SwiftDeath
Member
Stop ducking the question. Yes or no?
the question makes no sense. I can't guarantee that everyone in the US won't murder someone tomorrow hence murder is okay. Cool makes sense
Stop ducking the question. Yes or no?
Stop ducking the question. Yes or no?
Stop ducking the question. Yes or no?
Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
the question makes no sense. I can't guarantee that everyone in the US won't murder someone tomorrow hence murder is okay. Cool makes sense
"Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
"Can you assure me...": Are you certain you can tell me
"...with 100% certainty...": that you are 100% sure
"after this incident": in reference to the MS/EA incident,
"that every streamer on youtube": that every person that streams video game content on youtube
"is disclosing their endorsements?": is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Are you certain you can tell me that you are 100% sure in reference to the MS/EA incident, that every person that streams video game content on youtube is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Now that I've rephrased the question, can you finally answer yes or no?
Stop ducking the question. Yes or no?
"Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
"Can you assure me...": Are you certain you can tell me
"...with 100% certainty...": that you are 100% sure
"after this incident": in reference to the MS/EA incident,
"that every streamer on youtube": that every person that streams video game content on youtube
"is disclosing their endorsements?": is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Are you certain you can tell me that you are 100% sure in reference to the MS/EA incident, that every person that streams video game content on youtube is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Now that I've rephrased the question, can you finally answer yes or no?
You're the one ducking the question as you still haven't addressed the actual point of the outcry.
SHADDAP
I sense a chewbacca defense.
A lot of people are super pissed off at MS and Machinima for asking streamers to not to disclose the conditions to get paid, but what about the streamers who probably would not have disclosed these conditions anyway?
No one asked if I understood the actual point of the outcry. I feel if you boil down to it, when the content ID matter occured, there were many Gaffers so upset about how youtube was putting these poor streamers out of their livelihood, many who may have been already under these kinds of terms and conditions we are uncovering this week.
I see a lot of people going to xb1m13 tagged videos calling them sellouts and a lot of the authors of the videos responding "hey, I'm just trying to get paid".
A lot of people are super pissed off at MS and Machinima for asking streamers to not to disclose the conditions to get paid, but what about the streamers who probably would not have disclosed these conditions anyway?
"Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
"Can you assure me...": Are you certain you can tell me
"...with 100% certainty...": that you are 100% sure
"after this incident": in reference to the MS/EA incident,
"that every streamer on youtube": that every person that streams video game content on youtube
"is disclosing their endorsements?": is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Are you certain you can tell me that you are 100% sure in reference to the MS/EA incident, that every person that streams video game content on youtube is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Now that I've rephrased the question, can you finally answer yes or no?
WHADDA COMEBACK!
What do you suggest we do? Because it's impossible to ensure everyone does everything legally, but that doesn't mean that when companies like Microsoft/Machinima have been caught red-handed they get a free pass.
What do you suggest we do? Because it's impossible to ensure everyone does everything legally, but that doesn't mean that when companies like Microsoft/Machinima have been caught red-handed they get a free pass.
That defense totally works for me when I go to rob someone.
"Hey you can't prove to me that someone in the world would not have happily given me that money anyway! Therefore I am innocent!"
Three months ago: There is a segment of GAF that hated that streamers got stripped of monitization. Claims of "why is Nintendo mad? Its free advertising!"
Now: there is a segment of GAF that hates that streamers got monitization. Claims of "Can't trust youtube streamers now, they are sellouts to the highest bidder!!!"
The point of the outcry is it's shitty when you have what appear to be ordinary people getting paid to advertise to you, without you knowing they're getting paid to advertise to you.No one asked if I understood the actual point of the outcry. I feel if you boil down to it, when the content ID matter occured, there were many Gaffers so upset about how youtube was putting these poor streamers out of their livelihood, many who may have been already under these kinds of terms and conditions we are uncovering this week.
I see a lot of people going to xb1m13 tagged videos calling them sellouts and a lot of the authors of the videos responding "hey, I'm just trying to get paid".
A lot of people are super pissed off at MS and Machinima for asking streamers to not to disclose the conditions to get paid, but what about the streamers who probably would not have disclosed these conditions anyway?
"Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
"Can you assure me...": Are you certain you can tell me
"...with 100% certainty...": that you are 100% sure
"after this incident": in reference to the MS/EA incident,
"that every streamer on youtube": that every person that streams video game content on youtube
"is disclosing their endorsements?": is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Are you certain you can tell me that you are 100% sure in reference to the MS/EA incident, that every person that streams video game content on youtube is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Now that I've rephrased the question, can you finally answer yes or no?
The point of the outcry is it's shitty when you have what appear to be ordinary people getting paid to advertise to you, without you knowing they're getting paid to advertise to you.
derp
The problem wasn't monetization, it was the lack of the legally required disclosure,.
Maybe it sticks in gif-form
OMFG that fucking TAG! Phenomenal.Which is why I asked the question that everyone jumped down my throat about. Are you completely sure that streamer you think is playing a fun game of FIFA or Dead Rising 3 isn't doing it because they are getting paid $3 per view from the makers of the game/console? Seems that created a storm because everyone wants to think it's the sole responsibility of the corporation and not of the streamer as well. There were plenty of streamers that were happy to take the bait (and are being quite arrogant and proud of it) and should justly be included in the penalties as well, in my opinion.
Maybe it sticks in gif-form.
http://i.minus.com/iZZUBY2FpnfW2.gif[IMG][/QUOTE]
*bows*
brilliant insight, thank you so much
"Can you assure me with 100% certainty after this incident that every streamer on youtube is disclosing their endorsements?
"Can you assure me...": Are you certain you can tell me
"...with 100% certainty...": that you are 100% sure
"after this incident": in reference to the MS/EA incident,
"that every streamer on youtube": that every person that streams video game content on youtube
"is disclosing their endorsements?": is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Are you certain you can tell me that you are 100% sure in reference to the MS/EA incident, that every person that streams video game content on youtube is letting their viewers know of their endorsements that may cause a conflict of interest?
Now that I've rephrased the question, can you finally answer yes or no?
All the attacking of Sessler and the dude is doing a good job of both moderating and contributing IMO.
Maybe it sticks in gif-form.
Machinima Inside Gaming Daily video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ajHl1qzOII
their excuse "it's product placement guys"
Is there anymore to it then that? Do they discuss the nondisclosure part at all?
I really don't want to give Machinima ad money directly
Is there anymore to it then that? Do they discuss the nondisclosure part at all?
I really don't want to give Machinima ad money directly
Machinima said:Partners should have been told to make it clear but they're promoting the Xbox One videos while still keeping the details of the agreement confidential up. For some reason that part was left out the contract. Our team is looking into what happened with this particular contract
they skim it with the other rules and then quickly go to saying that everyone does this "look look GAF reported on EA too, also product placement in movies and stuff"
"Oh and please still watch our vids we are not biased even though our parent company might do this we have stated our sponsors every time"
No discussion on how it is different from the rest
"Left out" DrEvil.jpgThat's it.
they skim it with the other rules and then quickly go to saying that everyone does this "look look GAF reported on EA too, also product placement in movies and stuff"
"Oh and please still watch our vids we are not biased even though our parent company might do this we have stated our sponsors every time"
No discussion on how it is different from the rest
That's it.
Figures. What a joke.they skim it with the other rules and then quickly go to saying that everyone does this "look look GAF reported on EA too, also product placement in movies and stuff"
"Oh and please still watch our vids we are not biased even though our parent company might do this we have stated our sponsors every time"
No discussion on how it is different from the rest