that they beat their children. Witnesses saw it. Marks on the child were consistent with whatever they where beaten with. Child's testimony. Mountains of evidence to throw this guy in jail. Case adjorned.

Quit trying to say that I'm somehow against empirical evidence. I never said that, nor did I ever imply that.

Despite all the straw and shit you've flung at me, you've still have yet to prove the video's main claim that IOC will be negatively affected by this new change. You cannot, repeat, cannot substitute intent for actual evidence. You do not know if any harm will come of these changes. Nor is your claim that your video doesn't need factual evidence, despite how it props itself up as factual. Your argument are not true no matter how many times you dress them up in different clothing or reword it or add convoluted examples.

There is no evidence to support it, then it is unfounded.

Like I said, yet you just don't get it.

The point of the video is to try and take action before it becomes too late.

I think the purpose of the video isn't very worried about "looking like a dumbass" if it's wrong, Doku.

If the video turns out to be wrong, the video wins. That it's purpose. To force Youtube to listen and NOT go ahead with their plans.

The video makes it's claims based on Youtube's past behavior. If Youtube doesn't go through with the repeated behavior, then the purpose of the video was fulfilled.

Why should Youtube listen to what the video says? None of it's claims are even founded. Once again, intent =/= actual evidence. You have no proof that any changes Youtube has made to it's website have negatively effected IOC creators, nor do you have any proof that even if they did make changes that negatively affected IOC creators (no) that they made enough of them to make it a pattern.

And since you did not respond to my examples stating that sometimes it is actually a pretty good idea to act based on past behavior, and that not every call to action requires 100% factual evidence to be valid, I'm going to assume you agree).

Actually, I copied your post before you added that whole tirade. If I was really frivolous, I could accuse you of trying to trick me and trying to backpedal and trying to play dirty tricks to gain a upper hand. However, I won't, because I'm not like that.

Next time you wanna make amendments to your posts in an argument, just post another post like I do.

Did you read my reply to you where I mentioned:
Quote:
They did it on the DMCA Reform, they did it for capped video size / lengths, they did it for World Music Group, they did it for Universal, they did it for every single record company who has filed false IP claims that violate the law of Fair Use. In every single one of these cases, Youtube did the same. They screwed over their users and they helped the big companies that can otherwise RAPE YOUTUBE IN COURT. And you're telling me this video has no foundation for it's claims? Yeah that's what I thought.

???

Or did you just skip over it because you couldn't refute it?

Every single instance mentioned there negatively impacted IOC's.

Every single one.

They were all the result of Youtube ass-kissing to it's corporate masters, and ignoring the users.

They were all the result of observable, predictable, repeated behavior on Youtube's part to side with the corporate.

They were all instances which negatively impacted IOC's. Are you aware of what it means for Youtube to be letting corporate partners (but not users) get away with: False DMCA takedowns, violations of the Fair Use law for entertainment, education, observation, and analysis and the like? It's not only censorship, it's illegal, and guess what; it negatively impacts IOC's in ways even worse than simple corporate programs.

Are you gonna ignore this too and say it's not conclusive enough evidence for you?

Um, hello? I did answer your reply.

At best, you've established intent, that Youtube doesn't care if it hurts IOC creators or not. But that's all you got. You still have no evidence that these changes will actually hurt anyone.

I guess you want an more in-depth reply.

All those violations Youtube has made, false DMCA claims, violations of Fair Use, etc. were illegal.

Changing the look of your website and getting permission of companies to host their movies and TV shows and music is perfectly legal.

They are not the same thing.

Youtube may be biased toward who they moderate. They may side with corporations in lawsuits. But that does not mean that their changes are bad for IOC creators. Or at least this change is. Just because someone's a thief and a murderer, it does not mean he is also a rapist.

When someone is accused of murder, the most important thing you need to convict him include a body, the scene of the crime, and a weapon. If a weapon isn't found, you still might be able to get a conviction. If you don't have a crime scene, you still might be able to get a conviction. If you don't have a body, you won't get a conviction. If you don't have two of the three pieces of evidence, or none at all, you definitely won't get a conviction and the accused gets to walk away. You don't have a body (IOC creators being negatively affected) or a weapon (failed to connect the changes Youtube makes as negative. But you sure do know a lot about who they side with in lawsuits and moderation).

