8 ms·

She's a disgruntled Youtuber. This is her website: http://nasimabc.com/ http://nasimabc.com/ From her page showing a screenshot of her Youtube ad revenue dashb

She's a disgruntled Youtuber. This is her website: http://nasimabc.com/ http://nasimabc.com/ From her page showing a screenshot of her Youtube ad revenue dashboard: > Analytics Last 28 days > Views 366,591 > Revenue $0.10 Highlighted in Red: Revenue $0.10? There's also another bit where she shows her historical vs. current traffic and makes a reasonable case that she's getting down ranked. Interesting times.

leereeves 9y ago
> Views 366,591 > Revenue $0.10 So basically all of her videos were demonetized?
- grizzles 9y ago
  Looks like it. Considering that she would have needed to increase her views by 3 orders of magnitude to scratch out $100/month from them. She should have did affiliate marketing & patreon.
  - quickthrower2 9y ago
    > She should have did affiliate marketing & patreon. And, like, ... not shot people.
    - duncan_bayne 9y ago
      It's funny how often that's a bad solution to a problem. Not always mind you ... but mostly.
      - solarkraft 9y ago
        She did get some wider attention to a problem that has been discussed inside the YouTube community before. While that's not something I'd want to die for, she may have reached her goal.
        coldtea 9y ago
        Well, she didn't want to die for that either, just to kill for it.
      - spacehome 9y ago
        If violence isn't solving your problem, it just means you're not using enough of it.
    - Density 9y ago
      They're not people if they're nazi fucks. Censoring fascists.
      - dang 9y ago
        Please stop.
  - flukus 9y ago
    > She should have did affiliate marketing This is the modern version of "as seen on TV" ads, I've started unsubscribing to anyone that does it regularly. Advertising intermixed with content is the worst form of advertising.
    - KozmoNau7 9y ago
      The only channel I follow that does it regularly is Spectre Sound Studios, and I accept it because the services Glenn pimps are actually really damn good. And he makes it very clear that it's a paid interlude, not part of the actual content.
      - macspoofing 9y ago
        >And he makes it very clear that it's a paid interlude, not part of the actual content. I have to say that with the content creators I follow, that is the norm rather than the exception. There is always a clear delineation between advertisement and the content, even if the advertisement is embedded in the content (i.e native advertising).
        ryandrake 9y ago
        Much more acceptable and less jarring that having Red Lobster or Taco Bell scream at me for 5 seconds before a relaxing music video.
    - mayniac 9y ago
      Some channels do it acceptably. CGP Grey comes to mind, usually an ad for a service at the end of the video the advertiser has effectively funded. It's far worse when people do it without saying, ie product placement. Can't think of any good examples since people usually get away with it, although the obvious blatant example would be any of the Jenner's on Instagram which got into issues for not reporting paid endorsements IIRC.
      - petercooper 9y ago
  - reificator 9y ago
    If the ads are embedded in the video, that's a guarantee that I will stop coming back.
- amelius 9y ago
  The fact that this happens seems even worse than PayPal freezing the accounts of random users.
  - ikurei 9y ago
    Those two events have nothing to do with each other. In Paypal people send each other money, and the man in the middle is blocking it. In YouTube, Google decides whether or not to put ads on your video and give you part of the money. You aren't entitled to that cash just because you uploaded a video and people saw it. It's still terrible and irresponsible for YouTube to be arbitrary about it and have no clearly defined rules; it's clear they're unfair. But I don't think the comparison with PayPal makes sense.
    - MertsA 9y ago
      >the man in the middle is blocking it. Slightly off topic but PayPal doesn't just block it, it seizes the funds entirely for a long period of time. In any case, you're right, YouTube not advertising on videos is not at all like PayPal stealing payments.
    - titzer 9y ago
      > You aren't entitled to that cash just because you uploaded a video and people saw it. I dunno, why should all the ad revenue go to YouTube for a user's content?
      - magicalist 9y ago
        > I dunno, why should all the ad revenue go to YouTube for a user's content? There are no ads on demonetized videos. That's the point of it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
orf 9y ago
Isn't it possible that her content just wasn't that good? I mean her website is a pretty typical looking 'illuminati controls everything' crazy conspiracy site, if her content is similarly poorly produced getting down ranked seems natural.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Isn't it possible that her content just wasn't that good? Even so, she still had 366,591 views, which should all that matters re revenue.
  - CydeWeys 9y ago
    Are you sure? There are certain coveted demographics that advertisers are willing to pay a lot more money for than others. I don't think it's true that all views are counted the same for monetization purposes. And then there's views that are desired so little (e.g. those on whacko conspiracy theorist channels) that advertisers aren't willing to pay to put ads on them at all, and you end up with "demonetization".
    - coldtea 9y ago
      >Are you sure? There are certain coveted demographics that advertisers are willing to pay a lot more money for than others. I don't think it's true that all views are counted the same for monetization purposes. I'm not saying any kind of 350,000 views will pay the same -- but unless there's something off (e.g. monetization off, copyright infringement, etc) 350,000 views pay substantially more than $0.1 whether the demographic.
      - CydeWeys 9y ago
        There's plenty of content that advertisers are not willing to spend any amount of money to be associated with. To use a trivial example, imagine if the KKK had a YouTube channel. And as a more nuanced example, this woman's channel. There is some minimum cost per view, and if the ads aren't even worth that much then there won't be any revenue, rather than a small amount. There's been a rash of negative blowback over the past couple years for being associated with certain types of content, to the point where being monetizable at all is increasingly not the default state. Advertisers would rather not risk it.
majani 9y ago
One of the reasonable conclusions to all this is that revenue sharing on user generated content is a live wire that platforms would rather not touch from now on, despite it being morally correct.
m_fayer 9y ago
Usually personal sites and social media accounts for such people are quickly taken offline, so reliably that I've wondered how it is that there's always someone with the authority and access around to quickly pull the plug. Not in this case, so strange to see this site still online and open to all.
MertsA 9y ago
There's some rather telling content on that site about her mental state. http://nasimabc.com/sitebuilder/images/car_attack_nasim2-426x296.jpg http://nasimabc.com/sitebuilder/images/car_attack_nasim2-426... She feels paranoid like everyone is out to get her and it probably didn't help that when YouTube "attacked" her online, it was direct, unambiguous, attributable to a distinct entity (to her at least), etc. When she ran over some debris in the road she came to the conclusion that anti-vegan (she identifies strongly as a vegan) businesses hired unspecified criminals to harm or kill her, and that they did it because of the stickers on her car. She might have honestly been deluded into thinking that YouTube wanted her dead.
- AlexCoventry 9y ago
  On the one hand it surprises me that a screw could accidentally get pushed into a wheel at that angle. On the other, it would be a really ineffective attack.
  - arbitrage 9y ago
    At high velocities, road debris can do interesting things.
- written 9y ago
  I've seen first hand something similar with a person I have known. It was similar detail (in a sense that it would seem inconsequential to everyone else - bent pages in some work log on a day he made a mistake only he knew about) that mightily added to his sense that peope at the company he worked at were after him for some small oversight he made. He was not sleeping well or at all, ruminating, and well on the road to a major breakdown or suicide. We managed to save him, by taking him to a psychological crisis management center, where he stayed for a few weeks, got a big change in his daily routine, found some new friends and was able to recover. Might as well be that she simply was unlucky, that she stayed in contact with people who added into her fears/anger and paranoia, instead of pulling her out of her daily context and meaningfully opposing what seemed overblown and crazy about her thinking, helping her see alternative ways to achieve what she wanted, etc.

