Youtube needs a far greater amount of bureaucracy than it has, despite how scary that word is to tech people. Google's automated approach is clearly not capable of keeping up with the scale and nuance of the website.

It's worth stating, though, that the vast majority of youtube's problems are the fault of copyright law and massive media publishers. Google could care less if you wanted to upload full camrips of 2025's biggest blockbusters, but the powers-that-be demand Google is able to take it down immediately. This is why 15 seconds of a song playing in the background gets your video demonitized.

YouTube is “riding a tiger,” and the moment creators realize they hold the real power, the game is up. I believe the platform purposely creates a fear of the unknown with intermittent reward–punishment cycles. Random rules enforcement, videos taken down, strikes, demonetization, throttling... The algorithm becomes a sort of deity that people try to appease and they turn into cultish devotees preforming endless rounds of strange rituals in hopes of "divine" monetization favor.

Right, that's the issue. I really doubt that creators love having to spam the same "Don't forget to like/subscribe/comment!" message in every single video they produce, but Youtube forces them to.

As a viewer I certainly hate that crap and wish Google didn't intentionally make it this way.

That is my entire point. The creators fight each other in a pit, for the Emperor's amusement.

What am I looking at? Is this a transcript of a real thread formatted in a flat manner? Or is this fiction?

> Lots of very hateful, negative content too. It didn’t take me long to find the video “why this new artist sucks.”

If you're referring to his video I'm Sorry...This New Artist Completely Sucks[1], then it's a video about a fully AI generated "artist" he made using various AI tools.

So it's not hateful against anyone. Though the title is a bit clickbait-y, I'll give you that.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKxNGFjyRv0

> “why this new artist sucks.”

That's about AI, not very polarizing at the level it's currently at.

> Another find, what I assume is an overblown small quibble turned into clickbait videos, was “this record label is trying to SILENCE me.”

That might be overblown, but it doesn't sound polarizing at all. OP was saying he always has the most polarizing opinions.

If that last one is the vid I'm thinking of, the same record company has sent him hundreds of copyright strikes and he has to have a lawyer constantly fighting them for fair use. He does some stuff verging on listen-along reaction videos, but the strikes he talks about there are when he is interviewing the artists who made the songs and they play short snippits of them for reference while talking about the history of making them, thought process behind the songwriting, etc.

I think it's not just automated content ID stuff where it claims the monetization, but the same firm for that label going after him over and over where 3 strikes removes his channel. The title or thumbnail might be overblown, probably the firm just earns a commission and he's dealing with a corporate machine that is scatter shotting against big videos with lots of views that have any of their sound rather than targetting him to silence something they don't want to get out, but I don't think the video was very polarizing.

While I think he has his cranky old man moments and he isn’t for everyone, his titles are far more spicy and hateful than the actual content. He doesn’t just hate everything new because it is new. He also has plenty of videos loving on things old and new.