And a crime scene? Okay, I admit, the metaphor breaks down there. But, you have not been able to establish any real evidence that Youtube changes negatively affect IOC creators. You've established intent (or at least that they don't really care) and have repeated tried and failed over and over again to establish that evidence=intent and that all we need to force Youtube to stay the same.

If you and theweeklyrealnews are so sure that the changes Youtube is making is illegal, then why are you and the creator of the video wasting your time making and mirroring videos when you can be filling a lawsuit? Your videos don't do jack shit except rile people up for a while, then everyone will forget about it. If it's illegal, then you can challenge it. And don't give any 'oh, but their corporate lawyers are too strong' and 'the justice system is corrupt and they'll just bribe the judges and everyone and it'll be like something out of a dystopian fiction'. Like you said, you don't care if you look like an ass or fail, so what do you got to lose? You would've struck a victory for freedom and justice, by just challenging them. As it stands now, you are not doing all you can to fight injustice. You are no better than Youtube.

Besides, your campaign has failed anyways. It has achieved #1, yet you have not stopped Youtube from implementing its changes. You have failed, so STFU.

[Archael]

Youtube may be biased toward who they moderate. They may side with corporations in lawsuits. But that does not mean that their changes are bad for IOC creators.

lol
I'm guessing you are looking for # of channels taken down by false DMCA's, # of videos censored / deleted due to false DMCA's, and the like as evidence?

Im guessing you are looking for the endless videos and outcrys people have made about false DMCA's and yelling at Youtube to stop the BS and fix it's issues as proof? Oh wait.

I am pretty sure Youtube's IOC community has made it clear that what I mentioned above negatively impacted IOC's, dude.

Search Youtube for "False DMCA".

There's even a community channel called:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DMCAabuse


If you honestly believe that false DMCA takedowns and the like (observed behavior of youtube siding with the corporate) is NOT a negative impact for IOC's, you're dellusional.

Besides, your campaign has failed anyways. It has achieved #1, yet you have not stopped Youtube from implementing its changes. You have failed, so STFU.

Ah, well, now I'm convinced. That STFU at the end did it!

I'm not sure if the video has had an impact yet. The video's message wasn't that Youtube is going fall. It's not that Youtube's going anywhere.
The message was that 'YOU' (IOC) are slowly being phased out. You keep trying to see this as a black and white, over-night thing, but it never was.

Your videos don't do jack shit except rile people up for a while, then everyone will forget about it. If it's illegal, then you can challenge it.

Err, the changes coming to Youtube aren't illegal. This was never about taking legal action against Youtube, the illegal part is just something I told you was illegal (false DMCA abuse IS illegal), and it negatively impacts IOC's. The whole "why don't you take legal action here then if you're so worried!!!" doesn't really apply.

Besides, that's now how you challenge changes that a private company makes without caring for the consequences of it's OIC's; like you agreed to here:

At best, you've established intent, that Youtube doesn't care if it hurts IOC creators or not.

Youtube not caring for the changes they make negatively affected IOC's is pretty damn good evidence that they will make sweeping changes with zero regard to what happens to IOC's.

But, you have not been able to establish any real evidence that Youtube changes negatively affect IOC creators.

lol

You think none of the DMCA / false takedowns / IP violations I brought up are negatively impacting IOC's... if you honestly, believe that, then I have no clue what else you believe.

How is people's channels being taken down for no legal reason, their videos getting censored illegally, and their entire messages deleted because they happened to fall for a false take down / audio censor  NOT a negative impact?



Are you saying that isn't bad for OIC's, because last time I checked, those are negative consequences.

Getting IOC channels deleted for no legal reason, getting IOC messages and videos censored for no legal reasons is a negative impact, Doku.

2x: I am pretty sure Youtube's IOC community has made it clear that what I mentioned above negatively impacted IOC's, dude.

Nice strawman you got there. Think he'll scare away the crows?

