anyone else getting sick of YouTube's shit?

[Fife]

Muh network effect tho

[BjornP]

You spout so much crap I don't have the time to debunk all of it. So once again I'm going to limit my response to just one turd out of the pile of bullshit you just left.

That's one statement with an 'or', not two statements. What are the common avenues of communication? Over he air television, cable television, radio, print media, and the various internet avenues like YT, FB, Twitter, and individual websites. There are other smaller internet avenues, but remember, I said common avenues, not your right to stand in the street and talk.

The FCC does indeed watch over television and radio. To this point the government has not gone communist run with any of it. That's where the large corporations come in. Who gets a TV channel for politics and general news? You think I can simply start up a cable channel out of my basement? That is all controlled by large corporations with far left agendas. Print media is too, but that is almost dead anyways. Radio is just like television. Very little outlet for conservative views, even though the ones that are out there have huge followings.

So you are left with an internet that is controlled by far left corporations, just like television.

Your solution is to start shooting or STFU.

No one said anything about "everything should be free" just like no one said anything about wanting the government to control it. You are just spouting talking points you got from someplace other than here because no one is saying that here. Your posts come off as some kind of whiny tantrum more than anyone else in this thread.

Only start shooting if you run out of other ideas. Sometimes revolutions work like a charm, like Romania, sometimes they turn to shit like France or Syria. You could get lucky. But preferebly, of course, no guns should be involved, at all. That's why I posed the other options first. You could also start a new political party, for that matter.

"Large corporations with far left agendas"? Don't exist. You, personally, may not be able to start a cable channel. Didn't say that you, alone, had to be able to do this. Don't you have any political allies in your country? Are they all homeless or unemployed, poor and penniless? If you find that with all of your collective (right-wingers) imagination, all your collective personal initiative, ambition, drive and ability, you still can't be allowed to reach people online in numbers you'd like... then either start a political party, or do a revolution. Or simply accept that you're forever marginalized. I don't mind, I'm not American and I have no love for some of you guys' ideas and ideals. But.... I still wish for some of you, that you weren't so... defeatist, so fatalistic, so obssessed with "structural oppression". Even if it's real to the extent you describe, you can only change it, if you actually have a plan. Not neccesarily the personal you, Po5, just....someone, anyone, a person and persons you trust politically.

[Speaker to Animals]

Muh network effect tho

Oh, that is your attempt at refuting a well-understood market principle?

[Fife]

[Speaker to Animals]

Fife demonstrates shekel cuckery well. Ideology by itself is not terribly crippling. What truly is mentally crippling is going through life seeing only the ideology instead of reality. That is when humans run into trouble. To Fife, government is always bad and must never interfere with markets. He starts from that and then ignores all the evidence to the contrary.

[Fife]

[PartyOf5]

I'm taking it to mean he has no idea what we a talking about. He's the old person.

[PartyOf5]

You could also start a new political party, for that matter.

"Large corporations with far left agendas"? Don't exist.

One of your proposed solutions is to start a new political party. Large corporations with far left agendas don't exist. Thanks for confirming you don't understand what is happening here.

Best solution I see is a red US and blue US.

[BjornP]

i agree that youtube and the rest can ban wjomever they want, most of what people are complaining about is the unfair enforcement of their rules. carlos meza is only the most recent example of someone tweeting calls for violence against conservatives but having youtube bend over backwards to protect him from criticism

i agree that the youtube/twitter personalities whining about censorship while still actively posting on youtube/twitter come off as entitled brats, but they like the platform and want to see it successful, like how it was before the tech censorship began. youtube was the shit 5+ years ago, there should have been a viable alternative by now but any attempt is thwarted by some other corporation further up the food chain, as detailed by partyof5

Even if I was all that updated on famous youtubers and tweeters, I've most been focused on national elections here in Denmark. Mainstream media here haven't featured news of that guy, either in a negative, neutral or positive fashion. Only mention of a "Carlos Meza" in the newspaper I subscribe to, is a 2004 article about a Bolivian president named "Carlos Meza". Is that the same guy? If so, I think Twitter has some different rules for heads of state. If it's not the same guy, meh, it's likely preferential treatment, sure.

Maybe FB, twitter and YT should just charge, like 50 cents or so for a subscription. They can probably get away with unfair enforcement of their own rules because their users aren't really customers, who, I would presume, have special consumer rights in most US states.

[BjornP]

You could also start a new political party, for that matter.

"Large corporations with far left agendas"? Don't exist.

One of your proposed solutions is to start a new political party. Large corporations with far left agendas don't exist. Thanks for confirming you don't understand what is happening here.

Best solution I see is a red US and blue US.

When someone says "far left", I tend to think Socialist or Communist, so no, such large corporations obviously don't exist. Ah, so your "best" solution involves validating a "One State, One Mind" mindset. Hey, what happens to those who live in red states now, but who are Democrats, and don't want to leave? Ah, I guess it's not the State you want to use against them? And do the kids of blue staters who get "red" (that's gonna be confusing...) children just emigrate at age 18 to the blue US?

Thanks for sadly confirming you aren't intellectually equipped to come up with solutions.