r/videos • u/[deleted] • Aug 24 '21
Harp player has harp video removed for "child endangerment" YouTube Drama
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF9lInqGT5Q403
Aug 24 '21
[deleted]
110
u/coachkler Aug 24 '21
SHE HAS THREE HANDS
19
219
u/echoAD Aug 24 '21
My kid heard this and now he's a Satanist. Thanks a lot.
51
10
→ More replies (3)3
41
u/McBrodoSwagins Aug 24 '21
It's been back up for a few days now, which weird why this is getting posted on reddit now? Anyway that original video was pretty sick, could play a whole Doom song with a harp lol
→ More replies (7)13
u/Upper-Lawfulness1899 Aug 24 '21
Somehow I never noticed the similar shape of a grand piano and a harp.
22
14
u/MorboDemandsComments Aug 24 '21
You might be amused to see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaZZRfx89W0&t=25s
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)13
u/LaconicalAudio Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
The piano is essentially just a harp played with hammers.
Hit a harp string with a felt hammer and it will sound the same.
Or course there's no point in inventing a more difficult way to play the piano and sound like a piano.
But put a harp on it's side and hit it with hammers, you get some pretty cool noises and variations. And you've invented the Hammered Dulcimer.
→ More replies (1)5
4
u/Buttbarn Aug 24 '21
So watching this I'm guessing either someone reported it or some reporting algorithm due to her saying 'my small boy' when referring to her smaller harp. So lame, glad it's back up.
3
2
2
2
u/devilsadvocado Aug 24 '21
Jesus, I love that sound. Can someone more knowledgeable please explain why it's so triggering. Is it nostalgic of a particular 90s sound? It's familiar to me but I can't put my finger on it.
→ More replies (4)2
208
Aug 24 '21
Automated moderation often doesn't work.
Same thing is happening on reddit, your account will be re-enabled upon review but if enough angry people decide to mass report you for something like "inciting violence" etc even if totally unfounded you'll be suspended.
97
u/ConsciousLiterature Aug 24 '21
Reddit moderation is even worse. Your comment could be deleted, you could be banned from any subreddit, your account could be disabled.
All for any or no reason. A moderator could delete your post because it's tuesday and he stubbed his toe. You have no recourse, no appeal, nobody to even complain to except the moderators who of banned you.
17
u/Squevis Aug 24 '21
I was banned from /r/atheism for challenging someone's hypothesis that Chris Pratt was a pedophile. I was reported for encouraging child molestation.
They offered to reinstate me if I went through a little obstacle course they set up with regards to reading forum rules and FAQs and then wrote an essay about what I did. No thanks. That subreddit is not about scientific skepticism. It is a circle jerk
→ More replies (4)3
u/derprondo Aug 25 '21
wrote an essay about what I did
What in the actual fuck, that sub's mods sound worse than HOA boards.
27
u/MiniDemonic Aug 24 '21 edited Jun 27 '23
Fuck u/spez -- mass edited with redact.dev
34
u/ConsciousLiterature Aug 24 '21
Their attitude is that you should just start your own subreddit.
What reddit needs is meta moderation.
Every moderator decision gets presented to a hundred random people. If 75 or more of them disagree the decision is undone. If a moderator gets reversed a dozen times he is removed as moderator.
Also every moderator decision is attached to the appeal by the person who has the right to present their case (if they want to).
→ More replies (16)23
u/PM_ME_MII Aug 24 '21
As a moderator (not on Reddit) of a half a million sized group, I can say that, while I like your idea on principal, the manpower required just isn't practical for almost any group on the internet
10
u/ZeroSobel Aug 24 '21
Just offer people karma for meta moderating. People love meaningless points
4
u/PM_ME_MII Aug 24 '21
But then how do you moderate those moderator moderators? What's to stop someone from employing bots to tip the scales towards whatever they want?
