|
|
Post by mattsawesomestuff on Mar 6, 2018 21:13:15 GMT
The Youtube Union has several goals. I'm not sure I agree with all of them, not sure all the rest of us do either. Other things we want that are difficult to accomplish or difficult for Youtube to implement. Others seem quite easy. It's a lot to digest all at once.
So, in this thread I'd like to focus on one aspect and open discussion about how to fix one that I think we can all agree on, that Youtube needs to make transparent decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattsawesomestuff on Mar 6, 2018 22:08:29 GMT
What does "Transparent Decisions" mean?
To me it means, WHEN Youtube takes action (let's ignore for now how they do that, to focus on this particular task), right now you get no explanation and that is a problem. You get told that you violated community guidelines, and that's all.
Ideally what I would see is a detailed explanation that goes something like this:
"Your video has been demonetized/deleted/copyright strike/etc, as determined by bot/reporting/Youtube personelle. The following are the violations:
1 - Beginning at 1:20 there was "shocking content", this was judged in poor taste and not for news reporting.
2 - Beginning at 2:13 there was "copywritten audio" that matches X video at Y timestamp, it was reviewed/not reviewed and confirmed to not fit fair use doctrines.
3 - Beginning at 3:47 there was "shocking content", this was judged in poor taste and not for news reporting.
4 - Beginning at 5:18 there was "sensitive content".
"
What does "Transparent decisions" mean?
- We know what happened
- We know why it happened and according to what rule
- We know what part of the content was the part affected
- We know what prompted the decision (bots, user reports, youtube itself)
The purpose of this is so that we clearly know which rules were violated, we can confirm that they were in fact violated, and we know, thoroughly, the problems with the video without having to guess. We need to know all the flags on a video not just the first one.
...
There is no excuse for this not already being the case, except to perhaps mask how inept and ineffective their bots are.
There is no additional cost to Youtube for doing this, they have already put the resources into making the decision, you should at least know precisely how and why.
|
|
|
|
Post by maximgunn on Mar 7, 2018 0:06:34 GMT
Quite right, if a bot has detected a violation, it knows precisely when and what triggered it. As you say, that information can and should be passed on to the recipient. We should be able to face our accuser.
I also agree that specificity would likely make their bots look very poor indeed. Conspiratorially, I would also suggest that they are using these weak triggers as a way of stealing the lion's share of a video's value and increasing profits. I have made this point on another thread, but why should the 'partner' be fiscally damaged for their incompetence?
|
|
sulla
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by sulla on Mar 7, 2018 2:33:41 GMT
It would be nice if they sent you something with useful info.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattsawesomestuff on Mar 7, 2018 8:56:28 GMT
I don't agree. When they demonetize, delete, freeze, etc a video or channel, that channel cannot serve ads. Youtube cannot profit from those ads, yet it is still displaying the video. Youtube will profit from the data collection still, and from any traffic directed to the website from that video via other sources in their subsequent viewing time on other videos, but not from the demonetized video itself.
Also, there's the Idiom "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence". Youtube's AI is barely competent, there is no master plan, there's just people half-assing the process.
Are there any other items any of you think Youtube should be better at communicating that I didn't mention, or other solutions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Joerg Sprave on Mar 7, 2018 9:01:58 GMT
Well, even the demonetized videos will make a bit of money, through YouTube Red. But it is unsubstantial.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrestlingambassador on Mar 12, 2018 13:03:45 GMT
But YT Red, is almost next to nothing also do you know anybody that has it?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmonmulgrew on Mar 12, 2018 14:12:12 GMT
But YT Red, is almost next to nothing also do you know anybody that has it? I never made much but as a percentage youtube red income was usually 5-10% |
|
|
|
Post by shoptheinsanity on Mar 12, 2018 18:50:18 GMT
Quite right, if a bot has detected a violation, it knows precisely when and what triggered it. As you say, that information can and should be passed on to the recipient. We should be able to face our accuser. I also agree that specificity would likely make their bots look very poor indeed. Conspiratorially, I would also suggest that they are using these weak triggers as a way of stealing the lion's share of a video's value and increasing profits. I have made this point on another thread, but why should the 'partner' be fiscally damaged for their incompetence? Quoted for truth. How can a person avoid making the same error in the future if they don't know what the error was? |
|
|
|
Post by maximgunn on Mar 13, 2018 0:47:44 GMT
Sounds like my last driving test... I failed. I asked why I failed. They couldn't/wouldn't tell me. They just said, (sheepishly) read the manual again.
I wasn't about to give those bastards another $40 borrowed bucks for a computer test I did right the first time. Fuck that.
I was driving around on a provisional license for about 15 years after that and never had an accident or a ticket... Do you think they'll give me a full license based on merit alone? Fuck no, they don't want good drivers, they want test money.
|
|
