Banned From YouTube

[grand-galop]

I will resume the experience we actually deal with as WHEN I WAS YOUNGER...  You want to get some good time and go to the bar with some good friends with the right state of mind to not offend anyone and enjoy the time you spent with your friends..  During your escapade , a guy not related to anyone of your team of friend is harassing and targeting someone in the crew because he is drunk by too much and want to try impress for no valuable reason...  In some situations, you can try to resonate the weak mind acting friendly with him to turn the heat down to a manageable level ...  But in some of the situation I have been into, there is no REASONNING AT SOME POINT and if you are not protecting you and your related, you are entering a dangerous zone that you already know where it will lead off....   The ole youtube situation and the debate exchange will lead this way in my opinion because there is one side that don't evaluate the consequences of their act and the other want to conserve their head leveled....    My two cents...

[LDP]

FYI - It appears AOA's channel is back up.

The channel is there but it looks like they moved all their videos to private.

[Marc In Iowa]

What is really needed is another venue coming from another direction, but that requires considerable capital and expertise.

You can sign up for a Wordpress web site for zero cost. You will have to learn how to operate a Wordpress web site but that is doable by mere mortals.

[beachgunner]

What is really needed is another venue coming from another direction, but that requires considerable capital and expertise.

You can sign up for a Wordpress web site for zero cost. You will have to learn how to operate a Wordpress web site but that is doable by mere mortals.

The issue is monetization, not hosting. You've always been able to host your own content for nothing via multiple "start your own website/blog sites". YouTube became the "catchall" place for content due to Google's search algorithm taking you there (the very reason the FTC and SEC NEVER should have approved to acquisition of YouTube by Google) when using their search engine.

Once people became "partners" with YT, and the dollars started coming in, you had the opportunity to create content for a living. That's fantastic, only now creators are realizing that they are only welcome if their content fits YT/Googles liberal, anti-freedoms, anti-American agenda.

Content creators quit their day jobs. Money started rolling in, and what a great opportunity it was. That is now under fire and will shortly be removed.

Bottom line; shooters and similar communities need to face the realization that they will have to go back to hosting content privately, and their revenue sources will have to come from somewhere other than YT. If you are Airguns of Arizona or Pyramyd Air, no big deal. The content supports the sales of their products and the revenue comes in regardless.

For air gun gear reviewers, the party is over. I know Steve at AEAC has some sponsors, but not sure if that is enough to support him and his family. I guess not based upon his emotional plea to the overlords at YT.

We, as content consumers, have been spoiled. All this fantastic information for free. Maybe it is time to go to a subscription based content host, where you pay x $/year, and you get all the content that you are interested in. If that happens, I would think that retailers and other product manufacturers will show up on those sites with sponsorships, kind of like the model here on GTA and AGN.

It'll be interesting to see how things shake out, but I think it will be okay. I'm more than willing to fork out some money to consume content that I support instead of going to YT for free where I am told my voice doesn't count, and I can't be who I want to be.

No thanks.

[Rob M]

What is really needed is another venue coming from another direction, but that requires considerable capital and expertise.

You can sign up for a Wordpress web site for zero cost. You will have to learn how to operate a Wordpress web site but that is doable by mere mortals.

The issue is monetization, not hosting. You've always been able to host your own content for nothing via multiple "start your own website/blog sites". YouTube became the "catchall" place for content due to Google's search algorithm taking you there (the very reason the FTC and SEC NEVER should have approved to acquisition of YouTube by Google) when using their search engine.

Once people became "partners" with YT, and the dollars started coming in, you had the opportunity to create content for a living. That's fantastic, only now creators are realizing that they are only welcome if their content fits YT/Googles liberal, anti-freedoms, anti-American agenda.

Content creators quit their day jobs. Money started rolling in, and what a great opportunity it was. That is now under fire and will shortly be removed.

Bottom line; shooters and similar communities need to face the realization that they will have to go back to hosting content privately, and their revenue sources will have to come from somewhere other than YT. If you are Airguns of Arizona or Pyramyd Air, no big deal. The content supports the sales of their products and the revenue comes in regardless.

For air gun gear reviewers, the party is over. I know Steve at AEAC has some sponsors, but not sure if that is enough to support him and his family. I guess not based upon his emotional plea to the overlords at YT.

We, as content consumers, have been spoiled. All this fantastic information for free. Maybe it is time to go to a subscription based content host, where you pay x $/year, and you get all the content that you are interested in. If that happens, I would think that retailers and other product manufacturers will show up on those sites with sponsorships, kind of like the model here on GTA and AGN.