Except that's not a straw man. It's literally what you are suggesting. You yelled alarmist, remember?

I was stating that as a opinion. Just because I would believe something, that does not make it true. At no point did I tout that as a fact.

Erm, alright, excuse me for thinking than when you said you believe something, you support it as a possibility.

You agreed to it. Don't go saying "Oh! I agreed that it was MY OPINION, not that it's FACT."

You can't agree to something then when it's turned against you try to distance yourself from it, lmao.

You agreed that companies have predictable, observable behavior, and by extension you also agree that this behavior can be used as empirical evidence to support claims / action like in the video.

I'm sorry that fucked you over, but calling it non-fact now won't help you. Besides, it's safe to call it a fact. It has been observed many, many times already Doku, that's why you agreed to it remember?

Quit trying to say that I'm somehow against empirical evidence. I never said that, nor did I ever imply that.

You're not against empirical evidence, which is why you agreed to this part:

At best, you've established intent, that Youtube doesn't care if it hurts IOC creators or not.

You said you're not against empirical evidence, right? You also said that you agree that companies have observable behavior.

So you agree that through empirical evidence (youtube's siding with corporate in the past, repeated times, in an almost predictable fashion) we can observe what they have done in the past.

What they have done in the past resulted in False DMCA takedowns, censorship, and all the other crap we already discussed. You know those things exist, you can see people complaining about this negative impact on IOC's all over the youtube community.

In other words, this video's claims are based on youtube's behavior in the past, which has obviously negatively impacted IOC's in the past.

I think it's safe to assume it will negatively impact IOC's again, Doku.

Let me put it in simple terms for you so that there is no possible way for you to mis-understand it:

1) Empirical observation of Youtube =  Siding with corporate. They always do it.

2) Siding with corporate had secondary consequences = False DMCA's. Channel take-downs. Un-founded threats of legal action.

3) False DMCA's. Channel take-downs. Un-founded threats of legal action. = A Negative impact to Youtube IOC's. The IOC's have themselves been calling attention to it as a problem for them. They are themselves SAYING it is a bad, negative thing.

4) It is reasonable to expect that Youtube siding with corporate yet again will produce a negative impact for IOC's.


This is a very real possibility. It's not even debatable.

Thus, the video.

I hope that lets you understand why the video was made, and why it makes such claims.

[Dokurider]

'm guessing you are looking for # of channels taken down by false DMCA's, # of videos censored / deleted due to false DMCA's, and the like as evidence?

Im guessing you are looking for the endless videos and outcrys people have made about false DMCA's and yelling at Youtube to stop the BS and fix it's issues as proof? Oh wait.

I am pretty sure Youtube's IOC community has made it clear that what I mentioned above negatively impacted IOC's, dude.

Search Youtube for "False DMCA".

There's even a community channel called:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DMCAabuse


If you honestly believe that false DMCA takedowns and the like (observed behavior of youtube siding with the corporate) is NOT a negative impact for IOC's, you're dellusional.

You literally have no idea what I'm talking about, do you? It's like I could have a seizure on the keyboard and post the results and you would still read it any way you want. I am NOT saying that false DMCA takedowns and like don't negatively effect IOC creators, I'm saying it has nothing to do with Youtube updating their content and look and whether it has a negative effect or not! It's an false assumption. Just because one barrel of fruit has gone bad, doesn't mean the whole crop is bad.

The video's message wasn't that Youtube is going fall.

Going to fall? Who said this? Nobody said anything about falling.

You keep trying to see this as a black and white, over-night thing, but it never was.

Stop putting words in my mouth. In fact, stop putting words into the video's mouth too. But it is pretty clear cut, if you make claims and don't have any evidence to back it up, then your claims are unfounded.

Err, the changes coming to Youtube aren't illegal. This was never about taking legal action against Youtube, the illegal part is just something I told you was illegal (false DMCA abuse IS illegal), and it negatively impacts IOC's. The whole "why don't you take legal action here then if you're so worried!!!" doesn't really apply.

