Mister Angry Rules Guy
1st February 2010
(Warning: Angry rant incoming.)
I am sure you have seen this by now.
This is bad on so many levels. Seems the de-monetization was not enough. Let's look at this point by point.
* Gain points when you.... So, now you are turning Social Justice Warriors into a game, and a role-playing game at that. Report more stuff, gain more XP points, level up, and become more powerful. Since this is a game, you might as well for a guild.
* Add subtitles or captions to a video. Seriously? You simply add that to any video you want? I get it. This is to allow you to translate things into another language because not everyone speaks English. Or you could write transcripts and subtitles. That is great. That is a good thing. By all means, do this.
This Heroes program has a massive problem. There is nothing stopping you from putting "Dicks. Dicks" all over any video you want, simply because you can. Or, maybe, because English is the most popular language, there is nothing stopping you from making the "subtitles" be a bunch of random nonsense in whatever language. For that matter, I would not at all be amazed to see a Jihadi praise being the subtitles for a Fox News video.
You find the same thing with Wikipedia, but at least they have a Moderator staff to remove that, or outright ban you for vandalization. So, when the Moderator staff become the vandals, there is nothing to stop them.
* Report negative content. One problem I know exists is people uploading entire television series, entire movies, or entire albums, to Youtube. To be completely honest with you, I must confess that I am guilty of listening to entire albums this way, and having that playing in the background while working. However, that does not change the fact that uploading the entire thing is still illegal.
The problem here is that negative is relative. Maybe you are seeing two people who simply disagree, but are genuinely debating the issue. Maybe you are seeing a contrary opinion, and you hate it simply because it is contrary to your opinion.
I come from a different generation. Because I am old-fashioned, my view of negative content is frequently what anyone born after 1990 thinks society needs to start doing.
As-is, demonetization made Youtube look like they wanted to be the BBC. Now, they seem to want to sterilize the site. So, the question turns to what Youtube sees as positive, and what Youtube sees as negative. One real-world example is how the American government is actively removing anything relating to Hillary Clinton having health problem, or anything that would confirm the whole Benghazi scandal, or the email scandal. Anyone who does put that information into public has a nasty habit of disappearing. So, is the only acceptable video going to be pro-Hillary, and anything contrary gets removed?
To further go back in time, Nazi Germany had what were known as "Block Leaders." Their entire job was to rat out anyone who had opinions contrary to the government. Better yet, you the citizen were encouraged to report someone to your local Block Leader. The same is true here. This enables people to engage in the same behaviour.
* Share your knowledge with others. What knowledge? Everyone has known that one guy who thinks something is fact because he saw it on Fox News. Or, in childhood, there was always that one kid who claimed his uncle worked at Nintendo, so the next Zelda game is this or that.
So, now that I am getting points for each post, I am now being encouraged to blow smoke everywhere in any thread where I think I can sound like I know what I am talking about. The simple fact is that no one knows everything about everything.
Me? I have spent my entire life playing guitars, as well as researching everything I can about them. I am subscribed to 8 different guitar channels on Youtube, and am subscribed to 2 different guitar magazines, as well as receiving weekly newsletters from a large bunch of guitar companies. So, I do feel as though I do have the guitar knowledge to give if needed. Technology? I know nothing. I certainly can sound like I know what I am talking about, but the vast majority of that is just me regurgitating whatever I have read. As such, I cannot contribute to a technology discussion.
The other factor is that most of what people post is their opinions. Keep that word in mind. Opinions. Just like this thread, these are my OPINIONS on the matter. When you take information, and filter it through your bias, you get opinions.
* Continue your training. Wait. This is training?
* Unlock super tools. Mass flag videos. So, I basically search Youtube for any keyword I want. Say I search Youtube for "Hillary Clinton," "feminism," "homosexuality," or whatever else. Flag that video. Flag that video. Flag that video. Flag that video. Why? Because that video promotes feminism, or because I know for a fact that vlogger is a lesbian. If I wanted, I could theoretically flag EVERY VIDEO in someone's channel, every last one of them. I could literally get someone's channel shut down by flagging all of their videos, simply because I disagree with the type of content someone posts.
