JFC almost every top comment is "giant corporations can do what they want with their stuff. Go start your own giant corporation if you don't like it!" Does Google have this many bots and shills doing image work even here?
this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2026
208 points (99.1% liked)
PC Gaming
15642 readers
709 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
That's mostly one guy posting over and over. I'm surprised at the upvotes but I assume it's because he adds a vague anti-corporate message to the end of most of them
Dang, 190k subscribers and his source of income? That's pretty awful.
Poor guy, fuck these people
J0nathan claimed that this is the scene that got his channel banned, despite the fact uncensored gameplay of the same scene remains live on other YouTube channels. While he did add the "Not Made for Kids" label to the video, he did not age gate it,** assuming that censoring the explicit scenes would be enough to satisfy YouTube.**
Guy made an assumption about the rules and lost his account, no different from posting on any other website. If you are going to base your career on an online account you had better be 100% fucking sure about the rules before you post anything publicly to that account.
you had better be 100% fucking sure about the rules
Generally true, but I have the impression YouTube has a history of being inconsistent with rules and punishing innocent creators, which would make it difficult to have any idea what the rules are.
Which is why a user who relies on YouTube so much should be taking the most conservative interpretation of the rules possible. There are several pages (reachable from the upload wizard) that talk about what may or may not constitute age-restricted content. Implied sexuality is on that list and if the video he uploaded contained even a censored version a sex scene in Hellraiser then that should have been a red flag for him.
I upload rarely enough that the upload wizard looks different pretty much every time I use it but the not-for-kids and age-restriction options are pretty prominent and both have links to gotcha pages that list how they should be used.
We all break tons of rules at work all the time. It would make sense to take down the one video he screwed up, not ruin him.
Agreed, and before terminating an account above some threshold size (say top 5%) there should be a human review or confirmation. But this is not surprising or even unexpected behaviour from YouTube. There are loads of horror stories from users who get their account shut down for 'minor' or accidental infractions. If a user is going to rely on a service with a history of unsympathetic and unpredictable enforcement then they should always take the most cautious approach when uploading.
Stop trusting corporations with the things you value.
and this is why I basically never login to any google account anymore, unless it's in a container.
It's not YOUR account, it's theirs.
That's why it fucking sucks that Youtube is a monopoly.
he did not age gate it, assuming that censoring the explicit scenes would be enough to satisfy YouTube
That's why you don't just assume and gamble.
Right wingers literally build entire platforms to lift each other up and report/bitch en masse when anyone does this to one of theirs up to and including making millionaires our of people meanwhile, the alternate side…
Lectures Bring each other down Endless “i told you so”s Offer alternatives they themselves do not back monetarily
Then you wonder why the fuck no one buys into this bullshit.
load more comments
(5 replies)
The game itself has an ESRB rating of Mature 17+ which should be enough of an indication that the video should have been age-restricted, the fact that he had to add his own censor bars means he was fully aware that the video was not appropriate for general consumption.
YouTube does not specifically state that censored nudity should immediately qualify a video for age-restriction but the several pages^[1][2]^ of guidelines heavily suggests that you should err on the side of caution.
Age-restricted videos are not shown in certain areas of YouTube. These videos may have limited or no ads monetization.
Guy was greedy, he didn't want to miss out on the ad revenue. When you have tied your livelihood to an account/service that uses automated checks and moderation, it is extremely irresponsible to push the boundaries, or even test them gently. YouTube is not YOUR job, you work for them, they own the platform, they set the rules.
I thought you had 3 strikes and your out? Also he could/should have been a lot more cautious:
Since the rest of the game was just a standard horror title like Resident Evil I figured it didn't really require an age restriction, and that if anything, YouTube would just apply one later on like they always do
I thought you had 3 strikes and your out?
I think that's for external claims like copyright takedowns, not violating YouTube rules.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I actually had mine unbanned after years. I now stiffle myself heavily.
Sounds like a brazen and cavalier flouting of the obvious rules, with the assumption that because other channels got away with it, he should too.
I am not callous, I can completely feel the pain of the loss, but at the same time it seems like a self-inflicted wound.
E flouting
Yeah, I get "there are lot of cheaters who got away with it, why am I then banned too?" energy.
view more: next ›