Hi YouTube Community,
Thanks for sharing all of your feedback about the YouTube Heroes program. There has been some discussion about certain contribution types, such as flagging videos, so we wanted to provide additional information.
When a flag is received, the reported content is always reviewed by YouTube and only removed if it violates our community guidelines. Additionally, only users who have demonstrated high quality contributions will have access to the mass-flagging tool. YouTube employees still make the final call on all video removals. Videos flagged by YouTube Heroes will not be automatically taken down.
Our contributors help out in a number of ways in addition to flagging videos. Current list of qualifying contribution types (and associated quality checks) are below:
Accurately reporting an inappropriate video (that gets removed by YouTube)
Adding captions/subtitles to a video (that get approved/published by the creator)
Answering a question in the help forum (that gets marked as best answer)
You can learn more about this and the YouTube Heroes program in the YouTube blog post.
Cheers,
Marissa
YouTube Community Manager
Great update and clarification!
Can't wait to see where this program goes!
This program is a horrible idea. Mass flagging videos is already a big issue, because it hurts people that don't deserve it!! Check out the dislikes on y'all's promotional video! And then you went and disabled the comments, because you don't want to hear from people. Censorship at its finest. Great job, guys.
On Friday, 23 September 2016 01:21:21 UTC+1, Onyx Cutts wrote:This program is a horrible idea. Mass flagging videos is already a big issue, because it hurts people that don't deserve it!! Check out the dislikes on y'all's promotional video! And then you went and disabled the comments, because you don't want to hear from people. Censorship at its finest. Great job, guys.
If you've read Marissa's post you'll be aware that only accurate flaggers/contributors will have access to the mass flagging tool. The trusted flagger programme has been around for quite some time too, (since 2012) and it hasn't harmed YouTube.
This is an awful an idea. I cannot believe this program got greenlit. So many channels are going to be falsely shut down because of this and smaller channels will have no platform to defend themselves with due to no network giving them a voice. There's already so many incorrect copyright and community guideline strikes given out daily and now it's going to be ten times worse. Why would you harm your own creators like this? It doesn't make sense
Good to see an update! I think the video caused some widespread confusion as to the difference between a flag and a takedown.
That's why they are letting users review the content. So that they can decide if the massive flagging has a purpose or if it is just people hatting on the creator.
Youtube as a corporation, sure. Their creators, however, clearly don't matter in that regard. Only those with 1mil+ get tended to, not those with smaller or more niche communities.
A better way to handle this would be to maybe turn YouTube Heroes loose on comment sections (plenty to be dealt with there) first. Have them prove their worthiness flagging bad comments. If they prove they can properly flag bad/abusive/obscene comments, then give them very limited access to video flagging. I understand that mass tagging only becomes available at Tier 3, but it seems like that is something that should only be available to a very small, very trusted segment of your moderation team, rather than crowd sourced.
Giving run of the mill users any more control over flagging of videos seems like a recipe for abuse. Youtube already seems to have enough problems with false flagging of videos, this seems like a giant leap in the wrong direction.
This isn't the worst idea, because as youtube grows and loads of videos are being posted daily not many of the videos posted are reviewed at such a fast pace which is why Heroes was born
On Friday, 23 September 2016 00:48:55 UTC+1, Marissa - Community Manager wrote:
You can learn more about this and the YouTube Heroes program in the YouTube blog post.
Putting aside for one moment all the debate about the "Mass Flagging For Points & Rewards" as that is sure to continue and gather pace over the forthcoming months...
I have a genuine and to me far more serious issue this new concept/ program YouTube are rolling out and thais is it's very poorly thought out title/ name of "YouTube HEROES"...
I implore YouTube to change it to something else and not to use the word "HEROES" in this program as is diminishes and indeed makes a mockery of what the word HEROES actually stands for and means...
Some YouTube user flagging videos or adding some subtitles to a video should NOT be labelled a "Hero" !!! I mean seriously what going to come next from YouTube... "YouTube Saints" !!! "YouTube Gods" !!!
For the sake of the GENUINE HEROES of this world such as Paramedics, Firefighters, Hospital Staff, Doctors, War Veterans or Members of the Armed Forces whom lay their very lives on the line to give us all these freedoms we enjoy to do pretty useless things like upload videos or even flag them then PLEASE stop using the word HEROES for this program as it makes a mockery of the word and it's true meaning and indeed is somewhat of an insult to the REAL HEROES of this world...
Please rethink that one and rethink it quickly YouTube... :-/
With all the issues surrounding videos being taken down unfairly and copyright issues this year, I cant say I 'am surprised with the amount of backlash this has received. :/ I personally believe youtube needs to focus on tending to their creators, and backing movements such as #wtfu rather than causing more controversy, and problems.
How long does it take to be enrolled in the program? I signed up but haven't received a email confirming my enrollment.
So if we are moderating videos and flag the ones we deemed inappropriate, who will moderate the moderators flagging the videos. will there also be away to unflag videos deemed necessarily flagged
tony solorio: YouTube reviews the flagged videos. If you flagged a video that wasn't actually violating the YouTube Community Guidelines, nothing should happen to it.
Note that the only "moderation" in the program is moderating the content strictly within the YouTube Heroes Community site. That has nothing to do with flagging videos.
Ok, but I don't see a lot of information on who will be actually moderating the flagged videos. Whose role exactly will that be?
It won't be given to run of the mill users. As mentioned, only users that achieve a very high level of accuracy would have this ability. And it still is reviewed by internal staff.
i don't the it launched yet
I think this program has a lot of potential because it doesn't seem to really give just random people a lot of power, it seems more of a way to help the YT staff get rid of bad content by first looking at flagged videos from more reputable users. Plus it seems to really have a lot of good perks. Seems really exciting!
Are you kidding me? I watch this Youtube hero Video and the whole things is stupid and good at the same. all the stuff that should that SHOULD OF BEEN ALREADY THERE accessible by everyone like talking to a live human being instead of a computer is locked away to people who kiss your asses by mass reporting videos both falsely and authentically. Why don't you give the channel/communitty owners and moderators the basic tools first instead you gave them to random people
On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 8:06:38 PM UTC-7, Coltaine47 _ wrote:Are you kidding me? I watch this Youtube hero Video and the whole things is stupid and good at the same. all the stuff that should that SHOULD OF BEEN ALREADY THERE
the tool have always been there. flagging, answering questions and ading subtitles have all been available to youtube users.
accessible by everyone like talking to a live human being instead of a computer is locked away to people who kiss your asses by mass reporting videos both falsely and authentically.
as explained in the OP, this is not possible.
Why don't you give the channel/communitty owners and moderators the basic tools first instead you gave them to random people\
they are not being given to random people. Please read the OP
"Youtube employees still make the final call", really? How are Youtube employees supposed to have the time to go through all the videos that are mass flagged? I imagine that they are going to end up blanket approving flags from "trusted" users simply due to time constraints, leading to videos getting removed even if the videos in question don't actually break Youtube's rules (think politics or other controversial topics).
If you are dead set on implementing this program, make it so that "Youtube Heroes" can also mark a video as "safe" or "good" (in terms of following Youtube's rules and not infringing copyright, and then when a video is "protected" as such it can no longer be flagged or removed without the author's consent.
On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 9:12:03 PM UTC-7, Ronan Joseph wrote:"Youtube employees still make the final call", really? How are Youtube employees supposed to have the time to go through all the videos that are mass flagged?
you do know how many people work for YouTube right?
and as stated, they can detect abuse.
I imagine that they are going to end up blanket approving flags from "trusted" users simply due to time constraints, leading to videos getting removed even if the videos in question don't actually break Youtube's rules (think politics or other controversial topics).
not possible.
If you are dead set on implementing this program, make it so that "Youtube Heroes" can also mark a video as "safe" or "good" (in terms of following Youtube's rules and not infringing copyright, and then when a video is "protected" as such it can no longer be flagged or removed without the author's consent.
that's the setting all youtube videos are at; all are "good" and "safe" until its reported for violation
Hi since the community guidelines are so vague can you use this tool to terminate my competitors?
Funny, I think the Community Guidelines are easy to help determine what content is not allowed and what is.
and no you can't. As repeatedly stated throughout this thread and RIGHT in the OP:
and no you can't. As repeatedly stated throughout this thread and RIGHT in the OP:
When a flag is received, the reported content is always reviewed by YouTube and only removed if it violates our community guidelines. Additionally, only users who have demonstrated high quality flags will have access to the mass-flagging tool. YouTube employees still make the final call on all video removals. Videos flagged by YouTube Heroes will not be automatically taken down.
So, do we have an estimate on how many people at any one time will participate on the program? Or how many flags they will be allowed to mark every day?
Are there any precautions to keep the amount of review-needing video content from overwhelming the moderators?
@Camilo Fernández
Hi Camilo,
There's no set number of participants allowed in the program but the program is heavily restricted and not available to the average YouTube users. At this time, it is a closed beta, applications are not yet being accepted at this time.
If you reach the level where you are granted access to the Trusted Flagger tool, you may flag an unlimited number of videos you believe violate the Community Guidelines.
The reason you may flag an unlimited number of alleged violative videos is because Trusted Flaggers have a 90% and above removal accuracy.
but that will lead to huge abuse of the system. So if some random 9 year old gets into the trusted flagger program. he ends up getting unlimited amounts of flags. There has to be a limit because that will only lead to abuse of the system and increased workload on the support team or whatever department it goes. leading to result in Approving of videos that are violating community guidelines or falsely removing videos that are not. is there some sort of control to prevent mass reporting?
@Coltaine47 _
Hello,
I understand your point but as stated, the program will be highly restrictive and users must demonstrate high accuracy quality flags over a substantial time period in order to gain access to the program or its mass flag tool. Users that flag hundreds of videos in a short space of time with lower accuracy (eg. attempting to quickly be eligible for the program) will not be accepted into the program.
Can a user mass-flag videos that they haven't even viewed? If they can, that is my main concern. A user, even if they have demonstrated "high quality flags" should not be able to flag a video they haven't viewed, that is nothing more than a prejudice.
People shouldn't flag videos, on a mass scale or individually, without through understanding of fair use and screened for non bias behavior. How do content creators ensure that the person flagging them has even watched through their entire video, understands satire? And furthermore do those supposed employees have the same training? Where do creators go when they are inevitably wrongly striked because of this program? If they have no network are they kust screwed over by an unaccountable Youtube 'Hero?' Will there be legal ramifications for loss of income due to inaccurate flagging?
Youtube is now rewarding trolls for false flagging videos wow! i know for a fact Youtube staff do not have the time to review every single flagged video thus allowing “trusted flaggers” the power to remove videos without it being reviewed by staff. I can already see Youtubers paying “trusted flaggers”money to terminate competitors. Youtube Heroes is every content creators nightmare
Yes sir! they can flag all your videos without viewing them thats why its called “mass-flagging”
this is a terrible idea, the video on this topic by "Youtube Help" already got 400,000 dislikes and only 5,000 likes, not to mention the amount on times people flagged it AND all the negative replies here, it is already obvios that the youtube users think this is a terrible idea, we are the ones that youtube would be nothing without, so you can ATLEAST give us a stay in what happens, we are not interested in doing your job for you and flagging everyones videos.
show some appreciation towards us youtube.
people should be alloud to have some "innapropriate" content in there videos (within reason).
show some appreciation towards us youtube.
people should be alloud to have some "innapropriate" content in there videos (within reason).
stop shitting in our mouths and fix your shit
I'd prefer the term superheroes.
How does YouTube determine flagging accuracy when it's an automated system? And trust me, it has affected a few channels unfairly, starting with Angry Joe, Team Four Star, I Hate Everything, and a few other channels. Very rarely does YouTube consider a channel falling under fair use (TheBibleReloaded and Jim Sterling)
On Friday, 23 September 2016 13:54:38 UTC+1, Alter Falter! wrote:I'd prefer the term superheroes.
Personally I'd say "YouTube ZEROS" would be far more apt... ;-)
Flagged videos get reviewed by YouTube employees. They determine flagging accurancy.
Am Freitag, 23. September 2016 15:22:36 UTC+2 schrieb Anon Imous:How does YouTube determine flagging accuracy when it's an automated system? And trust me, it has affected a few channels unfairly, starting with Angry Joe, Team Four Star, I Hate Everything, and a few other channels. Very rarely does YouTube consider a channel falling under fair use (TheBibleReloaded and Jim Sterling)
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 9:26:58 AM UTC-4, Alter Falter! wrote:
Flagged videos get reviewed by YouTube employees. They determine flagging accuracy.
What if the video's author appeals the flag and successfully gets their strike overturned and the video restored? Does the "Hero" who flagged it get their submission point(s) subtracted from their total? Does it then count against them as a non-"accurate" flag, just as it would if it wasn't initially approved?
This may be putting things a little strongly, but Youtube, ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR COLLECTIVE MINDS? This is a HORRIBLE idea and will kill valuable content on your site. People are going to flag every video they don't agree with and for no other reason. You're creating an absolute mess, and I'm looking for an alternative platform.
That's the plan. Your accuracy will drop. Unfortunately I don't have access to my superhero dashboard yet so I could verify.
Their points for the flag would be taken away and a record of a bad flag would remain.
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 10:00:42 AM UTC-4, TexasHighDef wrote:Their points for the flag would be taken away and a record of a bad flag would remain.
What about the YouTube employee who initially approved the flag that got overturned? I hope they are punished even more than the "Heroes", because they are responsible for maintaining the "accuracy" of the whole system.
I can't wait to see how gonna work!
The problem is they're going for a Stackoverflow style crowd sourced content police. It works great on Stackoverflow because it is generally factual, non-opinion articles. Youtube is filled with highly charged emotional/social/political content where people are going to disagree AS A RULE. People are going to flag videos just to troll, this idea is stupid beyond measure.
YT/Google keeps records of everything. Employee's know that a record of all their actions is kept and most employee's are part of a team that has a head of the team. Their neck would be on the line if they do not do their job well.
can't wait to flag peoples who insulted me
You can flag videos since ages.
Am Freitag, 23. September 2016 17:08:04 UTC+2 schrieb Razor Music:can't wait to flag peoples who insulted me
Fuck this idea with a thousand dicks. I hope Youtube finally goes the way of Myspace after this.
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 10:29:37 AM UTC-4, TexasHighDef wrote:YT/Google keeps records of everything. Employee's know that a record of all their actions is kept and most employee's are part of a team that has a head of the team. Their neck would be on the line if they do not do their job well.
But obviously that system isn't working well, otherwise "false flagging" would never be a problem because those employees would detect and reject it. I know YouTube is a huge site and some things are always going to slip through the cracks, but over the years there have been far too many high-profile examples of videos that got taken down due to false flagging. That's why people are so outraged by this -- instead of YouTube addressing the problem and announcing reforms to help prevent false flags from getting through the system, they just ignore it and launch a new "mass flagging" initiative! And we're just supposed to trust the accuracy of employees who haven't had a very good track record of accuracy so far.
vwestlife,
Mass flagging has been available for 4 years, since the end of 2012. It is not a new initiative.
false flagging =/= mass flagging
Most of the "videos taken" down complaints due to false flagging are done by another rival channel encouraging its subscribers/followers to attack another channel in masses by reporting one of their videos or many of their videos for various violations
don't know why people think that mass flagging (which means reporting multiple videos at one time) by Trusted Flaggers is the same as a channel with 300,000 subscribers putting out a video/comment stating "GO FLAG THIS GUYS VIDEO!" and all 300,000 do as told.