Then what's the fucking connection you're trying to make here? It's like you're trying to say, "DURR YOUTUBE SIDED WITH DA CORPORATIONS AND UNFAIRLY MODERATE PEOPLE, THEREFORE ANY ACTION YOUTUBE TAKES IS AUTOMATICALLY BAD FOR US DURR." Do you realize how retarded that sounds?

Besides, that's now how you challenge changes that a private company makes without caring for the consequences of it's OIC's; like you agreed to here:

Quote:
At best, you've established intent, that Youtube doesn't care if it hurts IOC creators or not.

Youtube not caring for the changes they make negatively affected IOC's is pretty damn good evidence that they will make sweeping changes with zero regard to what happens to IOC's.

Then how do you then? Campaigning? If Youtube doesn't care about IOC creators, then it double doesn't give a shit about your opinions either and it'll do whatever it whats and laugh in your face. You can't have it both ways, you can't have Youtube not give enough of a shit to make a change that will effect IOC creators negatively, yet it gives enough of a shit to listen to you and undo it's changes that didn't give a shit about who it was effecting in the first place! That doesn't make any sense.

Are trying to convince people to boycott? Then you have failed also, since no real boycott was made. Even you say you never leave the site.

What are you and the video trying to do? How is this change going to come about? What do you what me to do about it? MIRROR AND COMMENT PLZ. What the fuck is that going to do? You're basically asking us to just bitch and moan, which never gets jack shit done. Are you just hoping it'll just 'happen', that it'll just fall in your lap? Like Youtube will roll over and suddenly go, "Oh, you're right, we shouldn't have made those changes. We'll change it ASAP!" And once it does that, how is Youtube supposed to keep it's website running now that it's kicked all of it's corporate partners to the curb (because I'd imagine they'd pissed off) and is totally for the people now. IOC creators don't pull enough revenue to keep the website going.

Thoughts do not equal action. Just because IOC creators aren't on the mind of Youtube when it makes it's decisions, it does not mean that thoughtlessnesses doesn't magically convert itself to malicious action. And just because your video is #1 in a lot of things and is on the mind of everyone on Youtube, that does not mean that will somehow magically convert into action and change. You may as well be praying.

You think none of the DMCA / false takedowns / IP violations I brought up are negatively impacting IOC's...if you honestly, believe that, then I have no clue what else you believe.

How is people's channels being taken down for no legal reason, their videos getting censored illegally, and their entire messages deleted because they happened to fall for a false take down / audio censor Shocked NOT a negative impact?



Are you saying that isn't bad for OIC's, because last time I checked, those are negative consequences.

Getting IOC channels deleted for no legal reason, getting IOC messages and videos censored for no legal reasons is a negative impact, Doku.

2x: I am pretty sure Youtube's IOC community has made it clear that what I mentioned above negatively impacted IOC's, dude.

My St. Ajora, you are dim. I never, ever, said that. I never meant it, I never implied it. I said it does not prove that the changes Youtube is making is negative. Intent =/= Evidence.

Except that's not a straw man. It's literally what you are suggesting. You yelled alarmist, remember?

Except that's not what I said. I never said "We should never do anything about anything ever again." Those are your words you tried to put in my mouth. My logic was that your video's main claim is unfounded, therefore I don't have to do anything. There is a world of difference between your video and a hurricane warning issued by the National Hurricane Center.

Erm, alright, excuse me for thinking than when you said you believe something, you support it as a possibility.

You agreed to it. Don't go saying "Oh! I agreed that it was MY OPINION, not that it's FACT."

You can't agree to something then when it's turned against you try to distance yourself from it, lmao.

You agreed that companies have predictable, observable behavior, and by extension you also agree that this behavior can be used as empirical evidence to support claims / action like in the video.

I'm sorry that fucked you over, but calling it non-fact now won't help you. Besides, it's safe to call it a fact. It has been observed many, many times already Doku, that's why you agreed to it remember?

You just can't tell opinions from facts, can you?

I'd believe that I would enjoy tofu. I'd believe that I will live to be 200. I'd believe that your head is up your ass. Just because I support it as a possibility, does not mean that it is a fact or true. Unless of course, OPINIONS = REALITY and I enjoy tofu, will live to be 200 and your head really is up your ass.

