• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Vox reporter pushing for another Youtube Adpocolypse, over a channel that is already almost entirely demonetized.

monegames

Member
Sep 26, 2014
2,172
1,727
530
For those that don't know Carlos Maza initially went after Steven Crowder's channel for jokes mocking him. Crowder called him things such as "lispy queer", "anchor baby", and "mexican" in videos challenging Maza's videos. Maza has called himself an anchor baby in one of the videos Crowder challenged. Crowder also sells a shirt that says "Communism is for figs".

Maza and the company he worked for seem to initially go after Crowder through youtube support. After not getting what they wanted Maza took to twitter. Even calling on his followers to mass flag Crowder's channel.


Now he is going around doing interviews saying its about advertisers, even though Crowder's channel is almost entirely demonetized.


 

merlinevo

Member
Apr 28, 2019
238
440
255
Looks like youtube understands that the lgbt crowd, which is a vocal minority but ultimately insignificant in numbers or percentage population wise, do not make them money. They can safely ignore this insignificant number of lgbt individuals and still profit from the sheer size of their overall audience. The best part is the lgbt can go start their own video platform if they are so indignant about it.

Looks like big tech is beginning to realize appealing to the vocal minority is not the best business moves.
 

LegendOfKage

Gold Member
Mar 6, 2018
2,421
3,303
660
I don't enjoy watching Crowder outside of his Change My Mind segments because of how insulting he is. The guy's way more of an ass than he should be, but I wouldn't even begin to think that he should be removed for that. You Tube also went on record saying that that the videos reported do not break their TOS for hate speech. Having looked at their guidelines, I can see why:

If you're posting content
Don’t post content on YouTube if the purpose of that content is to do one or more of the following.

Encourage violence against individuals or groups based on the attributes noted above. We don’t allow threats on YouTube, and we treat implied calls for violence as real threats. You can learn more about our policies on threats and harassment.

Dehumanizing individuals or groups by calling them subhuman, comparing them to animals, insects, pests, disease, or any other non-human entity.

Other types of content that violates this policy
Praise or glorify violence against individuals or groups based on the attributes noted above.
Use racial, ethnic, religious, or other slurs where the primary purpose is to promote hatred.
Use stereotypes that incite or promote hatred based on any of the attributes noted above. This can take the form of speech, text, or imagery promoting these stereotypes or treating them as factual.
Statements that one group is less than another based on the attributes mentioned above. This includes calling them less intelligent, less capable, or damaged.


There you have it. Basically, Crowder isn't dehumanizing anyone, he's not suggesting or advocating violence, and the primary purpose of the terms he is using isn't to promote hatred. It's to sharply, and rudely, criticize an individual.

Philip DeFranco had a pretty good segment on this. Here's Crowder's defense, which I don't think is all that strong personally, but the TOS are on his side.



And here is the full segment, which includes a supercut of the insulting ways Crowder has been referring to the guy.
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2011
4,058
8,725
940
I don't agree with all of Crowder's politics, but I subscribed just because fuck this guy.

Also this video he posted in response is undeniably hilarious. regardless of your political persuasion:

I don't know how he kept a straight face through all of that.

And this is what virtue signallers and preachy reporters just don't get:

People are not receptive to being chastised and bullied. Used as scapegoats and generalised about. You will gain more opponents than allies through this measure. And allies are earned through intimidation and guilt. Not trust and loyalty.
By contrast, making people smile, entertaining them, using wit and self-deprecation allows people to warm to you. They do not feel like they are being attacked - even if that is what you're doing.
 
Dec 15, 2011
4,058
8,725
940
CRYBULLIES: ASSEMBLE!


Not a single mention of @gaywonk's incitement of harassment though. :unsure:
 
Last edited:

btgorman

Member
Jul 26, 2009
1,527
704
775
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat

juliotendo

Gold Member
Jan 5, 2019
949
1,705
525
Mexico
Hilarious.

Although I wouldn’t be surprised if YouTube reverses their decision —- these tech companies always go back on their words and cave to the outrage mob.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
4,681
5,604
570
heaven forbid someone have a fucking opinion

The irony of this jackass who gets paid to spread his opinion to the masses going after others and shutting them up. Just what a self obsessed loser.

Whatever happened to freedom of speech?
 
Dec 15, 2011
4,058
8,725
940
So, funny story.
I have a long commenting history on VG247, having been there since its inception.
As they've moved over to activism, I rarely post there.