Most of the "videos taken" down complaints due to false flagging are done by another rival channel encouraging its subscribers/followers to attack another channel in masses by reporting one of their videos or many of their videos for various violations
don't know why people think that mass flagging (which means reporting multiple videos at one time) by Trusted Flaggers is the same as a channel with 300,000 subscribers putting out a video/comment stating "GO FLAG THIS GUYS VIDEO!" and all 300,000 do as told.
On Friday, 23 September 2016 18:48:49 UTC+1, Gabriel. wrote:vwestlife,Mass flagging has been available for 4 years, since the end of 2012. It is not a new initiative.
You miss the point entirely... mass flagging HASN"T been available to the vast majority of YouTube users, now we're going to potentially be in a situation where many YouTube users whom sign up the YouTube ZEROS" program will potentially be able to gain access to mass flagging tools...
Just a quick look a t some of the comments posted in many of these threads on this subject in the past 24 hours shows that many of those idiots wanting to be a "YouTube ZERO" are looking forward to doing so to get their own back on channels that have blocked or upsets the poor wee souls in the past as they hope to potentially mass flag them...
All the careful scrutinising of people signing up to this idiotic program aint gonna weed out all the potential loonies who are are only going to be in it for a power trip or some sort of imagined revenge. They may be crazy but some of them are clever enough to bide their time and play by the rules until they gain access to the mass flagging tools and then the shit will really hit the fan...
YouTube have no idea what they are letting themselves in for and will be eventually swamped by idiots flagging things for point and rewards or just the hell of it... heck YouTube struggle as it is to cope with the amount of flagging that goes on and this crackpot idea is only going to make that problem worse for them...
The program is going to be heavily restricted and YouTube are going to be looking for frequent high accuracy reports/forum replies/subtitle-captions submissions over a long period of time to ensure only true contributors of the community have access. In simple talk, you must already have a proven track record to be allowed in. By the way, the program isn't even going to be available to the public quite some time.
On Friday, 23 September 2016 11:31:40 UTC-7, MadFranko008 wrote:You miss the point entirely... mass flagging HASN"T been available to the vast majority of YouTube users, now we're going to potentially be in a situation where many YouTube users whom sign up the YouTube ZEROS" program will potentially be able to gain access to mass flagging tools...
On Friday, 23 September 2016 20:03:29 UTC+1, Gabriel. wrote:By the way, the program isn't even going to be available to the public quite some time.
So you keep saying but didn't answer the question of WHY does YouTube currently have a page set up that invites anyone to submit their application to join (ie: the public) if what you are claiming is true ???
because there are people out there who contribute already, who have a good track record. The invitation to get more information (as that is what it is) is letting those people know, that your contributions matter, and we would like to let you know of this upcoming program
and also, to get people involved. That those who would like to contribute subtitles, but didn't know they could, can start now, and by the time the program goes public, their contributions up that point will be recognized.
and also, to get people involved. That those who would like to contribute subtitles, but didn't know they could, can start now, and by the time the program goes public, their contributions up that point will be recognized.
The form is live so we can measure interest and gradually accept people into the program who have high quality community contributions.
On Friday, 23 September 2016 21:16:42 UTC+1, Marissa - Community Manager wrote:The form is live so we can measure interest and gradually accept people into the program who have high quality community contributions.
So in other words it is not "Closed" as quite a number of people are currently incorrectly claiming on these forums...
This is very bad idea. I can't believe you think this is going to help.. It's making way more worse. There's a LOT haters and trolls around here and you just do this shit? Not cool, YouTube.
I think this is a good idea. Youtube will be moderating Youtube accounts that are signed up for it. If they keep false reporting videos, then the account will be removed and everything will be back to normal. I'm currently thinking about signing up for it or not; I could be a hero.
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 2:07:55 PM UTC-7, Skinny Sun wrote:This is very bad idea. I can't believe you think this is going to help.. It's making way more worse. There's a LOT haters and trolls around here and you just do this shit? Not cool, YouTube.
did you not read the OP? Did you not read the page? did you not read anything?
sign up as its to gauge interest in the program (and those that already have demonstrated their contributions will get the invite fairly quickly to the beta).
however, nothing is stopping you from contributing right now. Anything you do (on the account you wish to sign up with), will be kept on record, so when you are invited (you never know, you could be invited to the Beta, because of your quality contributions), you will see how much you have earned thus far.
however, nothing is stopping you from contributing right now. Anything you do (on the account you wish to sign up with), will be kept on record, so when you are invited (you never know, you could be invited to the Beta, because of your quality contributions), you will see how much you have earned thus far.
And how are you sure it gets reviewed by YouTube employees?
@Anon Imous
Does what get reviewed by employees?
Does what get reviewed by employees?
after all these years of making youtube great why are they destroying it now?
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 2:34:46 PM UTC-7, Anon Imous wrote:And how are you sure it gets reviewed by YouTube employees?
you mean flagged content? Because that is what happens now. All flagged content are reviewed by Youtube employees
Great, I have high expectations about this program. Keep up the good work.
Great update and clarification!
I've been reporting and flagging real inappropiate video's for the past few hours now same goes for the comments hopefully this YouTube heroes thing is going to work out really nice!On Saturday, 24 September 2016 05:19:05 UTC+1, Riaz Roshoven wrote:Great update and clarification!I've been reporting and flagging real inappropiate video's for the past few hours now same goes for the comments hopefully this YouTube heroes thing is going to work out really nice!
You are another perfect example of why this is such a bad idea, the Flagging For Points & Rewards mob are coming out in force already and you aint even been accepted into the program yet... :-/
Fer gawds sake YouTube can't you see what you have started, the little wannabe dictators and point scorers are coming out of the woodwork before the shows even begun and yet you think this is a good idea !!! seriously !!!
the faux drama is really tiresome
I applied, does anyone know how long it will take for me to get accepted?
Yes they can, but large numbers of inaccurate flags will count against the flagger; mass-flagging is meant for cases where the ToS violations are so blatant that they can be determined by just looking at the thumbnail and title (stuff like whole TV series without authorization, or titles that tell potential viewers the videos are pornographic); in most of these cases, if the video itself wouldn't violate the ToS, then the video-post falls under the policy against deceptive metadata (and this is common too, like 2-hour videos purporting to be whole movies that just tell viewers "YouTube wouldn't let us show this, so go to this other website!").
As for DeeLite310, whom I usually agree with, and who has provided the best advice so far about the Heroes program...
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 4:29:08 AM UTC-4, DeeLite310 wrote:As for DeeLite310, whom I usually agree with, and who has provided the best advice so far about the Heroes program...
that's the setting all youtube videos are at; all are "good" and "safe" until its reported for violation
That's not what the "protected" idea means: Instead it means that a video would be brought to YouTube's attention as a video that is definitely not violating policy, and once suitably vetted by staff, it couldn't be flagged anymore; the problem is that YouTubers with massive followings would then ask for Protected ratings the same way they ask for Likes and Subscriptions, and the more ideologically motivated types would start massive Protection campaigns to shield those they regularly watch from having to abide by YouTube policies, presuming that Protection would work the way they think Flagging works (i.e., automatically and based on the number of reports).
In reality, such a system would only swamp YouTube staff more and would not in fact lead to mass protection from flagging; a variation on this idea that might work is that Protection requests would also trigger checks for violations, and videos improperly Protect-requested would be treated as if properly flagged (i.e., removed), except that an improper Protection request would count against the requester's reputation.
P.S.: The real reason the Like/Dislike counts are so lopsided is that the motivation to use either button is much higher among certain communities who have been fed misinformation about the program; the few among us who understand, and the vast majority who don't feel strongly, don't have such strong motivation. In short, it's vote-brigading.
In reality, such a system would only swamp YouTube staff more and would not in fact lead to mass protection from flagging; a variation on this idea that might work is that Protection requests would also trigger checks for violations, and videos improperly Protect-requested would be treated as if properly flagged (i.e., removed), except that an improper Protection request would count against the requester's reputation.
P.S.: The real reason the Like/Dislike counts are so lopsided is that the motivation to use either button is much higher among certain communities who have been fed misinformation about the program; the few among us who understand, and the vast majority who don't feel strongly, don't have such strong motivation. In short, it's vote-brigading.
This is quite interesting. I have to say that I am starting to understand the concept here. I have started to up-vote good comments and flag bad videos rather than just watch videos and read comments. Does that make me a Youtube Hero now?
The Youtube Heroes video led me here to moderate this forum and you are being violent and spewing belligerent obscenities therefore I have flagged your comment.
Here's a thought: that just may be one of the "Super Tools" that will be available to "Youtube Heroes."
The entire program is on a "Volunteer" basis therefore the moderators/Youtube Heroes will not overwhelm themselves, albeit a very relaxed environment.
I am becoming a Youtube Hero without being enrolled simply by following the instructions set forth in the video. I will go subtitle some videos that I like now. See, the Youtube Heroes program isn't a program, it is an initiative/guidepost for casual users. Ta Da!!!
I don't think that it is a program at all. I believe that it is an initiative, like in the show "Lost" the Dharma Initiative is where people volunteer to do what is needed to be done instead of feeling like they have to do it like when someone joins the Military they are being self-less servants... It is a calling rather than an order. We are answering the call.
Rhetorical questions here... How many videos do you know of that you know infringe copyrights? How many videos have you flagged today? Youtube Hero Out
The content creators have their own army of spammers that already do this therefore Youtube Heroes are now going to be the "Hall Monitors" of Youtube.
Your response is why so many creators are going to get more demerits for falsely reporting "Youtube Help's" video. What is there to report?
Youtube Heroes is meant to add to the A.I. interface equation by adding Eyes and Ears to the mix.
Y U Mad Brah?
This is still embedded into the Youtube community so the person falsely reporting videos can and will have their Youtube account banned.
Don't let the Play Button hit you in the Gluteus Maximus on the way out, but if you would hear me out for a moment... I don't believe that Youtube Heroes is actually going to be a program, rather an initiative for the casual user to better understand how to be more involved in the community by taking the initiative to add subtitles to their favorite videos, flag spam, get more involved in discussions, report violations of the community guidelines AND HIT THE LIKE BUTTON. Ta-Da... You're Welcome.
RossBoomSocks actually had his channel fully demonetized for months, because people mass-flagged his videos.
The videos might not get taken down, but ALL of the revenue was lost during those months. This is a big problem for a lot of other channels as well.
Also, people's videos DO get taken down even if it does not violate the communities terms of service. UberDanger just had one of his videos taken down, because of swear words?
That's not someting a video should be taken down for.
The videos might not get taken down, but ALL of the revenue was lost during those months. This is a big problem for a lot of other channels as well.
Also, people's videos DO get taken down even if it does not violate the communities terms of service. UberDanger just had one of his videos taken down, because of swear words?
That's not someting a video should be taken down for.
On Saturday, 24 September 2016 10:18:18 UTC+1, WilliamBartlett wrote:The Youtube Heroes video led me here to moderate this forum and you are being violent and spewing belligerent obscenities therefore I have flagged your comment.
Yet another perfect example of someone going out of their way and admitting doing so in their very own words to flag things because of this idiotic "YouTube ZEROES" program...
Not only has this one suddenly thought to itself it has now become a self proclaimed moderator of these help forums the hypocrite has spammed this one thread alone with 13 posts in a row !!!
This is exactly the type of self righteous clown whom will attempt to abuse the system under "YouTube ZEREOS" and is the perfect example of why this program is doomed to cause nothing but chaos and end in failure and it won't be good for any user of YouTube nor YouTube themselves... :-/
This is a great update and the Youtube Heroes program will be able to do great things for Youtube.
They say with great power, comes great responsibility. The far flung result of this will be that there will be groups or rackets of flaggers that will flag honest product reviews, advice and other genuine videos being paid by corporations to do so... Already we know there are many companies/firms illegally help in boosting or disliking videos of genuine creators. Time and time again they have been exposed.
Now imagine the same thing happening with a greater amount of power given to users to remove videos totally.
YouTubers will greater than 40k to 100k subscribers will be relatively immune. But budding content creators will find it much harder to get a footing.
Now imagine the same thing happening with a greater amount of power given to users to remove videos totally.
YouTubers will greater than 40k to 100k subscribers will be relatively immune. But budding content creators will find it much harder to get a footing.
We have seen YouTube as a company already pampering a certain section of US/UK based content creators (mainly vloggers, pranksters and daily news/lifestyle channels) in their YouTube Red platform.
This will further complicate things. YouTube's free and open community is what distinguishes it from any other platform. Hierarchical of structured censorship will not do it any good.
LET FREEDOM PREVAIL. AND ONLY GIVE POWER TO THE INCORRUPTIBLE UNBIASED PEOPLE WHO ARE CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE RESPONSIBILITY VESTED TO THEM.
This will further complicate things. YouTube's free and open community is what distinguishes it from any other platform. Hierarchical of structured censorship will not do it any good.
LET FREEDOM PREVAIL. AND ONLY GIVE POWER TO THE INCORRUPTIBLE UNBIASED PEOPLE WHO ARE CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE RESPONSIBILITY VESTED TO THEM.
There should never be a "mass flagging tool" What ever happened to one person one vote?
Heroes? HEROES?? Seriously? Throw doggy treat points to anyone with a power fetish and you are going to call them heroes? What a joke. If you want the 'Best Youtube' - Leave the controversial stuff alone. Maybe allow a self rating system to warn wandering viewers what they might be about to view. You already have an age restriction, You think adults are so fragile they can't just ignore videos they dislike? What a wast of time. Save money by laying off all the people you employ trying to make Youtube 'better'.
Just another way for them to steal more money off of others work by letting children do all the free labor for them. YouTube is digging their own grave. There is a reason your YOUTUBE HEROES video has over 550k dislikes and will most likely not be taken down even though it will be mass flagged like other videos that have been taken down for no reason.
On Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 7:19:33 AM UTC-7, Tanbir Sohail wrote:They say with great power, comes great responsibility.
Yes and that is why YouTube will vet any person who is invited to the program. You have to have an established history of the three ways to contribute to be even considered for the program.'
The far flung result of this will be that there will be groups or rackets of flaggers that will flag honest product reviews, advice and other genuine videos being paid by corporations to do so... Already we know there are many companies/firms illegally help in boosting or disliking videos of genuine creators. Time and time again they have been exposed.
Seeing once again the misinformation campaign is flying unabated despite numerous people explaining that this will RARELY happen or even happen at all. YOuTube Heroes are reviewed and assessed and anyone CAUGHT abusing the program for their self interest will be booted from the program. The potential for abuse is close to none.
the rest of your post has nothing to do with YouTube Heroes, and imaginary scenarios like those you have proposed cannot happen under this program.
On Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 9:46:15 AM UTC-7, h page wrote:Just another way for them to steal more money off of others work by letting children do all the free labor for them.
Oh? really? You have to of legal age to sign a contract to join, and of course establish that you are a positive contributor
your claim is unsupported.
your claim is unsupported.
YouTube is digging their own grave. There is a reason your YOUTUBE HEROES video has over 550k dislikes and will most likely not be taken down even though it will be mass flagged like other videos that have been taken down for no reason.
dislikes on a video only show how people follow a herd without fidning out things on their own.
wahh .... saya sangat berminat ...
Well hello MadFranko008. It has not been a pleasure to meet you. I am going to have to kindly ask that you please do not refer to me as "it" or to myself as "itself" whereas I am an intelligent human being. I am not proclaiming myself as a moderator, I am simply engaging with you as another intellectual human being. You seem to be smart, but you have a superiority complex along with anger and rage issues that spew out of your brain and into your fingertips, therefore your words come across as belligerent and obscene. I do understand that with your mental instability it is hard to accept the truth. You are attempting to undermine me with your egotistical concepts but the first rule of magic is to be the smartest person in the room.(~;
On Saturday, 24 September 2016 18:30:35 UTC+1, WilliamBartlett wrote:
Well hello MadFranko008.