leereeves 9y ago

> Views 366,591 > Revenue $0.10 So basically all of her videos were demonetized?

grizzles 9y ago
Looks like it. Considering that she would have needed to increase her views by 3 orders of magnitude to scratch out $100/month from them. She should have did affiliate marketing & patreon.
- quickthrower2 9y ago
  > She should have did affiliate marketing & patreon. And, like, ... not shot people.
  - duncan_bayne 9y ago
    It's funny how often that's a bad solution to a problem. Not always mind you ... but mostly.
    - solarkraft 9y ago
      She did get some wider attention to a problem that has been discussed inside the YouTube community before. While that's not something I'd want to die for, she may have reached her goal.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        Well, she didn't want to die for that either, just to kill for it.
    - spacehome 9y ago
      If violence isn't solving your problem, it just means you're not using enough of it.
  - Density 9y ago
    They're not people if they're nazi fucks. Censoring fascists.
    - dang 9y ago
      Please stop.
- flukus 9y ago
  > She should have did affiliate marketing This is the modern version of "as seen on TV" ads, I've started unsubscribing to anyone that does it regularly. Advertising intermixed with content is the worst form of advertising.
  - KozmoNau7 9y ago
    The only channel I follow that does it regularly is Spectre Sound Studios, and I accept it because the services Glenn pimps are actually really damn good. And he makes it very clear that it's a paid interlude, not part of the actual content.
    - macspoofing 9y ago
      >And he makes it very clear that it's a paid interlude, not part of the actual content. I have to say that with the content creators I follow, that is the norm rather than the exception. There is always a clear delineation between advertisement and the content, even if the advertisement is embedded in the content (i.e native advertising).
      - ryandrake 9y ago
        Much more acceptable and less jarring that having Red Lobster or Taco Bell scream at me for 5 seconds before a relaxing music video.
  - mayniac 9y ago
    Some channels do it acceptably. CGP Grey comes to mind, usually an ad for a service at the end of the video the advertiser has effectively funded. It's far worse when people do it without saying, ie product placement. Can't think of any good examples since people usually get away with it, although the obvious blatant example would be any of the Jenner's on Instagram which got into issues for not reporting paid endorsements IIRC.
    - petercooper 9y ago
- reificator 9y ago
  If the ads are embedded in the video, that's a guarantee that I will stop coming back.
amelius 9y ago
The fact that this happens seems even worse than PayPal freezing the accounts of random users.
- ikurei 9y ago
  Those two events have nothing to do with each other. In Paypal people send each other money, and the man in the middle is blocking it. In YouTube, Google decides whether or not to put ads on your video and give you part of the money. You aren't entitled to that cash just because you uploaded a video and people saw it. It's still terrible and irresponsible for YouTube to be arbitrary about it and have no clearly defined rules; it's clear they're unfair. But I don't think the comparison with PayPal makes sense.
  - MertsA 9y ago
    >the man in the middle is blocking it. Slightly off topic but PayPal doesn't just block it, it seizes the funds entirely for a long period of time. In any case, you're right, YouTube not advertising on videos is not at all like PayPal stealing payments.
  - titzer 9y ago
    > You aren't entitled to that cash just because you uploaded a video and people saw it. I dunno, why should all the ad revenue go to YouTube for a user's content?
    - magicalist 9y ago
      > I dunno, why should all the ad revenue go to YouTube for a user's content? There are no ads on demonetized videos. That's the point of it.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