You said you're not against empirical evidence, right?

Right.

You also said that you agree that companies have observable behavior.

Wrong. It is of my opinion.

So you agree that through empirical evidence (youtube's siding with corporate in the past, repeated times, in an almost predictable fashion) we can observe what they have done in the past.

You can't "observe something with empirical evidence". You can make predictions with empirical evidence.

What they have done in the past resulted in False DMCA takedowns, censorship, and all the other crap we already discussed. You know those things exist, you can see people complaining about this negative impact on IOC's all over the youtube community.

In other words, this video's claims are based on youtube's behavior in the past, which has obviously negatively impacted IOC's in the past.

I think it's safe to assume it will negatively impact IOC's again, Doku.

Let me put it in simple terms for you so that there is no possible way for you to mis-understand it:

1) Empirical observation of Youtube = Siding with corporate. They always do it.

2) Siding with corporate had secondary consequences = False DMCA's. Channel take-downs. Un-founded threats of legal action.

3) False DMCA's. Channel take-downs. Un-founded threats of legal action. = A Negative impact to Youtube IOC's. The IOC's have themselves been calling attention to it as a problem for them. They are themselves SAYING it is a bad, negative thing.

4) It is reasonable to expect that Youtube siding with corporate yet again will produce a negative impact for IOC's.


This is a very real possibility. It's not even debatable.

Thus, the video.

I hope that lets you understand why the video was made, and why it makes such claims.

So you predict that because Youtube sides with the big guys and unfairly moderates, any and all actions it takes are automatically bad for IOC creators. I shouldn't need to tell you how ridiculous that sounds.

Perhaps what the problem is that you are struggling to understand how to prove your case, this is how:

1. Collect data on the amount of views each user gets per video (channels views can also be included) one month before youtube implemented this change and one month after, being sure that you categorize the users (ie, the 0-500 viewed users, corporate users, something like that). Also be sure to tell how you got these numbers. How do you do this? I don't know. Ask around.

2. Compile the results into a graph. See if the accumulation of view counts does indeed go down. If it does, then you were right! If not, then you were wrong.

3. Give me results.

Remember, YOU don't have to do the dirty work yourself, you don't have to collect the data yourself. You can ask someone else to do it, but it is ultimately the burden of proof lies on you or therealweeklynews. Until you do this, I will consider all and any arguments you can come up with to be faggotry, fail and AIDS and will be ignored. You may ask for clarification on the experiment and negotiate it's parameters, though. Until then, I have nothing more to say to you on this subject. I got things to do IRL, and I can't spend another week arguing with someone that can't admit defeat or fault. Good day.

Now feel free to gloat and beat your chest in victory for "pwning me by repeating the same argument over and over again in different clothing", like the man-gorilla you are.

[Archael]

So you predict that because Youtube sides with the big guys and unfairly moderates, any and all actions it takes are automatically bad for IOC creators. I shouldn't need to tell you how ridiculous that sounds.

No, I predict that because Youtube has sided with the big guys in the past, which has caused a negative impact for IOC's in the past,
siding with the big guys now will also cause a negative IOC impact now.

I don't think that sounds ridiculous at all.

You already conceded that there has been a negative impact to IOC's in the past, here;

I am NOT saying that false DMCA takedowns and like don't negatively effect IOC creators

False DMCA takedowns and the like negatively effect IOC creators.
False DMCA takedowns and the like are the consequence of Youtube siding with the big guys in the past.

Youtube is siding with the big guys yet again.

It is reasonable to assume that this will produce negative consequences to the IOC creators yet again.

You called the video alarmist, I was just trying to explain to you why the claims in the video were made and
are truly far from alarmist, considering the negative impact Youtube's history with corporate has had on IOC's in the past.

I got things to do IRL, and I can't spend another week arguing with someone that can't admit defeat or fault

Winning an argument is not a criterion that is simply achieved by declaring it.

Indeed, the mere fact that you need to make such a statement seems to suggest that you do not think
that this is self-evident from your argument.

[Smitson]

I can't believe I read that all .