Hello Mr Spammer...
It has not been a pleasure to meet you.
Do I care about that... NOPE...
I am going to have to kindly ask that you please do not refer to me as "it" or to myself as "itself" whereas I am an intelligent human being.
That's merely you're own opinion and it's certainly not mine based on your own words and actions which is all I have to go by after all... ;-)
I am not proclaiming myself as a moderator, I am simply engaging with you as another intellectual human being.
I quote your very own words "The Youtube Heroes video led me here to moderate this forum" ...
You did indeed just proclaim yourself to be here to "moderate this forum", so with you now trying to deny that despite your own words being clearly visible for all to see I guess that really answers any questions there might have been over your "intellect" level...
You seem to be smart,
Wise guess but I've never actually claimed to be...
but you have a superiority complex
Nah, but in your case you obviously have an inferiority complex...
along with anger and rage issues that spew out of your brain and into your fingertips,
While those are obviously personal traits of your own that doesn't mean to say as you incorrectly THINK that your traits and behavioural patterns apply to all others...
Rest assured there is nothing and no one on these forums that have the slightest ability whatsoever to make me feel "angry" let alone "rage", in fact it's quite the opposite and I wouldn't be here taking part in anything if I had reached the stage what some total insignificant stranger on the internet had to say if it made me feel anger or rage... ;-)
therefore your words come across as belligerent and obscene.
I suggest you get a grown up to look up a dictionary for you and have them explain the meaning of "belligerent" and "obscene" as it's very clear you have not an ounce of understanding regarding either of those words...
Again though thanks for providing more evidence of why this whole program is NOT a good idea when people like yourself whom are oh so eager to sign up to it don't even understand a simple word like "obscene" and yet use that word because you imagined something which was not even there... ;-)
I do understand that with your mental instability it is hard to accept the truth.
If I'm "mentally unstable" compared to you, then that is indeed a compliment of the highest order coming from the likes of you, whom has shown in his/ hers/ it's own words the intelligence levels and comprehension abilities of half a brick... so thank you for that compliment... :-)
You are attempting to undermine me with your egotistical concepts
No, I allow your own crackpot and amusing words to undermine themselves, all I do is highlight them... ;-)
but the first rule of magic is to be the smartest person in the room.(~;
Oooh onto "magic" now are you (don't live in the real word do you)... :-o
You couldn't be the "smartest person" in an empty room as your own words here have proven and all the "magic" in the world won't help you out with that one... ;-)
FYI: There are seveal YouTube Heroes/Trusted Flaggers currently doing an AMA on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/54bpuo/were_some_of_the_youtube_heroes_trusted_flaggers/
We cannot report copyright infringing material. By law, the copyright owner or their designated legal representative can only file DMCA complaints.
On Saturday, 24 September 2016 02:43:00 UTC-7, WilliamBartlett wrote:Rhetorical questions here... How many videos do you know of that you know infringe copyrights? How many videos have you flagged today? Youtube Hero Out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QN293S3ajHo I AGRRE WITH LEAFY
you agree with someone who has no clue what he is talking about?
You need to watch videos from those that do:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPJke5AmgN0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MUZDa7SgVI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD3CA6nIa88
and you may want to head on over to the AMA, since everything leafy said in his video is based on misinformation
You need to watch videos from those that do:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPJke5AmgN0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MUZDa7SgVI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD3CA6nIa88
and you may want to head on over to the AMA, since everything leafy said in his video is based on misinformation
if its a comment, flag it
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802027?hl=en
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802027?hl=en
BTW he can try doesn't mean that any of his flags will work, and only puts his own account and channel in danger
This program is complete and utter bullshit. Sorry for my french but giving someone the ability to MODIFY someone else's content is WRONG plainly WRONG. Giving someone 13 y/o the ability to do the same is wrong. Youtube / google has not though about all the high influential channels out there that have many haters and this will just be an avenue for them to destroy something that someone put a lot of time and effort into creating. There is going to be a youtube strike and creators everwhere will be boycotting this bullshit. I would highly encourage youtube to abandon this youtube hero's before it even gets off the ground or there are going to be a lot of lawsuits and a lot of exposing.
Freedom Decoded: the program does not work the way you think it does. Please see the information below.
. Sorry for my french but giving someone the ability to MODIFY someone else's content is WRONG plainly WRONG.
No one will have the ability to modify someone else's content
Everyone has the ability to flag a video right now - I do, you do, everyone does.
When a video is flagged it's reviewed by YouTube for compliance with the YouTube Community Guidelines.
Flagging does not automatically take down a video. All a flag does is to submit it to YouTube for review.
Giving someone 13 y/o the ability to do the same is wrong.
13-year-olds are not eligible for the YouTube Heroes program
Youtube / google has not though about all the high influential channels out there that have many haters and this will just be an avenue for them to destroy something that someone put a lot of time and effort into creating. There is going to be a youtube strike and creators everwhere will be boycotting this bullshit. I would highly encourage youtube to abandon this youtube hero's before it even gets off the ground or there are going to be a lot of lawsuits and a lot of exposing.
Again, flagging doesn't remove any content. It just submits the video to YouTube for review.
Tons of videos are flagged that aren't affected by the flagging at all.
And to prove Peggy K's comment:
"
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/54bpuo/were_some_of_the_youtube_heroes_trusted_flaggers/
"
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/54bpuo/were_some_of_the_youtube_heroes_trusted_flaggers/
- The most flagged youtube videoby members of the global YouTube community is a Justin Bieber video.
and taht video is still up on YouTube, despite being the most flagged content on YouTube.
sim4
The type of people who will eagerly engage in this program are the type of people with "expert badges" on this forum. That is why this is a terrible idea. This will lead to authoritarian dickbags exploiting moderator status in service of their ideologies.
"Answering a question in the help forum (that gets marked as best answer)"
Considering that the very people who give the answers can mark those answers as "best answers", this is not reassuring.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 9:47:14 AM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:The type of people who will eagerly engage in this program are the type of people with "expert badges" on this forum. That is why this is a terrible idea. This will lead to authoritarian dickbags exploiting moderator status in service of their ideologies.
There are those that pariticpate that have no badges. They don't even answer questions. Trusted flaggers do not particiapte in this forum
"Answering a question in the help forum (that gets marked as best answer)"Considering that the very people who give the answers can mark those answers as "best answers", this is not reassuring.
we cannot mark our own answers as best answers.
There are those that pariticpate that have no badges. They don't even answer questions. Trusted flaggers do not particiapte in this forum
You fail to understand my concern.
we cannot mark our own answers as best answers.
Please explain the best answer for this thread then, please. For me, it says that LEOXD posted it and that LEOXD marked it as the best answer. Regardless, I'm annoyed that anyone besides the person who asked the question can mark "best answers".
(Please explain the best answer for this thread then, please. For
me, it says that LEOXD posted it and that LEOXD marked it as the best
answer. Regardless, I'm annoyed that anyone besides the person who asked
the question can mark "best answers".)
Forum TC's and the OP can each mark a best answer. There can be more then one best answer.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:14:32 AM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:There are those that pariticpate that have no badges. They don't even answer questions. Trusted flaggers do not particiapte in this forumYou fail to understand my concern.
No I fully understand it. You fail to realize that those who are in the program are not just forum participatns, and do not carry a badge. Trusted Flaggers have been around since 2012.
Have you seen complaints against them for having big egos and flagging nonsense? can you demonstrate on instances where a trusted flagger has a bused their "power" as you infer it?
Have you seen complaints against them for having big egos and flagging nonsense? can you demonstrate on instances where a trusted flagger has a bused their "power" as you infer it?
I'm speaking to Rising Stars. Top Contributors are designated as such as they are recognied for giving the BEST answres consistantly
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:14:32 AM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:
Regardless, I'm annoyed that anyone besides the person who asked the question can mark "best answers".
top contributors usually do that for threads where hte OP has left completely, and the correct answer was given. And that happens alot. Sometimes the oP doens't realize they can do that
Top Contributors are there to fill the gap, so that those who gave the best answer in a thread, aren't left to dangle . Also if someone comes along and sees the thread, but the OP has never bothered to reply back, it also gives that new vistoir a chance to see that hte question was answered
There are numerous threads here no best answer is ever given.
Top Contributors are there to fill the gap, so that those who gave the best answer in a thread, aren't left to dangle . Also if someone comes along and sees the thread, but the OP has never bothered to reply back, it also gives that new vistoir a chance to see that hte question was answered
There are numerous threads here no best answer is ever given.
I feel as if I owe this forum an answer since I opened my big mouth in the first place. I am a stay at home dad out of the military on disability. Until this Youtube Heroes Programme came about I just watched videos and read comments without the slightest demeanor of hitting a like/dislike button or taking action against anything that I have read. This has made me more self conscious about what I could have been doing about negative, racist, and harmful content contained in the comments rather than just scrolling by and thinking someone else will flag it and that it wasn't any of my business. No one has to have the Youtube Hero Badge to make a change with their own viewing habits and do better for the Youtube or real world community. The ones that are making a big deal out of this are obviously the ones that have something heavy weighing on their conscious. Let the garbage take itself out. I do apologize for this being so long, but necessary to get the point across. Thank you all for your understanding and keep making Youtube awesome. (~;
No I fully understand it.
No. You don't. Here, let me help: "The type of people" is not the same thing as "the same people". You can disagree, but you can't tell me I meant something other than what I meant.
Have you seen complaints against them for having big egos and flagging nonsense? can you demonstrate on instances where a trusted flagger has a bused their "power" as you infer it?
Do you believe that my mistrust of and dislike for the people here who consistently act with childish sanctimony is a brand new state of mind? I don't have to show you anything, I'm not trying to convince you.
I notice you failed to acknowledge the fact that your claim ("we cannot mark our own answers as best answers.") does not align with reality.
TexasHighDef wrote:Forum TC's and the OP can each mark a best answer. There can be more then one best answer.
That's not what I needed explained. I understand that people other than the person asking the question can mark "best answers", I just disagree with the rationale.
On Sunday, 25 September 2016 18:01:11 UTC+1, DeeLite310 wrote:.
we cannot mark our own answers as best answers.
Sigh... more misinformation given out yet again by you despite the clear evidence for all to see that certain people can and do indeed mark their own answers as "Best Answer"...
From this every thread you are participating in...
I eagerly await you're usual desperate response where you will as usual claim, I am making it up, that I am lying, that I can't read etc... etc... as you do every time despite everyone being able to see for themselves that you once again are giving out incorrect information here to people on these forums... :-/
I eagerly await you're usual desperate response where you will as usual claim, I am making it up, that I am lying, that I can't read etc... etc... as you do every time despite everyone being able to see for themselves that you once again are giving out incorrect information here to people on these forums... :-/
That's exactly the kind of behavior I'm talking about.
Yes I do know what you are talking about, and you based your entire opinion on nothing more than your own bias and without evidence.
Its the equivalent of saying people who become police officers or firefighters only are doing it to feel superior over others. That may be the case for some people, But you malign an an entire group with a broad brush.
And you failed to read my other posts as to why Top Contributors are able to mark best anssers in thread. Unless you like threads with correct answers to have no best answers given, and someone jumping in to aks the same quesiton that was answer 1 post later.
And you failed to read my other posts as to why Top Contributors are able to mark best anssers in thread. Unless you like threads with correct answers to have no best answers given, and someone jumping in to aks the same quesiton that was answer 1 post later.
I dont know about you, but when I jump into an old thrad and see a best answer is chosen, I don't bother to read the rest of the thread, no matter WHO picked it as best answer.
Only Top Contributors and TC Alumni, Google Experts can mark best answrs, beyond the OP. For everyone else, its a greyed out icon.
It's like talking to a defensive brick wall. You're demonstrating exactly what I'm talking about, and you don't even realize it.
I especially like your insistence that I meant something I didn't mean and which couldn't be gleaned from anything I actually said. Classy.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 11:21:43 AM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:It's like talking to a defensive brick wall. You're demonstrating exactly what I'm talking about, and you don't even realize it.
Actually no I'm not. you are demonstrating that you find anyone who has any modicum of control to be "bad:
do you argue with police officers about them being power driven? that they are only doing it because they want the "power"?
As you are being, you are insulting every member in the Trusted Flagger program with a broad brush without even knowing who they are. Do you know why they do what they do?
did you visit hte AMA from the Best answer post to pose that question to them? Why they are doing it?
do you argue with police officers about them being power driven? that they are only doing it because they want the "power"?
As you are being, you are insulting every member in the Trusted Flagger program with a broad brush without even knowing who they are. Do you know why they do what they do?
did you visit hte AMA from the Best answer post to pose that question to them? Why they are doing it?
DeeLite310, I'm just waiting for you to acknowledge that you were proven wrong about "best answers". Until you do, I have nothing more to say to you.
And sadly she never will, she will basically stalk you as she had done with me for almost two years endlessly posting that she is right and everyone else is wrong even when you post clear evidence to her proving that was she has said was in fact false... and always trying to get the last word in no matter how foolish her own words make her look...
Standard internet moderator, then. It's good to know that I'm not the only one who's frustrated with this nonsense.
It's best just to point out her mistakes, misinformation and quite often lies she posts for the benefit of other reading these threads and let her own words expose her for what she really is... ;-)
If you've been tangoing with her for that long, maybe she's a lost cause.
I apologize about the best answers. I was going off that Rising stars do not have that ability, which is part of the confusion. not everyone with a "badge" can do what you say they do.
are you going to apologize for using a broad brush to malign a group of hard working volunteers?
Your best to ignore frank. he'll turn on you the moment you show any sort of disagreement with him, even on little things.
Sorry be on the defensive but there are trolls in this forum, and when you have to deal with constant trolls, it can get hard to recognize people with true questions. part of the problem is that lots of people come here half cocked and angry and their posts are less than inviting to respond to.
bagaimana cara melihat kontribusi kita di youtube hero ??
There is a dashboard you will see that you can see all of your contributions.
until you are accepted into the program, you can somewhat track your progress for subtitle contributions an forum answers these ways (you just won't know how many points you have):
When you click on that, it'll take you to a screen of all your subtitle contributions and see if they've been accepted
For forum, you can track via your emails sent by Google notifying you of your answers being chosen as Best Answers, or by visiting your profile to see how you are doing
Flagging content, is not trackable until you are part of the Heroes program
Welcome to George Orwell's 1984. Thank you Google for eliminating free speech in America.Google is the new thought police.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 2:19:49 PM UTC-7, Utopian Delusions wrote:Welcome to George Orwell's 1984. Thank you Google for eliminating free speech in America.Google is the new thought police.
Please see this blogpost
Please head over to the Reddit AMA, as most of your concerns are addressed and answered :
Please read over the program articles:
Here are some videos by YouTube Creators who addresses some of your issues:
On Sunday, 25 September 2016 22:19:49 UTC+1, Utopian Delusions wrote:Welcome to George Orwell's 1984. Thank you Google for eliminating free speech in America.Google is the new thought police.
Nah, they've got an "App" these days that controls peoples thoughts... you can see it in the blank dead eyes of every mobile phone user... ;-)
I think I might just leave this here:
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/31873/summary
What you are asking for is nothing short of free labour, if you really want a quality control for content you should actually bother enough to pay for it... It's not like you don't have the money for it.
Terrible idea, it's very exploitative and it's very easily deployed as a silencing tool of unpopular opinions and as a trolling tool. Again, hire real people if you care about quality.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/31873/summary
What you are asking for is nothing short of free labour, if you really want a quality control for content you should actually bother enough to pay for it... It's not like you don't have the money for it.