You hate the type of content someone posts, again, go see your local Block Leader.
To make matters worse, this is a problem that already exists. Some crazy stalkers will already take the time to chain-report every video you have. The ability to mass report is going to make that a lot easier, which is going to make the problem even worse.
On the other side of that, look at it from a corporate view. Say you are a huge personality on Youtube. I am not going to Google who is the largest channel, because that is not the point. The point is that you can flag your competition. You can go to your competitor's channel, and flag every single video they have. By removing your competition, you have less in the way of your viewers, your opinions. This is something major corporations have been known to do, and now Youtube is opening the same door for it to happen here.
And because you get points for it, you get rewarded for doing this, and encouraged to do it more and more.
The worst part is that this also opens the door for Heroes to come after each other. Cliques will happen, and wars will ensue betwixt them. It is only a matter of time. And if someone in your clique gets terminated, you get terminated as well, simply because you are involved with that guy.
* Help moderate community content. So, any random bloke also have the ability to moderate comments. Go to any video. That comment does not agree with my opinion. That comment does not agree with my opinion. That comment does not agree with my opinion. Delete. Delete. Delete.
Again, Block Leader.
The only way to stop this is to disable comments on your stuff anyway, which defeats the purpose. Discussion is how opinions form. Discussion is how things happen.
Either that, or they disable comments because they cannot tolerate criticism or opinions contrary to their own.
* Contact Youtube staff directly. Even the largest Youtube channels cannot contact Youtube directly. Google the top 10 largest Youtube channels. They have been going for years, have millions of subscribers, and billions of views. Even still, none of them can contact Youtube staff directly. Not one. Needless to say, this is a thing should should already exist by default.
* Access top hero perks. So, now the guild has become an Elite Guild.
*Apply for Heroes Summit. So, the Elite Guild gets to choose who they accept or deny membership into said Elite Guild. If you have performed particularly well as a Block Leader, you get to be promoted to National Inspector. Well done! * Because all heroes deserve a little GLORY. Hail Youtube! Hail Youtube! Hail Youtube!
The worst part is how this looks like anyone can apply. Literally any average bloke can make an account, apply, and you are in. Start your Hero Guild gaming! In theory, your points can be reduced if you are abusing the system. In practicality, that is likely not going to happen. The problem is that Youtube already cannot monitor what happens with all the reports that are happening every day.
As-is, Youtube already has a problem of mass reports, and people making fake accounts to report stuff. Some gamers cannot get rid of a copywrite strike, just because some troll made a fake account named "Valve," and reported something. Obviously, the real Valve did not send this report, but the report still cannot go away because the name on the report is still Valve. As a result, you only have two options. Immediately re-contest said report every time the previous contest expires, or just take the copywrite strike. You get 3 copywrite strikes, and you are not allowed to have a Youtube channel anymore.
And now, Youtube is going to give just ANY random bloke a badge. If Youtube already cannot monitor the reports, they have no way to monitor the Heroes to make sure they are legitimately doing a Moderator job. This is just ripe for favouritism, elitism, and abuse. In addition, it will only further encourage making burner accounts, just to make fake reports.
At least with forums, you need to be a member for a long time, earn the staff's trust, and prove you can be trusted with some power. Here, you start as a simple Moderator, for specific areas. If technology is your main know-how, you are Moderator for the Tech Discussion section. If and when a Supermod retires, only the most trusted can be promoted, and that needs to be by unanimous vote.
Youtube would do well to take a lesson from this. The question turns to whether or not Youtube possesses the ability, or the will, to learn.
/end angry rant
26th May 2003
Yep, I pretty much agree with most of that. Crowd-sourcing moderation rarely goes well if you're not prepared to invest the time and effort in actually managing that behaviour and making sure that the culture you want is the dominant one. That's expensive, both in time and in money, and limits the speed at which you can grow. So far, there isn't really a solution to rapidly expanding membership, nor to trying to change a culture at speed once it already exists.
And so people reach into the hat of fast and stupid fixes to be seen to be doing something.
