Google Product Forums

Re: I don't like the new channels design, how can I go back to the old channel design?


Saguaro Lounge Mar 8, 2012 8:02 AM
Posted in group: YouTube
"This move was made only to benefit Google in someway."

Not Google. Somebody specific at Google - one of their VPs, the one currently in charge of Youtube and Google+, who is feeding his own ego at the expense of users and stockholders, alike. As was seen in the nym wars incident, he enjoys making other people's choices for them - answering the question floating around, of why creative freedom is being suppressed - and hiding the contacts on the channels becomes a way of forcing people to use Google+, his pet project, which I'm told wasn't proving as popular as had been hoped.

Companies don't make decisions. People do, moved by motives which very well may be completely self-serving. What the people in this discussion don't seem to get is that there is a way to deal with a problem like this. If enough people do something that noticeably, financially hurts Google in direct response to the change, then the VP will be required to set his ego to one side by law. It's called fiduciary duty. Google is required, by law, to act in the best interests of its stockholders.

The stockholders, as the aggrieved parties, are unlikely to care about the VP's psychological quirks or self-actualization. Make the company really hurt, and write to those stockholders, and you've got a good chance of seeing action. Just sit here and flame the company representatives, and scream about this, as many have, and nothing will get done. People have been given a perfect easy, reasonable way of doing that violates no part of the TOS, no law, is perfectly ethical, and will provide them with immediate personal benefits, even if nobody else ever does the same. Here - I'll even set up a redirect to it.

http://is.gd/e3bMvK

Now watch everybody ignore this, and continue doing nothing but screaming en masse - a strategy that I have never seen work anywhere, ever - until they give up, and use the new channels that they swore they'd never have anything to do with. The VP and his supporters (or opportunistic cronies) will look at these complaints and laugh, because they know that the users can't sit here and scream forever, so all they have to do when the users respond in this way is wait them out, and wait for the drama to pass. If, on the other hand, we do something that is fun for and benefits us, while not doing much that is good for them - making the new channels far more of a problem for them than they are for us - then we can sustain that forever. On those terms, the Youtube staff can't realistically hope to win a test of wills with us on the subject because we'll be having a good time, and they won't.

Why is this concept so hard for people to get? Do they want to really want to see anything change? Or do they just love the sound of their own voices, as they scream, and not really want to get anything constructive done, at all?