Terrible idea, it's very exploitative and it's very easily deployed as a silencing tool of unpopular opinions and as a trolling tool. Again, hire real people if you care about quality.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 3:26:21 PM UTC-7, aLmAnZo wrote:I think I might just leave this here:
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/31873/summary
What you are asking for is nothing short of free labour, if you really want a quality control for content you should actually bother enough to pay for it... It's not like you don't have the money for it.
those of us who have been doing it for years, aren't doing it for money or are we doing it for the recognition:
As explained in the AMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/54bpuo/were_some_of_the_youtube_heroes_trusted_flaggers/d81w87h
As explained in the AMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/54bpuo/were_some_of_the_youtube_heroes_trusted_flaggers/d81w87h
The way I perceive this is that the programme is entirely voluntary. We are not forced to flag content, we aren't forced to spend certain amounts of time flagging content, and we don't have a quota. We don't have obligations other than a high accuracy as volunteers, whereas in paid jobs you tend to have to do a certain number of hours or tasks.
We contribute what we can, when we can. Anyone with a little bit of free time and the accuracy who wants to contribute via the programme is capable of doing so. Some people do this for a few minutes a day, and others sometimes opt to do it for a few hours - it really depends on the person and how they are feeling. There are on the other hand organisations which run volunteer programmes such as the Red Cross, which I am also a part of, which may actually impose some other requirements. Volunteering in itself is just contributing spare time you have towards a cause you care about.
As an aunt to 6, I want YouTube to be safe for them and others to use. Users should be able to enjoy the platform with as little hindrance as possible in my personal opinion, and spam alongside other forms of abuse can harm the experience people have. I am happy to have the ability to not only help keep the platform safe, but also to pass on anything of concern and help people who need it. It's another way of doing what you can with the time you have, and making a positive impact.
If, by viewing content that would otherwise endanger users, I have the opportunity to help prevent someone falling victim to it, I will take it. The internet is awesome but there's plenty of not awesome stuff out there too - paedophiles, spam and ISIS propaganda to name just a few.
It differs person to person as we don't have a quota or any time requirements. Personally I usually spend around an hour a day doing this, although some days more, some days less. It really depends on the type of content that I'm looking at, as stuff like spam is much easier to tolerate watching and checking for a period of time in comparison to animal/child abuse. I'm pretty sure most other volunteers are the same in that regard.
I'd also like to mention that everyone verified in the OP has been doing this longer than the levelling has been a thing! The programme launched in 2012 and the rebranding to YouTube heroes is the only reason it's suddenly become so public. Anyone currently in the programme was a volunteer before the Heroes launch. Before I joined the programme (before 2013!) I flagged videos pretty regularly in order to try and stop users falling victim to phishing scams. After joining the programme it became much easier to escalate large amounts of spam and as a result, there's now a lot less spam on YouTube. There has really been no real world change for me - I do this when I have time and when I feel like doing it.
I am a volunteer as I do this optionally. I chose to flag videos and being invited to the programme isn't Google forcing me into anything - it's simply making passing on concerns and issues easier. It's beneficial for the community because there's less spam, less scams, and less dangerous activities going on. We also do our fair share of passing on concerns and helping users, although most of what we've done in the past few years hasn't been very public, which is why there's so much confusion as of recent.
Volunteering means I can help people, make the site safer, and still do what I love doing and what I need to do when I need to do it. Unlike a job there aren't obligations, just to be accurate when flagging. It opens opportunities to help people who need it and keeps many users of the platform safe. Some examples I can provide off the top of my head are minorities who are targeted in ISIS propaganda videos, and minors who should be able to post content without being exposed to dangerous people.
Terrible idea, it's very exploitative and it's very easily deployed as a silencing tool of unpopular opinions and as a trolling tool. Again, hire real people if you care about quality.
As explained in the Blogpost you didn't read, the Articles on the program that you didn't read, nor the AMA you didn't read, There are securities in place so that the wrong people aren't able to even qualify for the program.
No one is going to spend hours every single day for weeks/months flagging content correctly, answering questions or spend 6 hours to translate a video to get subtitles uploaded and approved, just to qualify for the program, then once in, take advantage of it. All of these actions requires a lot of time and high quality contributions to even be considered.
From the rules, that you didn't read;
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7159025?hl=en&ref_topic=7124235
From the rules, that you didn't read;
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7159025?hl=en&ref_topic=7124235
B. POINTS ACCRUAL.
- Each YouTube Hero who is in compliance with these Rules will be able to earn points for every qualifying contribution to YouTube (such as accurately flagging inappropriate videos), that is verifiable and organic, and not gamed, improperly received or otherwise in violation of these Rules, including the YouTube Community Guidelines (each a “Qualifying Contribution”). We will determine each qualifying Contribution.
- Points you accrue can unlock certain perks. Learn more about current perks and the number of points required to unlock them here. Our point system and perks are subject to change at any time.
- Any abuse of the point system, the Program, or other violative behavior, may reduce the points accrued in your program account and/or restrict or prohibit any aspect of your participation in the Program.
D. APPROPRIATE CONDUCT AND PARTICIPATION.
- You must comply with these Rules at all times. By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree that when using Google products or services, you will not:
- defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (including the rights of privacy and publicity) of others;
- upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any unlawful, inappropriate, defamatory or obscene content or message;
- impersonate another person or entity;
- transmit any viruses, worms, defects, Trojan horses, or any items of a destructive nature; or
- submit fake, falsified, misleading, or inappropriate contributions.
Please read over the programs and visit the various links that we have provided, as the basis of your beliefs are nothing more than paranoia.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 12:54:33 PM UTC-6, DeeLite310 wrote:I apologize about the best answers. I was going off that Rising stars do not have that ability, which is part of the confusion. not everyone with a "badge" can do what you say they do.
I wasn't looking for an apology, just an acknowledgement that you were proven wrong.
are you going to apologize for using a broad brush to malign a group of hard working volunteers?
No.
Your best to ignore frank. he'll turn on you the moment you show any sort of disagreement with him, even on little things.
That's between you and him.
Sorry be on the defensive but there are trolls in this forum, and when you have to deal with constant trolls, it can get hard to recognize people with true questions.
That's fine and all, but I deal with trolls, too, and I find a more effective strategy is to say nothing and move on. If your answer is met with vitriol, why waste your time? Mine wasn't even a question, more a complaint.
I have dealt with the TC's and the RS's and the experts enough to know what kind of people are attracted to this sort of volunteering, and we just don't see eye to eye. If that offends you, good. It's supposed to.
"As an aunt to 6, I want YouTube to be safe for them and others to use. Users should be able to enjoy the platform with as little hindrance as possible in my personal opinion, and spam alongside other forms of abuse can harm the experience people have."
You think this is completely reasonable, don't you? This isn't a zero sum game, one person's spam and abuse is another person's fun. This is pretty much the core of the problem. This kind of volunteer moderation attracts people who believe they know what's best for everybody. You don't.
"As an aunt to 6, I want YouTube to be safe for them and others to use. Users should be able to enjoy the platform with as little hindrance as possible in my personal opinion, and spam alongside other forms of abuse can harm the experience people have."You think this is completely reasonable, don't you? This isn't a zero sum game, one person's spam and abuse is another person's fun. This is pretty much the core of the problem. This kind of volunteer moderation attracts people who believe they know what's best for everybody. You don't.
What? are you saying that someone who wants to keep porn, child abuse, pedophile videos, animal abuse and spam (spam is content and videos that are to send people to another site to purchase and in more cases than not, get to buy into a scam, or download malware, scam ware, ransom ware to that person's computer). YouTube has a responsibility to its users to try and limit those videos from being uploaded, however, it relies on its users to help report those videos when they are.
You're saying that a mother who wants YouTube to be a safe place for her child to watch their Favorite YouTuber, or research how to do homework subject or solve a math problem, shouldn't be concerned that a simple search on how to solve an algebra problem gets a return of 30 porn videos before a video a professor showing how to work it out?
Spam is spam. Porn is porn. its not hard to distinguish what is spam and what is not. Its not hard to distinguish what is porn and what is not.
So what if someone thinks child abuse videos, animal abuse videos, ISIS recruitment videos, pedophilia videos and scam spams are "fun", in the end, they are not allowed on YouTube.
and you completely ignored that no matter what, all content that are FLAGGED are reviewed by youTube employees to make sure that wrongly flagged content are not removed.
did you visit the AMA.> Why don't you pose our concern to their thread?
You're saying that a mother who wants YouTube to be a safe place for her child to watch their Favorite YouTuber, or research how to do homework subject or solve a math problem, shouldn't be concerned that a simple search on how to solve an algebra problem gets a return of 30 porn videos before a video a professor showing how to work it out?
Spam is spam. Porn is porn. its not hard to distinguish what is spam and what is not. Its not hard to distinguish what is porn and what is not.
So what if someone thinks child abuse videos, animal abuse videos, ISIS recruitment videos, pedophilia videos and scam spams are "fun", in the end, they are not allowed on YouTube.
and you completely ignored that no matter what, all content that are FLAGGED are reviewed by youTube employees to make sure that wrongly flagged content are not removed.
did you visit the AMA.> Why don't you pose our concern to their thread?
"other forms of abuse", Dee, is NOT as specific as all that. You are reading into what I said something that isn't there. "other forms of abuse" is extremely vague, and that's the problem. The YouTube TOS are also quite vague, particularly as regards "abuse". To pretend that there's no wiggle room and "legitimate" targets for moderation are limited to porn and the like is dishonest.
"Spam is spam. Porn is porn."
Oh, is that what "abuse" means? It means "porn"?
"Why don't you pose our concern to their thread?"
Still reading through what's already there to see if others have already broached these issues in the way I have. I will do so if it seems like there's something I can add, but I have added my voice to the throng and I'll be satisfied with that if I don't.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 5:52:57 PM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:"other forms of abuse", Dee, is NOT as specific as all that. You are reading into what I said something that isn't there. "other forms of abuse" is extremely vague, and that's the problem. The YouTube TOS are also quite vague, particularly as regards "abuse". To pretend that there's no wiggle room and "legitimate" targets for moderation are limited to porn and the like is dishonest.
As stated, it comes down to a youTube employee;s review. And the flagger must state when they flag why they are reporting it. If the YT employee agrees, and it falls under the "other forms of abuse" then the video would be removed. If not, then the video remains.
90% of videos reported fall into the main common forms of abuse: porn, child abuse, animal abuse, ISIS recruit ment videos,, promotion of violence/hate speech, harassment, privacy violations, and scams.
90% of videos reported fall into the main common forms of abuse: porn, child abuse, animal abuse, ISIS recruit ment videos,, promotion of violence/hate speech, harassment, privacy violations, and scams.
"Why don't you pose our concern to their thread?"Still reading through what's already there to see if others have already broached these issues in the way I have. I will do so if it seems like there's something I can add, but I have added my voice to the throng and I'll be satisfied with that if I don't.
okay. just seems that you're insistent on categorizing the Trusted Flaggers as people who will willy nilly falg anything they want, and this would be your chance to actually ask questions of trusted flaggers.
I responded to this:
"What? are you saying that someone who wants to keep porn, child abuse, pedophile videos, animal abuse [...]"
I was noting that the passage I quoted had nothing to do with any of those things, thus your response was inappropriate and inapplicable.
"okay. just seems that you're insistent on categorizing the Trusted Flaggers as people who will willy nilly falg anything they want,"
I didn't say that. I said that this sort of position attracts people who think they know what's best for everybody, i.e. it attracts sanctimonious, benighted despots. You seem determined to paint me as some reactionary doomsday prophet. I am voicing my displeasure at the direction I see this going, plus insulting the people who are TC's here or whatever, because frankly y'all need a bit of negativity to keep you grounded.
You're not a collective of selfless volunteers helping the confused masses, you're a bunch of random people posting on a forum, often to insult people for asking certain things or saying things in a way you don't like.
You're not going to make me take it back, but take the last word if you must.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 6:49:21 PM UTC-7, David Giarratana wrote:"okay. just seems that you're insistent on categorizing the Trusted Flaggers as people who will willy nilly falg anything they want,"I didn't say that. I said that this sort of position attracts people who think they know what's best for everybody, i.e. it attracts sanctimonious, benighted despots.
which is categorizing hardworking volunteers with a broad brush, which brings back to the original issue with you doing so. funny that you don't want to tell this to the very people you are maligning.
Do you call volunteer police officers as "sanctimonious despots" ?
Do you call volunteer firefighters as "sanctimonious despots" ?
Do you call those who volunteer for the Red Cross as "sanctimonious despots"?
Do you call those who report child abusers as "sanctimonious despots"?
Do you call those who report crimes to the police as 'sanctimonious despots"?
Do you call volunteer police officers as "sanctimonious despots" ?
Do you call volunteer firefighters as "sanctimonious despots" ?
Do you call those who volunteer for the Red Cross as "sanctimonious despots"?
Do you call those who report child abusers as "sanctimonious despots"?
Do you call those who report crimes to the police as 'sanctimonious despots"?
Again, it seems that you just don't like people who have authority, or given authority based on their history of contribution. You don't like people being rewarded? Does that soldier who risks getting his life , not be rewarded or recognized for the work he did?
And as explained several times, the pogram is only looking for those who contribute positively to the community. Someone who is only doing it for "fame" will ;quickly be shown the door.
And as explained several times, the pogram is only looking for those who contribute positively to the community. Someone who is only doing it for "fame" will ;quickly be shown the door.
This has to be the worst idea EVER to come out of any Google company. Instead of being called "YouTube Heroes", just be honest about it and call it "YouTube Hitler Youth". It is totalitarian by its very nature, clearly intended to suppress freedom of speech.
you should know frank
youre an expert at bullying and abusing people on these forums. not to mention being everything you accuse others of being.
pot. kettle. black.
And he proves my point.
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 11:14:00 PM UTC-7, Upaj Os wrote:This has to be the worst idea EVER to come out of any Google company. Instead of being called "YouTube Heroes", just be honest about it and call it "YouTube Hitler Youth". It is totalitarian by its very nature, clearly intended to suppress freedom of speech.
Can you explain that if this is so "bad", why are videos that are critical of YouTube still available on YouTube? If Flaggers are as bad as you say,, wouldn't these videos be first to be removed?
This question regards accurately flagging a video or post in YouTube or Google+.
If the reported post contains nudity and the link or video does not fit the description; which would be the most appropriate flag; Nudity or misleading metadata?
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 12:19:04 AM UTC-7, Piecesoftofu wrote:This question regards accurately flagging a video or post in YouTube or Google+.If the reported post contains nudity and the link or video does not fit the description; which would be the most appropriate flag; Nudity or misleading metadata?
Are you referring to an image or a thumbnail of a linked video in a comment?
If its an image, you can report as outright nudity
IF its a thumbnail to a video, you can report the video for spam/misleading content > and misleading Thumbnail, and explain that its porn in the thumbnail, or nudity.
IF its a thumbnail to a video, you can report the video for spam/misleading content > and misleading Thumbnail, and explain that its porn in the thumbnail, or nudity.
is there an example of this?
Once again I repost what I have said as it is neither "Abuse", "Spam", "Insulting" or anything which the flagging system in this forum allows to be flagged but which a certain person here keeps FALSELY FLAGGING this post which is merely an observation on someones own exact words which they have posted on these forums... and is here completely relevant to this thread to show the sheer hypocrisy and foolishness of posts they have made in this very thread...
So here are those facts and observations yet again that show the sheer hypocrisy of someone here whom has claimed one thing in this thread while in her own words in another thread clearly display the hypocrisy of her words here that she is oh so keen to state and falsely proclaim to others in this thread...
-----------------------------
Don't you just love the sheer hypocrisy of a statement made by someone whom says...
QUOTE: DeeLite310 "those of us who have been doing it for years, aren't doing it for money or are we doing it for the recognition:"
Whom as it just so happens to be the very same person whom once felt the need to get people to RECOGNISE her contributions by pointing out that she THINKS people whom don't have that all important (to her) "Rising Star" label she apparently treasures and thinks is oh so important (to her) that their answers must somehow be wrong and thereby shouldn't be recognised, unlike her of course with her all important wee Rising Star label she wants everyone to recognise....
-----------------------------
DeeLite310 said:
Please completely ignore madFrank as he is often more wrong than right (notice that he doesn't have a "rising star" icon anywhere near his name which means more often than not, not many people find his answers to be correct)
------------------------------
Link:
-------------------------------
Isn't it simply amazing and indeed pathetic that the person involved here doesn't want anyone to read her own words that prove she is a complete hypocrite in what she has said here to people in this very thread...
In this particular case with the very sentence I have quoted above and which proves she is a complete hypocrite... so she continually & repeatedly FALSELY FLAGS the truth and facts being said in this post in a pathetic bid to censor the truth and hide the facts that expose her words in this thread that indeed prove she is a complete hypocrite...
Staggering the amount of FALSE FLAGGING she is willing to do in a sad attempt to try and hide those FACTS and TRUTHS about her, revealed by her very own words I should add...
I'd like to add that the ongoing discussion between Dee and MadFrank is exactly why this project is horribly misguided. In the marketplace of ideas arguments occur and sometimes those arguments get heated. This is what two adults having a debate sounds like. This is the exact kind of exchange on YouTube that makes it GREAT and the exact kind of thing that I fear this awful program will squelch.
One side of these exchanges always feels picked on or abused and that's too bad, but it's the way the world works. The fear is that person goes around flagging the content.
Do we want a community that polices itself down to the most easily offended people? If YouTube wants to have only kiddie content with toy unboxings and discussions as heated as whether you like animals "a lot" or "a WHOLE lot" that's fine, just come out and say it, and us adults can find another platform.
Phillyguy21: why do you believe that such content would be removed from YouTube? The policies haven't changed. The flagging options haven't changed.
And yet you can find all kinds of nastiness of YouTube today. And I expect that will be true in the future too.
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 11:57:35 AM UTC-4, PeggyK wrote:Phillyguy21: why do you believe that such content would be removed from YouTube?
Because YouTube admitted in the original version of the Heroes video that they want "negative content" removed. Only after the massive backlash began did they change it to say "inappropriate videos". Was that really a mistake they fixed, or did they reveal their true intent in the original wording?
an honest mistake and poor wording on their part. nothing more.
"why do you believe that such content would be removed from YouTube? "
Simply because of the growing trend going on in social media to squelch one side of the conversation regarding political and social events. Twitter and Facebook have both been caught red handed silencing the voices of countless people, simply because they disagree with them politically. Youtube up until recently has show itself to be honest broker with a neutral stance.
Twitter has been facing disaster due to this: https://blog.twitter.com/2016/announcing-the-twitter-trust-safety-council
And what YouTube is doing sounds a lot like it.
As evidenced by following below... and we're supposed to just accept and not dare question that Google/ YouTube all of of those whom think the sun shines out of Google/ YouTubes rear end word is something we should believe without question !!!
---------------------------
Read the following article that exposes the double standards of YouTube and basically exposes YouTube as being a company run by people who's mantra is Do As We Say and NOT As We Do...
Example from the article of these stealth changes made to the YouTube ZEROES video...
Original Video...
The video AFTER a stealthy edit...
Not great way to lead by example by YouTube to clean up things on the site which is the supposed objective of the program when YouTube themselves bend the rules and edit a video AFTER it has passed the number of views where they don't allow ALL other YouTube users to edit a video and have it keep the same URL, View Counts, etc... :-/
maybe head on over to the AMA; its being hosted and answered by the very people who are in the Trusted Flaggers program. You can ask them if such content wold be removed:
i think thats a great thing
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 1:23:24 PM UTC-7, Phillyguy21 wrote:
I can see where you would be concerned about that. And yes, the first version of the promo video was poorly worded.
But YouTube does try to differentiate between people not liking someone's opinion about politics or religion or other topics (which is within the Community Guidelines) and people who post abusive or harassing or hate speech content (which is not allowed).
People should be able to state their opinions without being abusive if they so choose.
I do recommend reading the Trusted Flagger AMA where they talk about the kind of content they flag - massive amounts of spam, and porn and child abuse and other content that clearly violates the community guidelines and has nothing to do with disliking someone's opinion.
That's the kind of content YouTube takes down when it's flagged.
As a you tube viewer not poster I am disappointed with the potential censorship this will create - any 'staff' will have to defend not removing something because it creates a reaction... If you don't like something don't watch it but don't prevent me from seeing it if I want to. I'm an adult 😡
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 11:04:07 PM UTC-4, PeggyK wrote:I do recommend reading the Trusted Flagger AMA where they talk about the kind of content they flag - massive amounts of spam, and porn and child abuse and other content that clearly violates the community guidelines and has nothing to do with disliking someone's opinion.
They also admit to "monitoring" LeafyIsHere's channel and waiting to catch him in a policy violation because he is "very close to losing his channel".
I don't like Leafy's videos either, but the "Heroes" should definitely NOT be targeting a channel like that and itching to find reasons to shut it down!
This is quite possibly the worst idea I have ever heard. It is literally the opposite direction YT needs to be going. You're punishing content creators for creating content and empowering trolls and people who don't understand Fair Use... it's almost like YT staff don't understand what Fair Use is. Do we really want YT to become a milquetoast, ultra-censored safe-space SJW haven? I guess if the idea is to drive views away from the site as quickly as possible, this is going to work like gangbusters.
Google, you should just sell YT to a company that understands how user-created-content works and why it's popular instead of trying to sabotage it into oblivion.
Google, you should just sell YT to a company that understands how user-created-content works and why it's popular instead of trying to sabotage it into oblivion.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016 18:34:07 UTC+1, sinrise wrote:Google, you should just sell YT to a company that understands how user-created-content works and why it's popular instead of trying to sabotage it into oblivion.
If Google actually did that then it would be the one and only best move they'd ever make as far as YouTube is concerned...
The Google way of doing things/ business plan simply doesn't fit in with the ideals, philosophy & concept of YouTube. Google should stick to the only thing they do best, search engines and advertising tools as they don't have clue when it comes to social media like YouTube and their failed Google+ venture to try and compete with the likes of Facebook just proves that social media isn't Googles forte...
On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:34:07 AM UTC-7, sinrise wrote:This is quite possibly the worst idea I have ever heard. It is literally the opposite direction YT needs to be going. You're punishing content creators for creating content and empowering trolls and people who don't understand Fair Use... it's almost like YT staff don't understand what Fair Use is. Do we really want YT to become a milquetoast, ultra-censored safe-space SJW haven? I guess if the idea is to drive views away from the site as quickly as possible, this is going to work like gangbusters.
hi it seems that you have been given alot of misinformation as to what the program is about and how content that violates the guidelines are handle
Please see this blogpost
Please head over to the Reddit AMA, as most of your concerns are addressed and answered :
Please read over the program articles:
Here are some videos by YouTube Creators who addresses some of your issues:
On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 1:55:33 PM UTC-4, DeeLite310 wrote:Here are some videos by YouTube Creators who addresses some of your issues:
Ironically those first two videos could easily be flagged and removed for "inappropriate content" (excessive boobage).
I'm simply going by what was presented in the 88% downvoted YouTube Heroes video that recently was released. There is FAR less content that violates anything besides SJW's and millennials sense of entitlement when it comes to having anything they say criticised. This is just an attempt of YT/Google to be more PC and consequently completely forgetting what made the site great in the first place. Looks like the VAST majority of people who have seen the video agree with me. Are you going to accuse all them of being misinformed, too?
Did you read the reddit AMA?
did you watch the videos I linked?
did you read the policies and articles?
A video that summarizes what hte progrma is about is not the whole story. Maybe asking a question in the AMA will help clarify things for you.
did you watch the videos I linked?
did you read the policies and articles?
A video that summarizes what hte progrma is about is not the whole story. Maybe asking a question in the AMA will help clarify things for you.
Who thinks YouTube heroes should exist? It got me banned from my favorite community!
Wow. How did they do that?
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 2:00:49 AM UTC+2, Kevin Dong - YouTube wrote:Who thinks YouTube heroes should exist? It got me banned from my favorite community!
The biggest flaw is that the Heroes program does not benefit content creators in any way, and instead gives "heroes" benefits that even many creators don't have access to, such as the ability to directly contact YouTube staff.
As I think Boogie2988 mentioned in his video about it, why not give "heroes" access to features that can actually benefit content creators, such as the ability to earmark videos that they think are excellent and should be featured by YouTube? Why not give "heroes" the ability to block trolls in the comments section of videos (as the announcement video initially implied they would, before it was edited)?
Yes, flagging and deleting spam and porn is important, but content creators really want to see some clear, positive benefit to them as well.
I could be wrong but I think contributing subtitels in 54 different languages do benefit content creators in a great way.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 3:02:56 PM UTC+2, vwestlife wrote:The biggest flaw is that the Heroes program does not benefit content creators in any way, and instead gives "heroes" benefits that even many creators don't have access to, such as the ability to directly contact YouTube staff.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 6:02:56 AM UTC-7, vwestlife wrote:The biggest flaw is that the Heroes program does not benefit content creators in any way, and instead gives "heroes" benefits that even many creators don't have access to, such as the ability to directly contact YouTube staff.
I believe Sharla In Japan would heavily disagree
She was first asked by one of her followers why she spoke in Japanese in her videos, with English subtitles, then she started to speak in English and do Japanese Subtitles. Then she was asked by other followers if they could translate and provide subtitles for other languages for her. Since then, she's opened up all of her videos to the community to contribute subtitles for, and in the process gained tons of followers, and many of her videos have been translated into more than 20 languages.
Just by opening up her videos to the community to contribute subtitles for her, she now can be watched by much more people all over the world. Starting from a small vlog for school, where only a few of her friends and family could see what she was doing; she now has over 460,000 subscribers.
As I think Boogie2988 mentioned in his video about it, why not give "heroes" access to features that can actually benefit content creators, such as the ability to earmark videos that they think are excellent and should be featured by YouTube? Why not give "heroes" the ability to block trolls in the comments section of videos (as the announcement video initially implied they would, before it was edited)?
A suggestion and feedback that some of us have provided already. Program is in beta, so they are open to all and any feedback that can help improve the experience for Heroes and the YouTube community.
But ordinary users can already submit captions and subtitles to videos. Being a "hero" is not necessary to do that.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 8:10:04 AM UTC-7, vwestlife wrote:But ordinary users can already submit captions and subtitles to videos. Being a "hero" is not necessary to do that.
And ordinary users can flag videos and answer questions here. The program allows users who contribute a lot to the community, to be recognized for their hardwork, time, and dedication, to help grow other YouTuber's and to make Youtube a safer place.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 11:21:37 AM UTC-4, DeeLite310 wrote:And ordinary users can flag videos and answer questions here. The program allows users who contribute a lot to the community, to be recognized for their hardwork, time, and dedication, to help grow other YouTuber's and to make Youtube a safer place.
But as content creators and contributors to this forum, it's a shame that YouTube didn't value and recognize our hard work, time, and dedication enough to bother to ask for our input and suggestions before creating this program.
It's Google's "you don't need to tell us; we already know what's best for you" attitude that pisses people off time and time again.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 10:39:16 AM UTC-7, vwestlife wrote:On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 11:21:37 AM UTC-4, DeeLite310 wrote:And ordinary users can flag videos and answer questions here. The program allows users who contribute a lot to the community, to be recognized for their hardwork, time, and dedication, to help grow other YouTuber's and to make Youtube a safer place.But as content creators and contributors to this forum, it's a shame that YouTube didn't value and recognize our hard work, time, and dedication enough to bother to ask for our input and suggestions before creating this program.
the program as presented is open to improvement. they needed to start somewhere. so they built this "base" and are working to improve it. suggestions and feedback helps.
It's Google's "you don't need to tell us; we already know what's best for you" attitude that pisses people off time and time again.
If they did, they wouldn't be encouraging participatns for feedback. At the summit, we sat down with teh program directors and creators. they were very adamant that anyone who has feedback to keep sending them in. The fact that they were asking for our feedback is indicative of us 'tellling them what to do"
It's pretty disheartening that so many YT shills/fanboys/apologists come out of the woodwork to defend YT no matter what. Shouldn't be a surprise. If YT staff aren't listening to their content creators (the only reason YT can even exist) why would anyone else? YouTube is becoming a PC/SJW safe-haven for only positive, milquetoasty content, which in my mind signals the end. I only say this because it only happens every time Content Delivery stops listening to Content Creation in favor of short-term numbers, or panicky, paranoid lawyers. It would be sad if there wasn't already tons of alternatives to YT. If you're defending YT at this point, you must be pretty ignorant of YT's history of not giving a f*** about what its content creators want or think, or you're just spinning.
Sorry that you feel this way.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 2:08:51 PM UTC-4, DeeLite310 wrote:the program as presented is open to improvement. they needed to start somewhere. so they built this "base" and are working to improve it. suggestions and feedback helps.
That must be why they disabled comments on the announcement video... right?
they disabled comments because of the abuse. i'm sure you want your child to see thousands of comments with swear words, threats of rape, violence and harassment, I'm sure you'd disable the comments as well.
we (my company) disabled comments on 90% of our videos because of this.
we (my company) disabled comments on 90% of our videos because of this.
@sinrise
It's not necessarily defending YouTube or at least I'm not -- I just stick to the facts.
This is the exact lowest common denominator thinking that makes people conclude this is going to be a content witch hunt. I'm curious, how many children are watching YouTube policy videos these days and decide it's interesting enough to check out the comments? If YouTube is so concerned with children, perhaps they'd be better off starting kids.youtube.com instead of dragging the rest of the content down to meet the needs of children."they disabled comments because of the abuse. i'm sure you want your child to see thousands of comments with swear words, threats of rape, violence and harassment, I'm sure you'd disable the comments as well."
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 12:23:06 PM UTC-7, Phillyguy21 wrote:"they disabled comments because of the abuse. i'm sure you want your child to see thousands of comments with swear words, threats of rape, violence and harassment, I'm sure you'd disable the comments as well."This is the exact lowest common denominator thinking that makes people conclude this is going to be a content witch hunt. I'm curious, how many children are watching YouTube policy videos these days and decide it's interesting enough to check out the comments? If YouTube is so concerned with children, perhaps they'd be better off starting kids.youtube.com instead of dragging the rest of the content down to meet the needs of children.
You do know that "children" includes those under 18 right?
you can think that way, but having to deal with comments on my own company's videos on their channels, we've taken the position of either disabling comments altogether or only showing approved comments. When 99% of the comments are tagged as "F!@# you" , then be sure we won't enable them.
I have a tally of all the comments we've received on our videos since the creation of our account in 2011. I stopped when we adopted the new policy in 2015 . By that time, I had racked over 20,000 comments with nothing but "F!@#% you" , over 10,000 forms of harassment, several thousand worth of spam, thousands of comments of threats on our employees, and several thousand with other "criminal" claims aginst sepcific employees, by name.
Im sure i can understand the position YouTube is taking to not have those type of comments they are receiving shown
It is not the lowest common denominator of "thinking". you have not read through YouTube comments before? Go to any video gamers channel and see exactly the type of "comments" that I'm accustomed to see on YouTube.
Im sure i can understand the position YouTube is taking to not have those type of comments they are receiving shown
It is not the lowest common denominator of "thinking". you have not read through YouTube comments before? Go to any video gamers channel and see exactly the type of "comments" that I'm accustomed to see on YouTube.
edit: and you wouldn't have believed on how many reports/falgs we got because of those comments by our rational visitors to our videos.
edit2: kids.youtube.com is for those 13 and under. and yes there are parents out there, that rather not have their under 18 year old child hear or see threats of violence, rape, harassment, murder, or swearing in the comment section of a video.
edit2: kids.youtube.com is for those 13 and under. and yes there are parents out there, that rather not have their under 18 year old child hear or see threats of violence, rape, harassment, murder, or swearing in the comment section of a video.
BTw, comment section for the Blogpost that clarifies the program is fully open to comments;
you an also add comments to the Reddit (linked above)
Yes. This. This is exactly what the whole thing is about. Adults making a huge deal about "abuse" in stupid YT comments IS the problem. Seeing swear words or trollish hate-speech isn't like demon-possession. Your children will be fine. "Protecting the children" is one of the biggest lines of BS I have ever heard. This is all about ad revenue and YT lawyers being ultra-paranoid about advertisers leaving because of trollish comments. This is all fueled by the hyper-paranoid helicopter parents and SJWs who think comments on a YT video count as "abuse." This has been the state of YT for a while, which is why most content creators with interesting or informative things to say usually have to seek other forms of income like Patreon or PP donations. This whole "heroes" nonsense is just another nail in the coffin.
On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 20:23:06 UTC+1, Phillyguy21 wrote:This is the exact lowest common denominator thinking that makes people conclude this is going to be a content witch hunt. I'm curious, how many children are watching YouTube policy videos these days and decide it's interesting enough to check out the comments? If YouTube is so concerned with children, perhaps they'd be better off starting kids.youtube.com instead of dragging the rest of the content down to meet the needs of children.
Many of those type of comments ARE made by little kids in the first place, so where are all those supposedly caring and concerned parents while little Johnny or Jane is cursing and swearing like a trooper right here on YouTube !!!
It's all sheer hypocrisy and utter bullshit the entire Mass Flagging and censoring of things by self appointed wannabe internet Police whom want to try and impose their often self righteous and hypocritical morals and standards on everyone else... :-/
There's a far better solution to if all and it's very, very simple and would satisfy almost everyone...
Give each and everyone of us the ability to block channels & videos completely, it's done already with comments so it wouldn't be a difficult thing to introduce...
That way if someone doesn't like a channel and its content when they block it then they would never see anything from that channel again showing up in recommended or suggested lists...
Videos & channels could still be flagged that indeed break the TOS of the site but for those that don't like things simply because it doesn't fit in with their morals or standards and flagging of those videos won't get them removed because they haven't broken any TOS, then by allowing the individual to block such channels totally would solve such issues in an instant...
It would really be that simple and would suit the vast majority of YouTube users (but probably not those whom simply scour YouTube looking for things to flag cos they have no real life of their own, that lot will never be happy until they've flagged everything and it's only them left here, when they'd probably then turn on each other and report each other as there was nothing else left for them to do)... ;-)
Dee this is the problem, a lot of us aren't trying to hock things for our business. We create and consume grown up content, about grown up issues, that are often intended to have heated grown up discussions. We're not trying to shill another Minecraft video, but are trying to spark heated debate about serious social issues.
It can be a fine line between what one person considers harassing and another considers arguing. Sometimes it contains naughty language, and sometimes include ad hominem attacks. Mature adults understand this happens, and don't need a safe space to hide in.
The most egregious comments can be moderated, but who makes that decision and what denotes egregious? Who determines what is harassment and what is losing an argument? YouTube right now is relevant to the world and to society.
I don't want to see it made into a pg, corporate friendly milquetoast discussion about, well, nothing. I want to see a vibrant wide open discussion about ideas. That marketplace of ideas can be ugly at times, and we risk killing the conversation by having over zealous moderators with a June Cleaver mentality sanitizing everything that may be offensive to someone.
Really great points, MadFrank. Whatever happened to just changing the channel? I know many YouTubers who've had their channels suspended and their monetization upheld because of false flagging and false DMCA claims which YT staff routinely ignore and content creators have to just wait it out, costing them potential a lot of money. Many creators have been able to carve out an actual living from their creations and because of YT's major lack of customer support and kowtowing to hysteria and people who don't understand humor, those people's livings have been put in jeopardy. THAT is actual abuse. Things like this have caused creators to start crowdfunding campaigns just to have money to hire a lawyer when some hysterical child-person gets offended and abuses YT's ridiculous flagging and reporting system. What has YT done to help these creators? They haven't just done nothing, they seem to be doing the opposite by empowering these people to continue to abuse their privilege. Now YT wants to call these people "heroes"?
On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 21:22:06 UTC+1, sinrise wrote:Really great points, MadFrank. Whatever happened to just changing the channel?
Sadly good old fashioned common sense is thing of the past especially for many people these days whom have nothing better to do than scour the internet looking for things they don't like to shed crocodile tears over and to whinge about things they claim offends them that they went out of their way to seek out to get offended by... the world's full of pious mental cases these days... :-/
I know many YouTubers who've had their channels suspended and their monetization upheld because of false flagging and false DMCA claims which YT staff routinely ignore and content creators have to just wait it out, costing them potential a lot of money. Many creators have been able to carve out an actual living from their creations and because of YT's major lack of customer support and kowtowing to hysteria and people who don't understand humor, those people's livings have been put in jeopardy. THAT is actual abuse. Things like this have caused creators to start crowdfunding campaigns just to have money to hire a lawyer when some hysterical child-person gets offended and abuses YT's ridiculous flagging and reporting system. What has YT done to help these creators? They haven't just done nothing, they seem to be doing the opposite by empowering these people to continue to abuse their privilege. Now YT wants to call these people "heroes"?
Not a lot of things in life offend me but that use of the word "HEROES" by YouTube for this crackpot project does, as it's an insult to the true "HEROES" of this world as I've said here before... :-/
Flagging videos & comments for silly wee points or adding subtitles to a video etc... does not by any stretch of even the most vivid imagination make anyone a "Hero"... :-/
I'm not even a content creator and it's still insulting to me. This is really just a symptom of a larger issue. People are now being arrested for their opinions or jokes because some people are offended. Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa0DqKgKUlQ and there are many more examples of people getting in real trouble simply because a mean-spirited idiot is butthurt or lacks a sense of humor.
It's worse than sad. It's actually pretty scary. Ideologies like this are leading to the loss of free speech. We've now got police departments diverting resources to monitoring twitter feeds and Instagram posts and people are getting in trouble for making jokes or expressing dissenting opinions. You can thank our shameless news media industry for contributing to fuelling of this hysteria. College campuses have gotten so bad with censoring free speech that almost no stand-up comic will book a show at any of them. The thought police have always been around, but who knew the internet would give these people so much influence?
At least they haven't started outright banning people for controversial content, yet. If things keep going in this direction, though, we can expect a lot worse things than demonetization and channel suspensions in the future. Unless YT is actually listening to the overwhelming amount of negative outcry over this issue, I don't see this turning around. YT have consistently proven they aren't interested in what the community thinks, at least in comparison to their lawyers/advisors.
It's worse than sad. It's actually pretty scary. Ideologies like this are leading to the loss of free speech. We've now got police departments diverting resources to monitoring twitter feeds and Instagram posts and people are getting in trouble for making jokes or expressing dissenting opinions. You can thank our shameless news media industry for contributing to fuelling of this hysteria. College campuses have gotten so bad with censoring free speech that almost no stand-up comic will book a show at any of them. The thought police have always been around, but who knew the internet would give these people so much influence?
At least they haven't started outright banning people for controversial content, yet. If things keep going in this direction, though, we can expect a lot worse things than demonetization and channel suspensions in the future. Unless YT is actually listening to the overwhelming amount of negative outcry over this issue, I don't see this turning around. YT have consistently proven they aren't interested in what the community thinks, at least in comparison to their lawyers/advisors.
What are you worried about exactly? Not finding enough fake videos and fake playlists with porn pics as thumbnails in the YouTube search? Or too many subtitles to chose from?
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:43:25 PM UTC-6, Alter Falter! wrote:What are you worried about exactly? Not finding enough fake videos and fake playlists with porn pics as thumbnails in the YouTube search? Or too many subtitles to chose from?
I'm not positive, but I am guessing they're worried about people who think like this:
"they disabled comments because of the abuse. i'm sure you want your child to see thousands of comments with swear words, threats of rape, violence and harassment, I'm sure you'd disable the comments as well."
and have the nerve to compare themselves favorably to volunteer firefighters having sway over who gets to say what, where and when.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:12:16 PM UTC-7, Phillyguy21 wrote:Dee this is the problem, a lot of us aren't trying to hock things for our business.
then your videos will not be flagged
We create and consume grown up content, about grown up issues, that are often intended to have heated grown up discussions. We're not trying to shill another Minecraft video, but are trying to spark heated debate about serious social issues.
then your videos will not be flagged
It can be a fine line between what one person considers harassing and another considers arguing. Sometimes it contains naughty language, and sometimes include ad hominem attacks. Mature adults understand this happens, and don't need a safe space to hide in.
profanity in comments or in a video are not what flaggers are looking for.
The most egregious comments can be moderated, but who makes that decision and what denotes egregious? Who determines what is harassment and what is losing an argument? YouTube right now is relevant to the world and to society.
comments on a channel or its videos are moderated by the channel owner. anything reported is actually reported to the channel owner. they are free to either report that comment to youtube, delete it, or allow it through.
comments can be flagged by the community but those flags are still reviewed as any other flags are done.
IN the end its up to a YouTube Employee to decide whether or not the flag was corrected/warranted or not.
IN the end its up to a YouTube Employee to decide whether or not the flag was corrected/warranted or not.
I don't want to see it made into a pg, corporate friendly milquetoast discussion about, well, nothing.
If it were that bad, companies would leave. Studios wouldn't be able to post their trailers for Rated R movies; video game companies wouldn't be able to post their game trailers, Gamers wouldn't be able to play any game rated M or above.
I want to see a vibrant wide open discussion about ideas. That marketplace of ideas can be ugly at times, and we risk killing the conversation by having over zealous moderators with a June Cleaver mentality sanitizing everything that may be offensive to someone.
As asked, if you visit the Reddit AMA, you are speaking to the actual people who are currently in the Trusted Flaggers program. YOU can ask them directly exactly what content they actually end up flagging .
Yes, and interestingly enough, I think I explained exactly what I'm worried about in several of my contributions to this thread. It's almost like people read one or two words and immediately respond in a reactionary, irrational way... not that I've never been irrational, or reacted without really understanding the other side's position. I guess the difference is, I'm not trying to take away anyone's right to express their opinions, even if those opinions piss me off-- because I'm an adult.
That all may be true on paper, DeeLite, but the point is that's just not the extent of it. YT has reputation for allowing abusive flaggers and reporters to run rampant while ignoring the content creators. Maybe it's not the intention to sanitize all of YT by YT staff or even by "trusted flaggers" but your system is so pathetically lacking that things like the "heroes" branding just build even more ill-will within the community of content creators that make the website possible. The backlash of the announcement of "heroes" is not because it's a bad idea in and of itself. What makes it a bad idea and why it's so insulting is the idea of it in light how YT staff typically handles issues. The bottom line is controversial content creators are NOT treated equally and this new "heroes" system on exacerbates that.
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:31:21 PM UTC-7, sinrise wrote:Yes, and interestingly enough, I think I explained exactly what I'm worried about in several of my contributions to this thread. It's almost like people read one or two words and immediately respond in a reactionary, irrational way... not that I've never been irrational, or reacted without really understanding the other side's position. I guess the difference is, I'm not trying to take away anyone's right to express their opinions, even if those opinions piss me off-- because I'm an adult.
Yes I've read it, and all of your concerns have been explained in various posts, and even right in the Reddit AMA. I'm not sure how else we can explain how this program isn't changing anything but centralizing several ongoing programs into one hub, for contributors who have helped the community for a while now. Many of us acted as "separate' from each , and this allows for those in the community helping to contribute to YouTube and other content creators to be able to communicate with each other, and help each other
Trusted Flaggers had their own CMS and community
Subtitle contributors actually had no community
Form participants only had this forum.
Now they all can communicate with each other; if there is a question concerning a certain content that a forum participant has come across, he/she can now approach a flagger to get their opinion on whether or the person asking a question in the forum as to how that particular content would be handled (ex. someone asks if they are doing a product review in their video, and they want to include links on how to buy this product, but don't want to make it seem like spam, a TC or RS in this forum can now talk to a Flagger to get advice on how to make sure that the person in the forum isn't violating a Community Guideline; Flaggers would understand the Community Guidelines much better than most people because of their history)
Of, a subtitle contributor comes across a video that has a particular language subtitle that is wrong or offensive, so he/she may go to the Heroes' community to ask a flagger if he/she is able to report the subtitle file for abuse.
Do you think that its better for all three communities to work together so that it REDUCES the chance of someone getting flagged when they shouldn't have?
Trusted Flaggers had their own CMS and community
Subtitle contributors actually had no community
Form participants only had this forum.
Now they all can communicate with each other; if there is a question concerning a certain content that a forum participant has come across, he/she can now approach a flagger to get their opinion on whether or the person asking a question in the forum as to how that particular content would be handled (ex. someone asks if they are doing a product review in their video, and they want to include links on how to buy this product, but don't want to make it seem like spam, a TC or RS in this forum can now talk to a Flagger to get advice on how to make sure that the person in the forum isn't violating a Community Guideline; Flaggers would understand the Community Guidelines much better than most people because of their history)
Of, a subtitle contributor comes across a video that has a particular language subtitle that is wrong or offensive, so he/she may go to the Heroes' community to ask a flagger if he/she is able to report the subtitle file for abuse.
Do you think that its better for all three communities to work together so that it REDUCES the chance of someone getting flagged when they shouldn't have?
BTW, thank you for offering a lot thought into this. Most of what is being posted here, I'm compiling to submit as feedback to the program.
Isn't the fact that they had to disable comments a sign of a much larger problem that the "Heroes" program does absolutely nothing to address?
On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 7:26:03 AM UTC-7, vwestlife wrote:Isn't the fact that they had to disable comments a sign of a much larger problem that the "Heroes" program does absolutely nothing to address?
No, its a sign that they don't have to take the abuse from people who didn't bother to read the program, its articles, blogpost or listen to other content creators. Like I said, there are TONS of trolls out there on YouTube (just look at the comment section of any Video gamer and their videos).
And from experience, about 10% of the comments we get on our company's videos, are nothing more than harassment, trollish behavior, threats of violence, profanity and the like. These comments have nothing to do with the video in question.
you can believe one thing, others believe another
and as stated, their blogpost about the program as well as the Reddit is open to comments.
And from experience, about 10% of the comments we get on our company's videos, are nothing more than harassment, trollish behavior, threats of violence, profanity and the like. These comments have nothing to do with the video in question.
you can believe one thing, others believe another
and as stated, their blogpost about the program as well as the Reddit is open to comments.
So YouTube does absolutely nothing about the "TONS of trolls" that affect every content creator (including YouTube's own videos!), while they create a whole new task force just to mass-flag the spam and porn videos that lurk in the deep, dark corners of the site and rarely get any more than a few dozen views?
Yes, getting rid of spam and porn is important, but if YouTube had asked content creators which is the more important issue, what do you think would be the overwhelming answer?