About the closest people have come, ironically considering I hate the site, is Reddit - and that by just letting anyone come up with a forum and run it more or less as they please. Freedom of association. (I mean I think their sorting algorithm just promotes mush, but that's another issue.)
Jeff is a mean boss
28th July 2002
Best video I've seen on possible solutions to the problems this is going to cause.
Caffiene Fuelled Ravings of an undiagnosed Sociopath.
13th June 2008
PewDiePie also has issues with this, and highlights in his own way how this could go very badly wrong.
When the platforms largest creator is opposing this, you know you've done fucked up.
Mikey - GameFront.com - Lead Developer
11th November 2006
I have no opinion on this, since I don't really use YouTube for anything important these days.
But why the hell is being a productive community member considered a "Social Justice Warrior" thing? All they're doing is rewarding you for things that you'd be doing if you had any interest in developing YouTube anyway.
9th October 2007
I literally don't even care anymore, companies like google and youtube make changes to their platforms hither and yon, I can't be bothered to even care keeping up anymore.
But regarding what Serio says, I have a pretty strong opinion on that. I'm entirely too fucking tired of the whole anti SJW tirade on the internet. And I've seen it here on FN too. I literally don't see the huge appeal in being an asshole. I completely understand the negative reaction towards what I know as radical feminism (basically the general idea of what people define as "feminazi"), but the whole anti-feminism agenda is such bullshit and I hate and judge with a passion anyone who claim themselves being anti SJW and anti-feminist. Y'all got as much blood on your hands as every white power supremacist, rapist, school/nightclub shooter and murderer cop that we hear of in media.
I can't for the life of me see the appeal in being against human rights, equal rights and you know, generally being against killing people in the name of medieval bullshit. I don't care what generation someone is born in, if they somehow find some sick joy in knowing people are getting harassed and murdered, they're the kind of scum that makes this whole earth/society thing the shit-filled reality it is. And in my experience, everyone I've ever met who's anti-SJW or whatever we're gonna call it fits into this category of people. Highly hypocritical if you ask me.
I often hear the argument that "that's just how the world is, it's a terrible place", but of course if someone holds that belief, of course everything's gonna be shit. Like jeez, have some empathy for the human next to you. It's about taking a step back and looking at things that don't affect you specifically actually affect a pretty large group of people. If one's been through some shit experiences, it's pretty easy to take a step back and you know, hopefully not further procreate shit experience for other people. It's all about some human empathy.
And all this bullshit gets masked as "freedom of speech", I say fuck freedom of speech. the "freedom of speech" thing is what get people like me killed, I read every single day about cases of people being thrown out of their houses, beaten up, harassed to the point of suicide (and don't tell me suicide is a personal option or the coward's way out) and murdered, people who really, if you think about it, deserve in no way that treatment.
This is by all means angry rant, I'm just fucking tired of the whole "boohoo an SJW called me white cis dude i'm so offended" crap (the people who shit talk the whole feminist/SJW thing are the easiest triggered folk I've ever met, mind you), and it just takes a small bit of analytical intelligence to see how most of these anti-SJW people are never in any situation in which they have to fear for their lives because of who they are. I'm tired of people advocating the stripping of human rights and crime towards people whose only goal in life is to live. I'm so freaking tired of the knowledge that I or friends to me can be killed at any point in life and subsequently become a topic of debate and jokes.
I'm just mad sick about this. By all means, strip people of their right for freedom of speech, moderate with iron fist peoples opinion. If it means we'll eventually stop being killed and humiliated in the streets, then by all means, fuck your freedom of speech.
26th May 2003
I'm tired of the whole political fight. People identify with a label, define a large or total part of their identity with respect to it and then reasoned debate goes out the window.
On one side you have people who are tired of being painted with the same brush as rapists and murderers because they enjoy a dirty joke and a swimsuit catalogue. On the other side you have people who are tired of rape and murder. And I suspect that's the majority of both groups, and they're both decent enough people. But then the fuckheads come, and then there are the flags and the little fucking labels - and decent people take a stance with respect to a label without any idea what's on the other side of it in any given instance.
