duelist1954
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2011
- Messages
- 430
- Reaction score
- 72
As many of you know, YouTube de-monetized over 100 of my videos last week.
Naturally, I requested a manual review of each one. So far, they have reviewed 63 of the videos in question.
For 21 videos, the manual reviewers reversed the original decision, so those videos are now deemed suitable for advertisers.
But for 42 videos, the reviewers upheld the original decision to de-monetize them because they violate YouTube’s weapons related content policy.
I guess I could swallow that if there was any consistency in how YouTube applies its policy. For instance, YouTube prohibits:
“Pages that provide instructions about the assembly, enhancement or acquisition of any firearms including parts or components thereof. This includes, but is not limited to firearm-making instructions, guides, software or equipment for 3D printing of guns or gun parts”
OK…I guess that is their rationale for de-monetizing my flintlock rifle build videos. But there is no consistency in their decisions.
For example, on my Swivel Breech rifle build series, the reviewers decided update 19 was fine, but updates 2, 3, 17, 18, 20, 22 and the series introduction violate their guidelines.
On my current York County rifle build, updates 2 and 7 are just fine, but updates 9,12 and 23 violate their standards…how? If building guns is bad, why aren’t all the videos in the series bad?
YouTube doesn’t allow you to contact them to question decisions, which is a shame, because most of the decisions don’t seem to follow any actual standard. It seems like a whim on the part of each individual reviewer.
Naturally, I requested a manual review of each one. So far, they have reviewed 63 of the videos in question.
For 21 videos, the manual reviewers reversed the original decision, so those videos are now deemed suitable for advertisers.
But for 42 videos, the reviewers upheld the original decision to de-monetize them because they violate YouTube’s weapons related content policy.
I guess I could swallow that if there was any consistency in how YouTube applies its policy. For instance, YouTube prohibits:
“Pages that provide instructions about the assembly, enhancement or acquisition of any firearms including parts or components thereof. This includes, but is not limited to firearm-making instructions, guides, software or equipment for 3D printing of guns or gun parts”
OK…I guess that is their rationale for de-monetizing my flintlock rifle build videos. But there is no consistency in their decisions.
For example, on my Swivel Breech rifle build series, the reviewers decided update 19 was fine, but updates 2, 3, 17, 18, 20, 22 and the series introduction violate their guidelines.
On my current York County rifle build, updates 2 and 7 are just fine, but updates 9,12 and 23 violate their standards…how? If building guns is bad, why aren’t all the videos in the series bad?
YouTube doesn’t allow you to contact them to question decisions, which is a shame, because most of the decisions don’t seem to follow any actual standard. It seems like a whim on the part of each individual reviewer.