It'll be interesting to see how things shake out, but I think it will be okay. I'm more than willing to fork out some money to consume content that I support instead of going to YT for free where I am told my voice doesn't count, and I can't be who I want to be.

No thanks.

well said.. I subscribe to a channel where the owner showed everyone his monetization page , he was making 18,000 dollars a month in ad revenue.. His channel is corvettes , not airguns , but there WAS serious money involved.

[WesBob]

Update: Pyramid Air is back up on YouTube. Hopefully it all gets sorted out soon and YouTube puts some safeguards in place to stop radicals from shutting everything down.

[ray1377]

Looks like squirrel hunter channel has removed all his video's himself.
Channel still there, just no content.

https://www.youtube.com/user/squirrelhuntertv/featured

Ray

[Relentless Holiday]

Yep.  this came on yahoo's feed. many mentions of the FL shooter having AGs...  We got associated with it.  And only 3 tags by a viewer/attacker/flager....well that's just easy pickings for anti's to shut down our friends.  glad some are rebounding already.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/25/us/nikolas-cruz-warning-signs/index.html

[Rob M]

Yep.  this came on yahoo's feed. many mentions of the FL shooter having AGs...  We got associated with it.  And only 3 tags by a viewer/attacker/flager....well that's just easy pickings for anti's to shut down our friends.  glad some are rebounding already.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/25/us/nikolas-cruz-warning-signs/index.html

he was pictured with a 1377 all over

[WesBob]

Wonderful. 

[Rob M]

cruz gu7ns by murphyrobert9, on Flickr

the media pics had him holding the 1377 in his room with a nutty look

[ray1377]

And that my friends is how "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch" term came to be.
I've been thinking it was probably gonna end up being some "nut job" who shot somebody with a big bore that would get this
mess started. Guess I was wrong.
Ray

[PelletsForPests]

well that explains why people are taking out their anger on airguns I guess... dang. One bad apple indeed. I only saw the picture of him holding an airsoft pistol. Sad

[Rabbit\Squirrel Killer]

well that explains why people are taking out their anger on airguns I guess... dang. One bad apple indeed. I only saw the picture of him holding an airsoft pistol. Sad

I saw a pic of an arm and 1377 in hand over and over and over .... again

[WolfyW]

What is really needed is another venue coming from another direction, but that requires considerable capital and expertise.

You can sign up for a Wordpress web site for zero cost. You will have to learn how to operate a Wordpress web site but that is doable by mere mortals.

The issue is monetization, not hosting. You've always been able to host your own content for nothing via multiple "start your own website/blog sites". YouTube became the "catchall" place for content due to Google's search algorithm taking you there (the very reason the FTC and SEC NEVER should have approved to acquisition of YouTube by Google) when using their search engine.

Once people became "partners" with YT, and the dollars started coming in, you had the opportunity to create content for a living. That's fantastic, only now creators are realizing that they are only welcome if their content fits YT/Googles liberal, anti-freedoms, anti-American agenda.

Content creators quit their day jobs. Money started rolling in, and what a great opportunity it was. That is now under fire and will shortly be removed.

Bottom line; shooters and similar communities need to face the realization that they will have to go back to hosting content privately, and their revenue sources will have to come from somewhere other than YT. If you are Airguns of Arizona or Pyramyd Air, no big deal. The content supports the sales of their products and the revenue comes in regardless.

For air gun gear reviewers, the party is over. I know Steve at AEAC has some sponsors, but not sure if that is enough to support him and his family. I guess not based upon his emotional plea to the overlords at YT.

We, as content consumers, have been spoiled. All this fantastic information for free. Maybe it is time to go to a subscription based content host, where you pay x $/year, and you get all the content that you are interested in. If that happens, I would think that retailers and other product manufacturers will show up on those sites with sponsorships, kind of like the model here on GTA and AGN.

It'll be interesting to see how things shake out, but I think it will be okay. I'm more than willing to fork out some money to consume content that I support instead of going to YT for free where I am told my voice doesn't count, and I can't be who I want to be.

No thanks.

Makes total sense.

[WesBob]

Ted's back up, though some commenters were saying already some of the videos have disappeared that he put back up.

[MartyMcFly]

If these are malicious and organized takedowns by social justice warriors and not Google's own agenda, then it might be considered tortious interference. These individuals or groups are after all destroying the livelihoods of the content creators by interfering in the business relationship between Google and the creators. I'm not a lawyer, but perhaps the content creators have good cause to impel google to identify the users that are flagging the videos in order to bring legal action against them. People who are the victims of defamation can ask to have anonymous internet users identified to file a lawsuit and perhaps a similar argument can be used in this situation.