But I thought, fuck it, let's say my piece. So I did. Not breaking any terms or policies:

(Yes "RhubarbForFingers" is me - don't ask):



I had the foresight to take a screenshot because I know how inconvenient facts can upset activist journalists, so imagine my shock when my comment had disappeared (note the final sentence of the comment above mine in both pics):



I thought I'd re-post but:


Oh, the yellow journalists banned the person with the offending facts.

And they're systematically removing all traces of my comments (often laden with inconvenient facts):


But some rando that wanted to put a bullet in my head the other day because of my outrageous remark? :



Yeah, they're fine with that. It's still there. Even after it was reported.



Hmmm.. who should I make a stink about this to.. ?
 

i_am_ben

running_here_and_there
Feb 5, 2008
8,540
372
1,085
Wouldn't his language violate the NeoGAF terms of reference? He was hurling homophobic insults at the Vox guy.

For example, referring to him as "that little queer" etc.
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
5,932
2,399
670
Canada
Wouldn't his language violate the NeoGAF terms of reference? He was hurling homophobic insults at the Vox guy.

For example, referring to him as "that little queer" etc.
What homophobic insults? This ex media matters idiot who has built his whole identity off of his sexuality is now going to cry when someone references his known sexuality? Referring to someone by the sexuality they put out into the world is not homophobic. Someone needs to take all the letters out of LGBTQ if referencing any of them is homophobic.

Don't fall for this weak victim play.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SpiceRacz

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
12,062
21,535
1,185
USA
dunpachi.com
So, funny story.
I have a long commenting history on VG247, having been there since its inception.
As they've moved over to activism, I rarely post there.

But I thought, fuck it, let's say my piece. So I did. Not breaking any terms or policies:

(Yes "RhubarbForFingers" is me - don't ask):



I had the foresight to take a screenshot because I know how inconvenient facts can upset activist journalists, so imagine my shock when my comment had disappeared (note the final sentence of the comment above mine in both pics):



I thought I'd re-post but:


Oh, the yellow journalists banned the person with the offending facts.

And they're systematically removing all traces of my comments (often laden with inconvenient facts):


But some rando that wanted to put a bullet in my head the other day because of my outrageous remark? :



Yeah, they're fine with that. It's still there. Even after it was reported.



Hmmm.. who should I make a stink about this to.. ?
You pissed off the bullies. Take it as a gift.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat

Musky_Cheese

Community Liaison
Oct 23, 2016
6,113
10,085
945
I don’t see much difference in the way the reporter has acted vs the YouTuber he’s trying to silence.
 

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
5,396
2,503
680
Watched this one fully;


Crowder cleary went after Vox and not after "latino gay".
Calling that harassment is a blatant attempt to silence someone who called out Vox's BS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilfait

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
5,932
2,399
670
Canada
I think somebody who attacks a person's sexuality is a coward. Crowder comes off as a complete jerk. Who wants to be that guy?
If people can't handle others referencing the thing that they based their entire identity on they need to get some thicker skin or fuck off with basing your entire identity on something that is seen as an attack if referenced. Quit falling for this victim bullshit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon Neu
Jun 26, 2018
1,797
1,176
380
42
Milwaukee, WI
If people can't handle others referencing the thing that they based their entire identity on they need to get some thicker skin or fuck off with basing your entire identity on something that is seen as an attack if referenced. Quit falling for this victim bullshit.
Do you not have any gay friends or acquaintances? If you do, is that the way you speak to them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urban Viking

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
4,681
5,604
570
its just too much to ask to simply not watch a video for some people. every single video on the planet must have the same values and must all be in agreement.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
12,062
21,535
1,185
USA
dunpachi.com
I don't know. People may take Crowder seriously if he didn't act like a douche.
The Phil Fish argument? C'mon, I'm not going to deny anyone their right to be insulted/offended by a comedian insulting/offending someone else (that's your choice), but Crowder is a tamer version of the same snarky assholes that've debated on the internet since... the internet. Either Crowder has a point hiding somewhere in his comedic vitriol, or he doesn't. I think he does. Tone-policing his form of comedy gets us lost in the weeds.
 

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
8,475
7,020
715
I don't know. People may take Crowder seriously if he didn't act like a douche.
Crowder wouldn't be internationally famous and his show ridiculously popular if he wasn't who he was.

You think he's a douche. Okay. Move on?
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
4,681
5,604
570
Ugh this lame argument. “Do you talk to your gay friends like this???”

No but I also don’t talk to my boss like Dunkey. I don’t talk to my mom like the RLM guys. Somehow I have prevented the all but certain brainwash that occurs when you watch a video.
 
Last edited: