sulla
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by sulla on Mar 6, 2018 20:57:13 GMT
I have a basic question for those in charge or any one that wants to give their opinion. Will the Union help its members or possibly other Youtubers if the rules are not fairly applied to them. For example is something clearly inside the rules is removed or demonetized or a person is banned etc? And will there be exceptions for these rules?
Examples....
1. Joerg starts getting strikes on old videos and is in danger of being banned. Does the Union help him? (Not trying to pick on Joerg but just do not know who other leaders might turn out to be.)
2. If the same thing happens to a smaller member with the exact same content do we help them? (Assume the only difference between them and Joerg is size of channel for this question.)
3. Does the union care about fair treatment under the Youtube rules? Will this even be an issue for the Union get into?
4. If we get Google to be more clear on their rules but they still apply them unfairly do we just ignore it?
Curios about what every one thinks and the pros and cons etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by coffekanon on Mar 7, 2018 12:58:17 GMT
I think it's important that one of the Unions demands has to be that Youtubers should not recieve strikes for older videos made and uploaded before some of the many changes in the community guidelines.
Youtube has after all been around for a long time. Longer than when Google bought it out. And Google in turn has "revised" their "community guidelines" over and over, applying changes and restrictions as they go which makes it practically impossible for all youtubers to ensure that every single video they ever uploaded conforms to those standards.
So if Youtube wants one set of Community Guidlines to apply as of now, then they will have to concede not to hand out strikes for videos uploaded before the current set of guidelines, since it would be unfair to punish people because they made videos that doesn't conform to the rules that you constantly change and revise.
|
|
|
|
Post by maximgunn on Mar 7, 2018 16:34:55 GMT
When this question came up about how the union would behave in an ongoing way, Joerg stated that he didn't believe we would ever be in a position to help individual cases. I've got to admit that I was taken aback by this answer... What good is a guild if it doesn't enforce its demands? What good is a group if one of us is attacked and the rest does nothing?!
All for one and one for all. I see no alternative.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmonmulgrew on Mar 7, 2018 17:22:57 GMT
When this question came up about how the union would behave in an ongoing way, Joerg stated that he didn't believe we would ever be in a position to help individual cases. I've got to admit that I was taken aback by this answer... What good is a guild if it doesn't enforce its demands? What good is a group if one of us is attacked and the rest does nothing?! All for one and one for all. I see no alternative. I believe the problem comes that there are just too many individual cases right now to deal with them on a case by case basis. Our only practical approach at first is to focus on bringing the number of cases down. |
|
|
|
Post by maximgunn on Mar 7, 2018 17:35:39 GMT
That would be a first good step, but you realize YT isn't being honest with us now, what makes you think they will be honest later? There's too many individual cases NOW, only because they caused this chaos in the first place and no one knows where they stand. Once we start enforcing some clear rules, those numbers will rapidly diminish.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmonmulgrew on Mar 7, 2018 17:55:56 GMT
I think the time to start talking about how we handle case by case is after the numbers have been reduced enough to make it manageable. I don't have a problem with anyone asking for help in the forums, I don't see a need to keep everything on task. We are all a sympathetic community after all even if we decide not to act as a whole on a case by case basis.
|
|