This form of action may not only scare the social justice warriors, but it can force Google to fix their system, after all they don't want to be in the middle of such lawsuits. Lastly, this may bring about other scary scenarios into focus for Google, such as class action lawsuits. If the content providers can prove that at the time of termination they were not in breach of their contracts, they may have grounds for legal action. Despite vague contracts that are usually written to protect the service providers each state has its own laws that can provide additional protections despite what Google may have laid out in their agreements with user and creators.

I want to stress that I am not a lawyer, but these are ideas I would explore if my livelihood was impacted and I would go to great lengths to organize with other content providers to spread the costs of the legal action and to put more weight behind the issue.

[beachgunner]

If these are malicious and organized takedowns by social justice warriors and not Google's own agenda, then it might be considered tortious interference. These individuals or groups are after all destroying the livelihoods of the content creators by interfering in the business relationship between Google and the creators. I'm not a lawyer, but perhaps the content creators have good cause to impel google to identify the users that are flagging the videos in order to bring legal action against them. People who are the victims of defamation can ask to have anonymous internet users identified to file a lawsuit and perhaps a similar argument can be used in this situation.

This form of action may not only scare the social justice warriors, but it can force Google to fix their system, after all they don't want to be in the middle of such lawsuits. Lastly, this may bring about other scary scenarios into focus for Google, such as class action lawsuits. If the content providers can prove that at the time of termination they were not in breach of their contracts, they may have grounds for legal action. Despite vague contracts that are usually written to protect the service providers each state has its own laws that can provide additional protections despite what Google may have laid out in their agreements with user and creators.

I want to stress that I am not a lawyer, but these are ideas I would explore if my livelihood was impacted and I would go to great lengths to organize with other content providers to spread the costs of the legal action and to put more weight behind the issue.

The San Bernardino terrorist had iPhones and obviously the FBI and Homeland Security wanted to know the content of this device to prevent further attacks and find co-conspirators.

Liberal, American hating, Silicon Valley Apple refused to cooperate. The DOJ was preparing a suit, and that is when the FBI hired some top hackers to break into the iPhones of these terrorist to complete their investigations and do their jobs.

Do you think for one minute that Google/YouTube is going to cough up the name of some social justice warrior, living in their parents basement because they cannot get a job, to some local lawyer so that content creators can sue for damages???

Never happen. Not in a million years. I applaud your theory and the idea behind this, but Silicon Valley and our tech overlords are more powerful than the federal government. They know more about you and I than the feds ever will.

All that, and lets be honest, Google/YouTube is happy to eliminate people who do not accept their ideology. They will be happy to remove First Amendment, Second Amendment, and Third Amendment supporters, and go with, "Gee, must be a glitch in our algorithm on how we find inappropriate content. So sorry.."

I love you...
Check's in the mail...

...well, you know the rest.

Get off YouTube. Go direct to content creators websites. Financially support them.

F YT.

[Relentless Holiday]

And that my friends is how "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch" term came to be.
I've been thinking it was probably gonna end up being some "nut job" who shot somebody with a big bore that would get this
mess started. Guess I was wrong.
Ray

Always believed exactly the same Ray.

[Relentless Holiday]

If these are malicious and organized takedowns by social justice warriors and not Google's own agenda, then it might be considered tortious interference. These individuals or groups are after all destroying the livelihoods of the content creators by interfering in the business relationship between Google and the creators. I'm not a lawyer, but perhaps the content creators have good cause to impel google to identify the users that are flagging the videos in order to bring legal action against them. People who are the victims of defamation can ask to have anonymous internet users identified to file a lawsuit and perhaps a similar argument can be used in this situation.

This form of action may not only scare the social justice warriors, but it can force Google to fix their system, after all they don't want to be in the middle of such lawsuits. Lastly, this may bring about other scary scenarios into focus for Google, such as class action lawsuits. If the content providers can prove that at the time of termination they were not in breach of their contracts, they may have grounds for legal action. Despite vague contracts that are usually written to protect the service providers each state has its own laws that can provide additional protections despite what Google may have laid out in their agreements with user and creators.

I want to stress that I am not a lawyer, but these are ideas I would explore if my livelihood was impacted and I would go to great lengths to organize with other content providers to spread the costs of the legal action and to put more weight behind the issue.

It would take serious bucks to go after them, but it is very close to harasing a hunter,  I know that is a crime.