Forum thread: Youtube

bumb to increase engagement

2023-01-02 13:15

2 replies

it's just leftard bullshit and imho leftard bullshit is mostly even worse than rightard bullshit

2023-01-02 13:36

Only Pakistanis can do that

2023-01-02 14:16

what does protected group even mean

2023-01-02 13:15

31 replies

i was thinking the same

2023-01-02 13:16

hate speech against certain people is not allowed, but it is allowed against everyone else who doesnt come in that 'certain people' I guess it is minorites

2023-01-02 13:16

3 replies

So I can send death threats to white straight people for example. But doing the same to anyone else is against the rules?

2023-01-02 13:17

2 replies

yes

2023-01-02 13:18

1 reply

source: trust me bro

2023-01-02 14:23

Gender, religion, political orientation, stuff like that. Obese people or ugly people are not a protected group in that same way, there is a legal difference

2023-01-02 13:18

23 replies

stupid world stupid rules

2023-01-02 13:19

22 replies

Which part is stupid in your opinion?

2023-01-02 13:22

21 replies

Hatespeech should just be against the rules. Whats the diffrence if its a muslim or transgender person for example...

2023-01-02 13:25

20 replies

There is no difference, both of these would be forbidden

2023-01-02 13:26

19 replies

why make a separate rule then its stupid

2023-01-02 13:26

6 replies

They both fall under the same rule though?

2023-01-02 13:27

5 replies

No. The rule is hatespeech against protected groups. But hatespeech against not protected groups is actually not a rule...

2023-01-02 13:28

4 replies

Muslims and transgender people are both protected groups though. The reason why some stuff isn't protected is because there could be real life complications from it. For example if a rollercoaster could not legally stop obese people from riding the rollercoaster, it's a safety issue for everyone involved. Or if an etablissement has a certain "appeal" to young men, unattrative women can't work there and they can legally "discriminate" based on these factors

2023-01-02 13:31

3 replies

stupid rule

2023-01-02 13:32

how is this related to youtube and online harassment?

2023-01-02 13:32

1 reply

#48 the second paragraph. Real life laws bleed into online moderation

2023-01-02 13:33

so the punishment would be more brutal if the hate speech is against a transgender when compared to a straight person

2023-01-02 13:26

11 replies

why though

2023-01-02 13:29

If someone would hate another person *for being straight* then the punishment would be the exact same, legally speaking. Because both sexual and gender orientation fall under these protected group laws

2023-01-02 13:29

9 replies

ill rephrase then, would the punishment be greater if hate speech is done against a protected group than done against a unprotected group?

2023-01-02 13:30

8 replies

Probably, but I'm not a lawyer. I think Youtube is legally required to report hate speech against protected groups to the authorities(in some countries/regions), hence this extra step in the screenshot

2023-01-02 13:33

6 replies

ok, and how is that not racist? fighting racism by being racist

2023-01-02 13:33

5 replies

What is racist here? Hating against a white person *for being white* would have the exact same consequences as hating on a black person *for being black*

2023-01-02 13:35

4 replies

"Probably" why say probably then?

2023-01-02 13:35

3 replies

Because as I said, I'm not a lawyer nor do I work at Youtube

2023-01-02 13:37

2 replies

so youre not sure then. probably =/ not sure

2023-01-02 13:38

1 reply

Yes, correct. I'm just giving you my take on the situation based on what I know and what I have learned throughout life

2023-01-02 13:39

you're so dumb I can't

2023-01-02 13:33

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group

2023-01-02 13:27

1 reply

So many don't bother google and just get butthurt because they think they know what everything means :/

2023-01-02 14:30

Racism is totally accepted, as long as youre not white

2023-01-02 13:16

1 reply

good

2023-01-02 14:19

protected group = minorities that suffer discrimination. It's easy to interpret, don't be stupid.

2023-01-02 13:16

19 replies

flag + name

2023-01-02 13:18

8 replies

My god it's the same argumentation they speak for the BLM movement. "so if a movement a form of justice because of the hate suffered of a determined group, then it means the rest doesn't matter" dumb take. It's not because only one is shown that it's only that one that matters. What happens is that these groups suffer discrimination for being "different" - LGBT, other ethnic group taking away white people, people with disabilities, among others. Literally it's not written that "just that only one matters".

2023-01-02 13:21

3 replies

this is not like BLM so the comparison youre trying to do is stupid.

2023-01-02 13:23

2 replies

Smartest indian. Of course it does

2023-01-02 13:24

1 reply

NA logic, it isnt related

2023-01-02 13:24

So mad that you edited? Lmao.

2023-01-02 13:22

3 replies

how does that make me mad?

2023-01-02 13:23

2 replies

You're mad

2023-01-02 13:24

1 reply

cope

2023-01-02 13:24

so whites can't experience racism?

2023-01-02 13:19

8 replies

Definitely not. White people don't suffer racism because they are white.

2023-01-02 13:22

7 replies

flag and name checks out

2023-01-02 13:24

3 replies

2023-01-02 13:25

2 replies

he's either baiting or a typical fat murican who lives online 24/7 and needs a reality check asap.

2023-01-02 13:28

1 reply

Mad?

2023-01-02 13:32

White supremacist spotted.

2023-01-02 13:31

1 reply

Ok Beard43

2023-01-02 13:32

2023-01-02 14:20

Google isn't a god who's announcing terms for judgement day it certainly isn't okay to be racist against any group but the report takes priority when it comes to a certain group who are more prone and the act is more detrimental to them compared to someone from unprotected groups

2023-01-02 13:23

2 replies

google is god, nt

2023-01-02 13:27

1 reply

0/8 cry=free

2023-01-02 13:34

0/8 either clueless kid or straight up baiter its really not a hard concept to grasp, "hate speech against a protected group" is just a way to narrow down the report reason. for example, harassment and violent threats could also be considered hate speech depending on how they are done lol, but they have their own categories to separate it

2023-01-02 13:41

6 replies

whats the point for seperate rule though

2023-01-02 13:48

5 replies

lets say there are 100 people reviewing the reports, and you get like 50000 reports for violence but only 3000 for hate speech against a protected group hope i dont need to develop that further

2023-01-02 13:50

4 replies

ok and what is the diffrence between protected group and not protected group hate speech both are the same thing

2023-01-02 13:52

3 replies

and both get banned/removed? i dont understand whats ur issue

2023-01-02 13:52

2 replies

whats the point of having a seperete rule then

2023-01-02 13:52

1 reply

#59 #61 just easier to go through reports and manage it you dont seem to worry about dozens of other categories that are created for same reason

2023-01-02 13:54

clown world

2023-01-02 14:24

The main problem is to consider okay to distinguish and divide ourselves in groups. Anglo-american way of seeing things is making sure we stay apart and don't tolerate each other. Universalism is the way to go. We're all together on that boat, so any form of hate speech should be punished. While we're down here fighting to know who's the biggest victim we forget we're all just pawns on a chess board and none of us is moving the pieces. Once you stop fighting with your neighbor you'll understand who's making us fight between us and why. If you want a hint : look at where the wealth you produced at work is going. Sure you might have a good wage but it's far from the value you produced, so where me money???

2023-01-02 14:37