I'm too old for this sort of party. You can have reasoned debates with individuals about the issues. Trying to have a reasoned debate with a mob, even by proxy, is folly.
I remember one of the last debates I bothered having on the Escapist was about sexy characters in video games, and at least I got to talk with a person rather than some Chinese Room political group that wore their face. We both seemed to agree that eye-candy of both genders was good to have in there, and I learnt a bit about what at least that woman considered attractive. Ya' know? Good times. Neither of us called anyone a rapist, no-one talked about killing each other or fucking our freedom of speech. We just both fancied some man candy, or woman candy, as the respective case may be. That debate's about empathy and humanity - and maybe a bit daft but people are a bit daft - there was some connection there.
You can't empathise with a label.
That's what I fear this sort of debate ending up leading into. We'll excise our humanity so a label can win and no-one will be happy and no-one will be any safer, and there won't be any empathy because the last time anyone involved tried honestly engaging with each other will be decades ago at that point. Just a bunch of people who've nuked even the possibility of connecting with one another. Bitter little groups of concentrated hated surrounded by a vast mass who want nothing to do with either side whatever the outcome.
I hate seeing you folks, all of who seem fairly decent nice people to me, going down this pathway. I understand the temptation, I understand the frustration, and I think you are all making a mistake that will only add to the sum of suffering and loneliness in the world. You're all better than this.
Sod it all, I need a whisky.
Wanna go Double Dutch?
9th December 2003
Ideed you don't want what Wikipedia suffered from a lot a few years ago (seems better these days?) which simply meant trolling, being a dictator or have an obvious bias. Or as Stephen Colbert put it: truthyness. You don't want that to happen, it will bring down content and discussions that are genuinly fine, legit and legal but which may be controversial, not popular or sensitive items.
The tagging of good things, like suggest in the video that Lobster shared here does counter that to some extend. But even that is not flawless. In a perfect world were people all had good intentions, kept their calms and tried to see each scenario as a unique encounter (as not to have a bias) would make the whole system work fantastic. But people are flawed, biased and can be revengeful. Even a lot of positive points and such may not always make the obvjectively best contribution raise to the top or get the most points. In systems were answers can be rated for example a well known and popular contributor who overall does a very fine job at helping out may simply earn points because people know what this person is good. But in a particular case that contributor may not actually have made the best contribution. A newbie or lurker risks getting a lot less positive feedback simpy because people do not know this person.
I don't use youtube a whole lot, the advertising is getting more annoying by the day (more often, longer, can't always skip them after 5-15 seconds or so) and I never bothered commenting on videos. I simply search, stumble upon or get directed to a nice video, watch it and that's it. No need to bother with how all of it works exactly. Therefor I can't say much more about the whole 'heroes' thing either.
And no, I had not seen the 'heroes' thing yet untill I read this topic.
26th May 2003
"Serio"All they're doing is rewarding you for things that you'd be doing if you had any interest in developing YouTube anyway.
Not quite. What they're rewarding people for seems to be taking action against other users - like if you rewarded a moderator in terms of how many people they'd banned or how many threads they'd closed. It's difficult to see how that won't lend dominance to whoever is most ready to do so, and those most ready to do so are unlikely to be those with a balanced reflection on reasoned debate. It's like if you give police arrest targets - the police you end up retaining aren't those who keep the peace most effectively, they're those who go around being utter dickheads and consequently never find any shortage of people to arrest.
Wanna go Double Dutch?
9th December 2003
That is indeed the flaw with any reward system. Be it a reward for reaching a certain number of posts, points, fines or what not. Some people will be focussed on the this numerical target making it a game of quantity rather then quality. Overall such a thing will not benefit the community. Online users get drowned in content spam, society ends up with dickhead police officers who hand out fines or arrests that do not take the overall importance/needs of the comunity/society as the primairy goal.
People do like rewards though, to get some sort of feedback, a token to show that what they do is appreciated. So you end up having to seek a middle ground, rewarding the good with feedback (pat on the back or some actual reward) while stopping spam whores who are only interested in ranking up ASAP. Which brings in the need for a moderation staff (jury) etc.