On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 8:15:27 AM UTC-7, vwestlife wrote:So YouTube does absolutely nothing about the "TONS of trolls" that affect every content creator (including YouTube's own videos!), while they create a whole new task force just to mass-flag the spam and porn videos that lurk in the deep, dark corners of the site and rarely get any more than a few dozen views?
flagging comments by trolls is something that the community can do. If no one does it, how would Youtube know that the commenter is being abusive?
Yes, getting rid of spam and porn is important, but if YouTube had asked content creators which is the more important issue, what do you think would be the overwhelming answer?
As a content creator myself, removing the objectionable content, content that violates the tos/community guidelines, and spam would be my concern.
On Thursday, 29 September 2016 15:52:10 UTC+1, DeeLite310 wrote:No, its a sign that they don't have to take the abuse from people who didn't bother to read the program, its articles, blogpost or listen to other content creators.
Can you provide evidence that people whom MAY have posted on that video didn't bother to read the program, it's articles or not listen to other content creators... answer is of course is No you can't...
To the best of my knowledge comments were disabled on the video in question when it was published so there were no comments made by anyone allegedly giving abuse...
So it's not a sign of anything other than that YouTube don't want to allow people to post their comments/ opinions on a video which they know they are more than likely going to get more negative comments regarding the content of the video than positive ones...
and as stated, their blogpost about the program as well as the Reddit is open to comments.
Said it before I'll say it again... Why should anyone have to go to a site such as Reddit which has NOTHING to do with YouTube to comment or read (let alone supposedly get answers) by what people say their regarding a YouTube issue ???
These Official Help forums for YouTube is where it should be discussed and not some obscure site where some people claim to be so called "Trusted Flaggers", they should be posting here if they are in fact associated with YouTube as "Trusted Flaggers"...
Mind you what some "Trusted Flaggers" have to say is neither here nor there when it comes to the simple fact that it would appear the majority of people believe this is one of the worst ideas YouTube has ever come up with for many reasons and are concerned that it will end up very bad for all including YouTube as company...
I applied for the program. Am I a Hero now or how long does it take? Waiting for a message to confirm or something.
- Michi
You will be invited once they confirm and only if you have a good contribution history that is of high quality.
Hi there :D i've been doing all the rule to become a YouTube Hero but why i'm never get accepted in this new program ?? can you help me with something clear? Thanks for your support :D
Funny how You tube is taking lessons from the government in Constitutional Amnesia and program labeling. A HERO is someone with the courage to stand up for what he believes to be right. All the Marxist leaning intolerant SJWs seem to believe they are the 'ones' with possession of 'prefect commentary assessment skills, when in fact most of these quiggleypuffs are only heard from when complaining they are being ignored while they try to remove your voice from the debate.. Those who make policy for Google and You tube are thinking incredibly short sighted. This enabling of people to remain hyper sensitive to anything they haven't the intellect to understand just insures the entitled molly-coddled insecure kids of today will never grow a back bone, but will make good obedient adult servants of the NWO.
I sincerely pray this course the country has taken towards an unconstitutionally protected technocracy is reversed in November. There are certain opinions about free speech in a public venue that also extend into a privately owned common space. The next President will be appointing the Supreme Court justices that will reinstate Constitutional law, (If Trump) and hopefully that will provide the SJW's a little training on tolerance and provide for the strengthening of their present lack of backbone. After all how does one construe lecturing by one side of an argument to be a conversation by all.
Why not call it what it is a Community censoring group. Who's judgment do these people use in their activities?
Looks like you have some wrong information concerning the program, as nothing about it resembles what you are speaking to:
Please see this blogpost
Please head over to the Reddit AMA, as most of your concerns are addressed and answered :
Please read over the program articles:
Here are some videos by YouTube Creators who addresses some of your issues:
How do I report inappropriate *flagging*? I read classic poems & stories, and just had my 3rd video unmonitized. This latest one is an anti-war poem from 1879, "War" by Isabella Valancy Crawford.
Previously, I had an ancient Egyptian legend about the goddess of healing unmonitized, I think, because said goddess' name is "Isis". I also had an anti-suicide poem by Edna St Vincent Millay unmonitized.
The previous two examples, I sent a message to support, as instructed, but heard nothing back - not even acknowledgement that they received my message.
@Frank Blissett
Hi Frank,
Video flagging and monetization are completely different things.
To troubleshoot monetization issues go to https://support.google.com/youtube/troubleshooter/2990415
I think, personally, that it's a good idea. I feel that when people think it's just random internet trolls that can enter that's IMPOSSIBLE. It's a very hard program to get into that takes hard work and dedication, heck, even I can't get into it/haven't gotten a response. I do, however, have a question which is when it says "be of legal age in your country" does it mean (I'm in the USA) be 18+? Or be mature (13+) I'm 15 and wanted to make sure I'm not doing this in vain and wasting anyone's time. Thanks :D.
@John R T
Hi John,
I've asked the YouTube team for clarification on the age to be accepted.
Thank you for letting me know! Keep me posted and thanks for the help :).
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 5:48:55 AM UTC+6, Marissa - Community Manager wrote:
Hi YouTube Community,
Thanks for sharing all of your feedback about the YouTube Heroes program. There has been some discussion about certain contribution types, such as flagging videos, so we wanted to provide additional information.
When a flag is received, the reported content is always reviewed by YouTube and only removed if it violates our community guidelines. Additionally, only users who have demonstrated high quality contributions will have access to the mass-flagging tool. YouTube employees still make the final call on all video removals. Videos flagged by YouTube Heroes will not be automatically taken down.
Our contributors help out in a number of ways in addition to flagging videos. Current list of qualifying contribution types (and associated quality checks) are below:
Accurately reporting an inappropriate video (that gets removed by YouTube)
Adding captions/subtitles to a video (that get approved/published by the creator)
Answering a question in the help forum (that gets marked as best answer)
You can learn more about this and the YouTube Heroes program in the YouTube blog post.
Cheers,
Marissa
YouTube Community Manager
YOUTUBE CHANNEL SUSPENDED
Hello !
Youtube (Google) SUPORT TEAM
AFTER SIX MONTH CANOT REENABLETO MONOTIZED MY VIDEO
MY YOUTUBE CAHNEEL
RAJU SHAH
I got one of my videos removed since according to youtube
it violated the community guidelines. I think it is completely unfair that
this video was taken down and
I would like to appeal the decision. Yesterday when I checked, it had an
option to appeal this decision and
I couldn't do it yesterday as I was too busy. When I checked back today in
the settings area of the account this
option had gone and it also doesn't tell me when this community guideline
strike will expire. How can
I appeal this decision and why has the option for me to appeal it gone?
I really need some help on this issue.
Any advice much me much appreciated
Thanks very much
please help me!! I am begging you You tube...Some one please help me...I have all the proof...all the necessary documentations you need...soneone please take a look and it should put my channel back in Monetization.
Dear You tube, I am throwing myself for your mercy at this point. I desparately ant my Monetization back for my Channel " "ShoreHorizon1000"
My You Tube Channel URL: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpVXSEfigsQQjxTx4qznApw
I think you googlettes have a really great sense of humor. I complained about the scope of this program and the suspicious depth of this filter especially regarding political and controversial content that I know has removed by youtube before. However, what is ironic and hilarious, either by Google stream design or by happenstance, is that I am now getting all these videos with abhorrent graphic sexual pictures as the cover photo not related to youtube. I flagged this as inappropriate and moved on.
If you have issues please start a new thread.
In all honesty if we as the creators say that we don't want this and YouTube forces it down our throats anyways then YouTube is in the wrong. They should be pandering to their creators not the other way around. Or did they learn nothing from all the backlash that Microsoft got about the Xbox One when it was first announced? At least Microsoft was smart enough to change their policies. What's YouTube's excuse? Blatant retardation or just a lack of care for their creators?
Fuck your Trusted Flaggers and You Tube Heroes Program! Welcome to the end of free speech and expressions. This program will leave YT into an empty money maker and abandoned users!
@Utopian Delusions
The trusted flagger program has been around for 4 years. It's not a new initiative, so there's no "new end" to free speech. Anyways our flags are useless if YouTube doesn't think the video we reported violates the Community Guidelines or Terms of Service.
Membership in the Trusted Flagger Program gives users access to more advanced flagging tools as well as periodic feedback, making flagging more effective and efficient.
As always, the policy team at YouTube makes the final determination of whether content should be removed.
Ugh. SJWs and White Knights are cancer. Look I'm all for being a good person and doing the right thing you know I support gay rights you know I'm Against Racism butt there is a limit to how far political correctness should go and this is taking it way too fucking far.
YouTube has become a bunch of fascists. When you take political correctness too far you go from having a well-balanced society to running a dystopian hierarchy. There needs to be a limit to how much can be censored. Censoring too much just blocks people from reality and sets unrealistic expectations. You're trying to turn everyone into little pansy ass bitches who can't handle a racist joke here and there. And yes comedy is different from actual blatant racism or bigotry or general prejudice. It's like people have never seen an episode of South Park or Family Guy. Jesus Christ. Pull the stick out of your ass and get off your high horses.
This will ultimately fail because it's going to be a bunch of overly politically correct Tumblr users running around flagging everything they deem offensive because they are the type of people that think there are 400 genders or the type of people that get offended because a Mexican chick played a Taco in a comedy movie. If you give people power they will inevitably abuse that power that's just how people work.
Also calling them Heroes is just going to inflate their ego unnecessarily and make them have a God complex. Because that is also help people work. You're putting way too much faith in the internet and that is destined to fail. Have you seen the Internet? It's a cesspool of garbage people mostly. Spend more than 2 minutes on 4chan and you'll see what I mean. They are not Heroes by any means that is disrespectful to real heroes like veterans who actually did something with their life than play online tattletale. YouTube should be ashamed of themselves for even thinking that would be okay. You want to talk about something that's offensive. You pretty much blew the motherload with that shit. What you should actually be calling them is brown nosers because that's exactly what this kind of job is sucking up to a corporation for brownie points. Out in reality I believe they call them snitches and I don't know about the rest of you but in the city I live in things don't usually turn out well for those kind of people.
So yeah anyways since the majority thinks this is fucking stupid and the majority rules then yes this is fucking stupid and anyone who disagrees is wrong because majority rules. Also look at all these moderators arguing with users Jesus Christ where do you get off? Why do these moderators not get moderated themselves? Where is there higher up? Do they really just not care that they are rude and insulting to us? Maybe your YouTube zeros should be flagging you assholes.
I'm entitled to my opinion. Deal with it
So yeah anyways since the majority thinks this is fucking stupid and the majority rules then yes this is fucking stupid and anyone who disagrees is wrong because majority rules. Also look at all these moderators arguing with users Jesus Christ where do you get off? Why do these moderators not get moderated themselves? Where is there higher up? Do they really just not care that they are rude and insulting to us? Maybe your YouTube zeros should be flagging you assholes.
I'm entitled to my opinion. Deal with it
@Oversoul Gaming
I think you seem to have the assumption that the program will be open to anyone that flags a video, this is not the case. :) To be accepted, you must have proven high quality contribution to the platform over a substantial time period, either through:
- Submitting subtitles that got accepted by the creator
- Flagging videos accurately with a high % of reported videos being removed
- Posting in these forums with high quality and accurate answers
Mass flagging is not automatically available to people that get accepted into the Heroes program anyway, even if you reach the points required. So you shouldn't worry about some little trolls running around causing destruction to the community (which even if they did, YouTube would see the videos flagged don't violate the ToS or GCs and not remove them).
Also look at all these moderators arguing with users Jesus Christ where do you get off?
Not sure if you're talking about me or other Top Contributors or Rising Stars but I don't argue at all, I just put the facts out there and it's up to the user if they want to listen lol.
Why do these moderators not get moderated themselves? Where is there higher up?
We have a Community Manager at Google that takes care of us. :)
I wasn't talking about you I was talking about the moderators earlier that we're getting all defensive over this program. The way that you replied is fine but some of them are playing this way too close to the chest I think. And how do I contact the community manager of yours because I need to report one of your moderators they were extremely rude to me today getting into Political arguments and directing personal insults at me. I have screenshots. Granted most of what they said was true but it was extremely douchey and that is not ok. The moderators need to understand that as creators we are often left in the dark on pretty much everything and so we are going to understandably get frustrated but as moderators you all should be obligated to maintain composure and be professional regardless.
@John R THi John,
I heard back from the YouTube team and they have confirmed that it depends on where you live, but you must be considered a legal adult in your country.
In most countries, this is 18 years old and over to join the YouTube Heroes program. Sorry for the bad news. :(
That being said, you may be eligible to join the Google Top Contributor program as a Rising Star (RS) if you continue to post accurate and quality answers in this forum over a prolonged time period.
You won't be able to become a Top Contributor (TC) until 18 but a RS can be under 18 as you do not have to sign any contracts or non-disclosure agreements like TCs do.
Requirements and other information can be found here: https://topcontributor.withgoogle.com/how-to-join
You don't have to do anything except participate in the forum, improve your post quality, be accurate and most importantly learn expertise about the YouTube platform and a Community Manager will reach out to you when they think you're ready. You can express interest by filling out a form found on the website.
You may want to consider this an option if you would like to continue helping users! :) Thank you for your contributions.
Cheers,
- Gabriel
On Sunday, 2 October 2016 14:10:29 UTC-7, John R T wrote:Thank you for letting me know! Keep me posted and thanks for the help :).
Hi there I need help I have a Samsung A5 when I go into u tube to watch videos most I can see but certain ones it keeps telling me these videos have been restricted on your device ??how do I fix this
Reading Similar topics:
"This... This little idea of Youtube."Please see this blogpostPlease head over to the Reddit AMA, as most of your concerns are addressed and answered :Please read over the program articles:Here are some videos by YouTube Creators who addresses some of your issues:
Right. I'm sure those videos are totally un-biased.
If you dont like the videos, go over to the Reddit AMA.
@Gabriel Thank you! I filled out an interest form by the way, I wasn't sure if I needed to say I am 15 so they know that I could only be a Rising Star, or if I needed to put that in there? Anyways, thank you for the help.
-John
@John R T
It doesn't matter. :)
@Gabriel
Thanks again! I appreciate the help.
-John
I already applied for the program but haven't been contacted yet, what happened?.
@coŋejo pestileƞte
The program is not open to the public at the moment, it's in a beta stage.
The program is not open to the public at the moment, it's in a beta stage.
Thanks for the answer. I really want to be in the community.
Hi ! So...I tried joining the YT heroes thing...idk if I joined or not but I did not get an Email yet....Help?
you won't get an email until you've been accepted
these videos violate youtubes terms and conditions
I am making a youtube cannel
Hello All
First of all, let me answer a few questions including a few funny ones.
Q = I already applied for the program but haven't been contacted yet, what happened?.
A = The Program is currently not available to the public , Also it's currently in Beta stage.
Q = F your Trusted Flaggers and You Tube Heroes Program! Welcome to the end of free speech and expressions. This program will leave YT into an empty money maker and abandoned users!
A = Lol , People have been able to report videos for years, there's been no change in the policies for reporting videos.
Q = I do, however, have a question which is when it says "be of legal age in your country" does it mean (I'm in the USA) be 18+? Or be mature (13+)
A = From what I understand in most countries it is 18 years old , also it's been suggested that one's account may need to be 6 months old + to join , though that will be worked out soon once it's open to some members of public to join.
Q = " The program allows users who contribute a lot to the community, to be recognized for their hardwork, time, and dedication, to help grow other YouTuber's and to make Youtube a safer place. "
Response.
But as content creators and contributors to this forum, it's a shame that YouTube didn't value and recognize our hard work, time, and dedication enough to bother to ask for our input and suggestions before creating this program.
