YouTube, the world’s largest video platform, appears to have changed its moderation policies to allow more content that violates its own rules to remain online.

      • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        “Your claim is only valid if you first run this elaborate, long-term experiment that I came up with.”

        The world isn’t binary. When someone says less moderation, they don’t mean no moderation. Framing it as all-or-nothing just misrepresents their view to make it easier for you to argue against. CSAM is illegal, so it’s always going to be against the rules - that’s not up to Google and is therefore a moot point.

        As for other content you ideologically oppose, that’s your issue. As long as it’s not advocating violence or breaking the law, I don’t see why they’d be obligated to remove it. You’re free to think they should - but it’s their platform, not yours. If they want to allow that kind of content, they’re allowed to. If you don’t like it, don’t go there.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 hours ago

          You can also look into the long, long list of defunct instances because they got defederated by basically everyone because noone wanted to deal with their shit. Hexbear and lemmygrad don’t care if they’re defederated because they’re platforms to themselves, the instances I’m talking about were basically 4chan, kiwifarms, whatever, chuds getting banned on ordinary instances setting up their own and trying again. When that didn’t work the instances collapsed as harassing others was their only purpose.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              Those instances weren’t breaking laws. At least not American ones. It is not illegal to be an incivil assclown, but you are going to get thrown out of the bar.

              • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 hours ago

                It’s not a place for incivility that I’m making, either. I just struggle to believe you genuinely don’t understand what people mean when they ask for less moderation or censorship.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  I know what they mean when clutching their frozen peaches. It also never works out as they imagine because paradox of tolerance.

        • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying your claim is nonsense and if you want a proof, you can run an experiment. Do it or don’t do it, your choice. Just don’t expect people who have an experience in running an instance to agree with you.