• Jestzer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The program excludes creators terminated for copyright infringement

    Because that’s just unforgivable. /s

    • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Jfc. I thought this might be in response to the whole Gamers Nexus thing, and Google finally recognizing that it’s trivial to weaponize their copyright strike system against anyone’s channel.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      YouTube’s ‘second chance’ process fits with a broader trend at Google and other major platforms to ease strict content moderation rules imposed in the wake of the pandemic and the 2020 election.

      Oh goody, we’re going to get a whole new wave of far-right videos on YouTube.

      • noride@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        2 days ago

        If I had to guess, YouTube video uploads are down or at least stalling, and this is an easy way to juice the numbers before the next quarter. Content is content, after all, and line must go up.

  • OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Apparently ban has a different meaning than it used to. I keep seeing dramatic posts about Who-Gives-Shit influencer getting banned from somewhere. The next day or two I see another post about how they’re back.

    • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      People have been dropping the preceding adjective. It used to be that temp bans were handed out for first violations or accumulated minor violations, with the severity of the violation dictating whether it was a temporary ban of hours, days, weeks, or months.

      Really egregious violations, or a pattern of temp bans not changing the users behavior would trigger a permanent ban.

      I also hate the use of “ban” alone to mean temporary. The default use of “ban” should, does, mean permanent. If it’s temporary, it should be specifically conditionalized as such. I don’t really know when this started or how we got here, but it’s fucking annoying.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The temp adjective has been dropped for a decade or 2 which is why permabans have been called permabans not just bans.

  • Babalugats@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wonder what their motivation is. Just a good old change of heart, giving everyone a 2nd chance or possibly something else?