> The created an environment where people could work hard to create their own destiny while giving themselves the ability to destroy those destinies without cau

> The created an environment where people could work hard to create their own destiny while giving themselves the ability to destroy those destinies without cause or recourse. > It was only a matter of time until one of those furious victims took up a gun to get revenge. I strongly disagree that given YouTube's arbitrary policies murderous retaliation was inevitable. However, your pointing to the economic context of Ms. Nasim's grievance with YouTube is very helpful. Before continuing, I want to clarify that whatever may have motivated Ms. Nasim to take the actions she took, I believe her actions are ultimately unjustified and unbearably tragic and that no one is responsible for what Ms. Nasim did except Ms. Nasim herself. Concerning the economic context, the arbitrary foreclosure of a career path where the contractor (YouTuber?) has little to no recourse over her livelihood highlights problems with the unequal power between platform and content generator. I believe platform owners (like YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, etc.) have the ability to make matters more equitable. Attempting to make platforms that rely on user-generated content more equitable undoubtedly will present new challenges, but such consideration for the people whose labor a platform depends for its existence is the moral and ethical thing to do. Giving content generators more power over the monetization of their content is the right thing to do. EDIT: add a "the"