4 ms·
Should it?
by jackvalentine 9y ago
Should it?
- smt88 9y agoFrom speaking and publishing his videos? No. From participating in a private online community that doesn't want people peeing in the pool? Sure. Harm done to Paul in exchange for others' benefit. Seems like an easy choice.
- ssyphon 9y agoYes.
- threeseed 9y agoYes it absolutely should. His behaviour was unconscionable, immoral, illegal and sets a terrible example for the young kids who largely make up his audience. By allowing this content YouTube is defacto endorsing it which then encourages others to follow in his footsteps. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
- DennisAleynikov 9y agoYou literally dont have to watch his content. why do people jump to bans to try and shut up poplar idiots. same goes for the most popular of idiots, Trump. I see frothing at the mouth when people mention banning him from twitter! whats the point???
- Jack000 9y agobecause the money and views directly enable this negative behaviour? These people are free to be assholes all they want, but they shouldn't be funded by youtube.
- jackvalentine 9y agoI think because in their mind a ban is a nice line in the sand thing. Never mind that a global platform like YouTube has an impossible tension of thousands of subcultures, countries, advertisers and other stakeholders to try and balance. That’s the big mistake of these Web 2.0 platforms in my opinion - they try to be both a virally growing platform and a community but always wait until something bad happens before making the rules apparent. It’s an unresolvable problem in my opinion.
- hugozap 9y agoIt's not about "not watching his content" he is clearly harassing people ( at least in the Japan videos ). Most communities ban people who commit abuse, this is no different.