It's Google's "you don't need to tell us; we already know what's best for you" attitude that pisses people off time and time again.
A = The above was posted by two Raising Stars of the forum, it's not really a question though let's see if I can answer it.
Youtube has never asked really what we want when they have launched something , they do read feedback and suggestions though not too much else , so what were you expecting.
However, they are asking for our suggestions now for improving the Beta ( only those who have access to it )
" The program allows users who contribute a lot to the community, to be recognized for their hardwork, time, and dedication Etc " this is exactly why the program was created.
Q = The biggest flaw is that the Heroes program does not benefit content creators in any way, and instead gives "heroes" benefits that even many creators don't have access to, such as the ability to directly contact YouTube staff.
As I think Boogie2988 mentioned in his video about it, why not give "heroes" access to features that can actually benefit content creators, such as the ability to earmark videos that they think are excellent and should be featured by YouTube? Why not give "heroes" the ability to block trolls in the comments section of videos (as the announcement video initially implied they would, before it was edited)?
A = The program is still in Beta and the fact is more feature could be added to it , So if you are a Beta Tester , join the community and have your say.
Q = This has to be the worst idea EVER to come out of any Google company. Instead of being called "YouTube Heroes", just be honest about it and call it "YouTube Hitler Youth". It is totalitarian by its very nature, clearly intended to suppress freedom of speech.
A = ROFL , Like I said before, people have been able to report videos for years, if your video doesn't violate the TOS or Guideline then why would you think it would be removed or as put " Suppress freedom of speech " .
Q = Please explain the best answer for this thread then, please.
A = First and for most , The Op or the one who posted a question can mark an answer to the question as the Best Answer, though you must note 90% + of all questions on the forum are never marked as Best Answered by Op's.
TC's and Google Staff can also mark Posts as Best Answers including ones posted by themselves, it's rarely done though can be done.
Yes, there can be two Best Answers on one post.
Also note = There is a suggestion to allow people who have achieved Level 5 to vote for a Best Answer ( 3 votes makes it a Best Answer ) , FYI = Adjustments are being made to points needed for leveling.
Reason for Best Answers = Gives people the best possible answer at the time of posting, also helps people find answers to their same / similar problems , it also frees up the experts time as they know the post has been answered so no need to look at the post again.
Q = There should never be a "mass flagging tool" What ever happened to one person one vote?
A = Then you really don't know how the tool works.
A person can already go to a channel and vote once per video to have it reviewed for removal / age restriction before moving into the next video , the mass flagging tool just allows a person to do the same though 20 videos at a time so still one vote per video.
Now I know there are more questions, so post away and I'll see if I can answer them.
@ Mr Franko
I know you're going to post something in response to this , don't bother.
Your channel is way beyond violating people's Copyright laws I had a good laugh.
Posting full videos of 70's , 80's and 90's music , seriously don't even try and use the terms " Fair Use ".
Anyway, I know you're not going to listen , so do your worst.
@GeneralHavoc
Do you think they're approving people but not accepting people? I heard that somewhere, I forgot. Also, what do you mean with the 6 months thing? Also, if they did put this feature in full force you think it would be an update to update to? Or just a feature added silently? Thanks.
-John
ok
On Saturday, 8 October 2016 11:51:33 UTC+1, GenerolHavoc wrote:
@ Mr Franko
@ Mrs Havoc
I know you're going to post something in response to this , don't bother.
Sure thing my little wannabe dictator but here's some news for you, I don't do what a nobody like you tries (and fails miserably) to tell me to do.. so tough luck for you eh... :-)
Your channel is way beyond violating people's Copyright laws I had a good laugh.
Oh false accusations eh... I'll report your post once I have shown here why through your complete ignorance regarding copyright & YouTube that your accusations you just made there are in fact false... allow me to educate you as you obviously need it regarding copyright and YouTube...
FACT: NOT ONE VIDEO ON MY CHANNEL VIOLATES ANYONES COPYRIGHT...
FACT: ALL VIDEOS ON MY CHANNEL WHICH CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED CONTENT ARE THERE WITH PERMISSION FOR PLAYBACK BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS WHOM OWN THEM, AS EACH VIDEO HAS A CONTENT ID CLAIM FROM THE APPROPRIATE COPYRIGHT ALLOWING IT'S PLAYBACK ON YOUTUBE...
So the simple FACT that you are obviously completely ignorant as to the way copyright actually works on YouTube as you have just proven with your very own words doesn't mean to say you can go posting false accusations regarding other people on these forums as you just have done...
Posting full videos of 70's , 80's and 90's music , seriously don't even try and use the terms " Fair Use ".
ROFLMAO: I've never ONCE tried to claim anything I've uploaded as "Fair Use" so your absurd ramblings there about "don't even try and use the terms 'Fair Use'" is as pointless as you are...
And once again my little wannabe dictator, don't bother trying to tell me what you THINK I can and cannot say or do on these forums or on YouTube for that matter...
Anyway, I know you're not going to listen , so do your worst.
Sigh, can't be easy for you making such posts in your sad childish game of point scoring, especially when your very own words have just shown how ignorant you are on a subject and made you look very, very foolish indeed...
So no need to "do my worst" as you asked me to do, when your very own ignorance and words have already done that for you... ;-)
Reply if you want, don't reply if you don't want to... it makes no difference to me what YOU do but then I aint a wannabe dictator whom is on a sad little power trip whom thinks he can tell others what to do here on these forums... ;-)
@ John R T
It's a suggestion which is being considered while the program is in Beta , like other suggestions to improve the program.
Also what I mean by it is someone's Youtube channel / account and Forum Account will need to be 6 months old + to join the program.
This will hopefully mean people joining the program will at least be able to navigate the basic functions of Youtube and this forum and also have knowledge of what they are doing.
As for joining , All I know is it was open to those who are contributors already though a select few outside our groups may have been considered ( special consideration ) unfortunately, I don't know if anyone from the public has been allowed to enter.
It is possible that when it is opened to a small group of public members the special consideration will be implemented , as to whom I can't help with that.
At a guess , those people who have been on Youtube or the Forum for Years.
I am from Indonesia. I view as the east youtube has made a breakthrough by breakthrough of Heroes Youtube Youtube Heroes.One tasks such as reporting negative video, such as sex, drugs, etc.but, western culture allows for sex and sebagainya.Saya see a YouTuber uploaded Youtube video entitled Heroes: come pitted, remove the freedom seks.Kalau I suppose coming from the Netherlands for example, I protest to the policy Youtube.this is my opinion .Thanks
A
Hello Youtube Im wondering how do i make a verification message to you
yes yes
H
HELLO MY NAME IS JOSEPH AND THIS NEW HEROES IS NOT WORKING FOR ME SOME ONE JUST FLAGED TWO OF MY VIDEOS FOR NO REASONE I DID NOT BRAKE ANY OF THE GUIDELINES AND IT IS HARD ENOUGHT THAT I TAKE MY TIME IN MAKEING VIDEOS AND THEN FOR SOMEONE DID NOT LIKE THEM TAKE THEM DOWN IT IS NOT RIGHT AND FOR YOU YOUTUBE IF YOU ARE NOT CARFULE YOU WILL LOSE ALL WHAT YOU CREATED AND PEOPLE WILL GO TO A NEW PLATEFORM IN MAKING VIDEOS AND THEN YOU WILL BE ALL ALONE SO IF THERE IS A NEW WEBSITE OUT THERE SO I CAN GO LET ME KNOW
Here's another helpful video about the program.
Men qa di
GeneralHavoc wrote:
A = First and for most , The Op or the one who posted a question can mark an answer to the question as the Best Answer, though you must note 90% + of all questions on the forum are never marked as Best Answered by Op's.TC's and Google Staff can also mark Posts as Best Answers including ones posted by themselves, it's rarely done though can be done.
Jesus Christ, do any of you people actually read before responding to anything? GeneralHavoc, sweetie, pay very close attention, because I have said this before:
I
KNOW
ALL
OF
THAT
ALREADY.
ALL
OF
THAT
ALREADY.
I said these people, you people, can mark your own comments as the best ones. That inveterate fool Deelite or something said "that's not true". I said "then explain the best answer for this thread". I was proving her wrong you insufferable simpletons. I KNOW that you can mark your own answers as the best ones. I KNOW why you think that's hunky dory. I also know that all that kind of attitude leads to is an echo chamber of self-aggrandizing nobodies who think they know what's best for everyone else. You know, like you geniuses on this forum.
Hi i m in serious problem. My channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMDf41I-i4VywSptwhUJFYA
terminated. I did not get any email from youtube. I m on youtube from 2 year and i always respect my subscribers N youtube rule..
Can anybody help me ??? this is wrongly suspended
@ David Giarratana
Hello, sweetie, pay very close attention, as I am only going to say this once.
Do you know the difference between a personalised comment and a general comment?
This here is a personalised comment actually direct at a person.
My first post was a general post directed at everyone, where I took a number of questions and answered them.
Furthermore and using your own words " you insufferable simpleton " we have been directing people to this post who have been asking the same questions, including in some similarity the one you posted.
I already know you know TC's can mark any answer as the best answer, though maybe others don't. Yes I used part of your post, though directed it at everyone.
Maybe you should look up Forum Etiquette 101 before critiquing a person.
I think I'll solve the conflict here and get someone else to me ban the
hundreds, yes it's hundreds, of porn, with explicit no debate
intercourse, videos I found today! Here have fun other mods because I
don't want to spend hours a day having to do captchas, which you have to
do after every 3rd flag, because youtube can't be bothered to put in a
flag account for porn option when they already have a flag account
button for other things available to EVERYONE!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZU1n1pLItRnnpmuxO2-ZjQ/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrvS-zA5Q2QsW4qczY6HKrw/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHJDl8VCPTCYYchdNhyQWKg/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQly0hnEevrDEMKk2vRcE8A/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrr1m5iESqCN1EBcwhU-63g/videos?sort=dd&view=0&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChtCZQhiwIcPeZVyiZt4o4w/videos?sort=dd&view=0&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyd5LKFgK1FAueeUgGIF3Pw/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCimC1nSoupa2uMUs9ky0fQ
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyTTsI2FxR6C7WtuVgA-7lg
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAIuw9JwJt29JzCFYaeZOAA
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeUJgpQ6455DcPGVNpiE05w
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAtQBqiPkIMgpcUdgLTNXzA/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOsPi8GOoozwNhjH8XoQhwQ/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsJEg6Cw5RsPnvAqKS22wqQ/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE7e5DkXq5KD4_mx-S-96bg
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Lrx9EufghU437WKOkLIRw/videos
The first group of these are obviously by the same person because they put up the same videos, in the same order, day after day. Some of them have been up for a week. I encounter people doing this thing far too often. I think it's fair to say on some things the porn spammers are far more efficient than Youtube itself. Also there are probably more of these accounts just search familystrokes . That's how you find porn on youtube btw find one porn video on youtube and then search for the website in the corner.
Seriously the idea that a mass flag button is going to abused is absurd when Youtube explicitly states it reviews all the videos even after flagging them! If someone abuses it they'll get kicked out of the Youtube heroes program and legitimate users will never know it! Not that I'd know because I've flagged hundreds of videos only for explicit porn (and a few for nudity) and still haven't gotten in, what does it take! I'd reason the only ones complaining are the ones who either want porn or are spamming it themselves. That youtube is "listening" at all to them just shows their greed. You already have a report channel button for everyone why else would you not add a report channel for porn option! They don't actually want to enforce their own rules they only want to do the minimum required to not get bad publicity and family groups on them.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZU1n1pLItRnnpmuxO2-ZjQ/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrvS-zA5Q2QsW4qczY6HKrw/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHJDl8VCPTCYYchdNhyQWKg/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQly0hnEevrDEMKk2vRcE8A/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrr1m5iESqCN1EBcwhU-63g/videos?sort=dd&view=0&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChtCZQhiwIcPeZVyiZt4o4w/videos?sort=dd&view=0&shelf_id=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyd5LKFgK1FAueeUgGIF3Pw/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCimC1nSoupa2uMUs9ky0fQ
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyTTsI2FxR6C7WtuVgA-7lg
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAIuw9JwJt29JzCFYaeZOAA
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeUJgpQ6455DcPGVNpiE05w
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAtQBqiPkIMgpcUdgLTNXzA/videos?view=0&shelf_id=0&sort=dd
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOsPi8GOoozwNhjH8XoQhwQ/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsJEg6Cw5RsPnvAqKS22wqQ/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE7e5DkXq5KD4_mx-S-96bg
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Lrx9EufghU437WKOkLIRw/videos
The first group of these are obviously by the same person because they put up the same videos, in the same order, day after day. Some of them have been up for a week. I encounter people doing this thing far too often. I think it's fair to say on some things the porn spammers are far more efficient than Youtube itself. Also there are probably more of these accounts just search familystrokes . That's how you find porn on youtube btw find one porn video on youtube and then search for the website in the corner.
Seriously the idea that a mass flag button is going to abused is absurd when Youtube explicitly states it reviews all the videos even after flagging them! If someone abuses it they'll get kicked out of the Youtube heroes program and legitimate users will never know it! Not that I'd know because I've flagged hundreds of videos only for explicit porn (and a few for nudity) and still haven't gotten in, what does it take! I'd reason the only ones complaining are the ones who either want porn or are spamming it themselves. That youtube is "listening" at all to them just shows their greed. You already have a report channel button for everyone why else would you not add a report channel for porn option! They don't actually want to enforce their own rules they only want to do the minimum required to not get bad publicity and family groups on them.
How rude is this while No-strike, Good Standing and account terminated?
I am using YouTube since over 10yrs, I had no any copyright strike ever, and having Good Standing in account status page.
on 14feb i shocked to see how YouTube terminated my account reasoning:-
"This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe violations of YouTube's policy against spam, deceptive practices, and misleading content or other Terms of Service violations.
1. If these violations has been repeating from long time than why my account standing was all green dots? and now this should be assume that these account standing status bar is real a misleading content on YouTube by YouTube.?
2. I agree certainly there would have been mistakes from my side, but YouTube must see our partnership is very long, and this is natural that in 10years the terms and policies would be blurred in vision and should give an opportunity to re-tune-up the channel.
3. As everyone knows now-a-days internet means Google/YouTube and if you block people from Google/YouTube it means you are blocking them from internet, So somehow it felt like victim of Monopoly.
4. Certainly, YouTube is revolution and i was proud to had a part of it, But now the way YouTube kicked me from its platform, it hurts.
5. I would Like request the Google Employees, to go re-view my channel and help me to reinstate it. i appealed on 15feb but didn't get any reply.
This channel is an Official Channel of an Artist(myself)
I WOULD LIKE TO GET ANSWERED FROM GOOGLE EMPLOYEE.
You are correct. Its awful and they are terminating channels without cause or warning. Worst part is they wont give details as to why after the fact. Horrible business practice.
Agree. I have been a parnter for about 10 years and just had my channel terminated with no explanation. I have NEVER spammed or scammed- indeed I have been the victim of that. Two weeks and Ill I get is a robot response and zero recourse. How is this protecting your partners and creators? Its insane.
It already IS being abused. First copyfraudsters collecting revenue on your videos (how many years did that go on) and now this? Why does YT constantly create avenues that reward bad behavior while punishing innocents. Then you cant even get a human response- or if you do its canned and meaningless. Unreal.
Im calling BS on that. You appeal and get a robot email in 30 seconds flat. And what if some vindictive person SPAMS you r account to get rid of you? Whats the recourse then? You folks are once again creating a system that will reward those who game it. 10 damn years a partner and I get terminated when I did NOTHING wrong and I cant even get the respect of an explanation. Its stunning how off the rails you are.