orf 9y ago

Isn't it possible that her content just wasn't that good? I mean her website is a pretty typical looking 'illuminati controls everything' crazy conspiracy site, if her content is similarly poorly produced getting down ranked seems natural.

coldtea 9y ago
>Isn't it possible that her content just wasn't that good? Even so, she still had 366,591 views, which should all that matters re revenue.
- CydeWeys 9y ago
  Are you sure? There are certain coveted demographics that advertisers are willing to pay a lot more money for than others. I don't think it's true that all views are counted the same for monetization purposes. And then there's views that are desired so little (e.g. those on whacko conspiracy theorist channels) that advertisers aren't willing to pay to put ads on them at all, and you end up with "demonetization".
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Are you sure? There are certain coveted demographics that advertisers are willing to pay a lot more money for than others. I don't think it's true that all views are counted the same for monetization purposes. I'm not saying any kind of 350,000 views will pay the same -- but unless there's something off (e.g. monetization off, copyright infringement, etc) 350,000 views pay substantially more than $0.1 whether the demographic.
    - CydeWeys 9y ago
      There's plenty of content that advertisers are not willing to spend any amount of money to be associated with. To use a trivial example, imagine if the KKK had a YouTube channel. And as a more nuanced example, this woman's channel. There is some minimum cost per view, and if the ads aren't even worth that much then there won't be any revenue, rather than a small amount. There's been a rash of negative blowback over the past couple years for being associated with certain types of content, to the point where being monetizable at all is increasingly not the default state. Advertisers would rather not risk it.

majani 9y ago

One of the reasonable conclusions to all this is that revenue sharing on user generated content is a live wire that platforms would rather not touch from now on, despite it being morally correct.

m_fayer 9y ago

Usually personal sites and social media accounts for such people are quickly taken offline, so reliably that I've wondered how it is that there's always someone with the authority and access around to quickly pull the plug. Not in this case, so strange to see this site still online and open to all.

MertsA 9y ago

There's some rather telling content on that site about her mental state. http://nasimabc.com/sitebuilder/images/car_attack_nasim2-426x296.jpg http://nasimabc.com/sitebuilder/images/car_attack_nasim2-426... She feels paranoid like everyone is out to get her and it probably didn't help that when YouTube "attacked" her online, it was direct, unambiguous, attributable to a distinct entity (to her at least), etc. When she ran over some debris in the road she came to the conclusion that anti-vegan (she identifies strongly as a vegan) businesses hired unspecified criminals to harm or kill her, and that they did it because of the stickers on her car. She might have honestly been deluded into thinking that YouTube wanted her dead.

AlexCoventry 9y ago
On the one hand it surprises me that a screw could accidentally get pushed into a wheel at that angle. On the other, it would be a really ineffective attack.
- arbitrage 9y ago
  At high velocities, road debris can do interesting things.
written 9y ago
I've seen first hand something similar with a person I have known. It was similar detail (in a sense that it would seem inconsequential to everyone else - bent pages in some work log on a day he made a mistake only he knew about) that mightily added to his sense that peope at the company he worked at were after him for some small oversight he made. He was not sleeping well or at all, ruminating, and well on the road to a major breakdown or suicide. We managed to save him, by taking him to a psychological crisis management center, where he stayed for a few weeks, got a big change in his daily routine, found some new friends and was able to recover. Might as well be that she simply was unlucky, that she stayed in contact with people who added into her fears/anger and paranoia, instead of pulling her out of her daily context and meaningfully opposing what seemed overblown and crazy about her thinking, helping her see alternative ways to achieve what she wanted, etc.