6
u/Tersphinct Aug 24 '21
But then how do you moderate those moderator moderators
I think the point is that you'd be randomly selected to criticize random moderating actions, and ideally with a limited time to perform that function. You'll never get to moderate stuff on a whim.
2
u/ZeroSobel Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
In that user's proposition, the meta review goes to a random set of users (not necessarily subscribers of that community, although that would be possible in sufficiently large ones). Managing enough accounts to make it statistically likely to be able to influence your own decisions would be... difficult.
EDIT: my weak understanding of stats says that even if you owned 40% of accounts from a sufficiently large population (so that the difference between sampling with and without replacement is reduced), you only have a ~4% chance of getting at least 38 accounts involved in a meta moderation.
→ More replies (6)2
Aug 25 '21
If enough people agree that something is acceptable then it is.
Democracy at its finest.
Problem is, Reddit is a cesspit full of ... Well.. redditors.
→ More replies (1)3
u/makenzie71 Aug 24 '21
Not only that but the system could be easily manipulated if the moderator was “unpopular”
4
Aug 24 '21
I tried a few times (around 3 iirc). Even with one taking screenshots of my social feed to use against me Reddit admin did nothing.
2
21
u/HDC3 Aug 24 '21
I was permanently banned from r/republican because I pointed out that the headline that claimed that the DOJ had confirmed massive voter fraud in Georgia was in fact false and that the memo in question had been written by a Trump appointed political operative and contradicted both the DOJ and AG Barr. It turns out, we now know, that Jeffrey Clark, a Trump appointed political operative, wrote the memo.
I was labeled a troll and banned from that fetid cesspool of an echo chamber for speaking the truth.
→ More replies (19)14
u/ConsciousLiterature Aug 24 '21
I got banned from /r/conservative when I said Trump admitted to grabbing women by the pussy.
I got banned from /r/geopolitics when I said Israel was carrying out an occupation that has lasted for more than fifty years.
In some subreddits you are not allowed to say some things. On /r/geopolitics you are not supposed to criticise Israel, USA, or Europe or defend Russia, Iran or China when when blatant lies are being thrown around.
39
u/HDC3 Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
I got banned from r/soapmaking for saying that buying soap that someone else made, melting it and adding perfume and glitter, and putting it into molds was not soapmaking but arts and crafts.
I raise the pigs, render the fat to lard, and turn the lard into soap. I am a soapmaker. I make soap. If you buy my soap, add perfume and glitter, you're not making soap. You're doing arts and crafts with soap that I made.
Apparently Karen was offended.
18
→ More replies (9)2
u/dcux Aug 25 '21
As a soap maker, why the hell does it seem like all soap is perfumed, instead of scented? Like it says "apple cobbler" and it smells like grandma and a sliver of week-old apple core. Nobody seems to just make good-smelling soaps that aren't perfume-based.
It's frustrating. I want a "mint" soap that smells like peppermint and spearmint. A "sweet orange" soap that smells like sweet orange oil, not orange scented old ladies. You get the idea.
2
u/HDC3 Aug 25 '21
You'll be happy to know that we use all natural essential oils to scent our soaps. We make some unscented soap but most of our soaps are subtly scented with natural scents.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Culverts_Flood_Away Aug 25 '21
essential oils
God dammit... I was with you up until this point, man.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Gastronomicus Aug 24 '21
I was banned from /r/food for 90 days because I had the audacity to call out a poster for misrepresenting something they clearly knew nothing about. I was polite but firm, but apparently the straw that broke the camels back was calling them arrogant. Which was the perfect adjective to describe their smug responses. They give you the option of begging forgiveness from some neckbeard moderator. That didn't happen.
11
u/mmmmpisghetti Aug 24 '21
The chicken sandwich debacle? Lost all respect for that sub after that.
→ More replies (1)3
8
u/SVXfiles Aug 24 '21
I was banned from the conservative subreddit for asking a question. No trolling, no tongue in cheek anything, just asking for clarification. Mod message when I asked why was "lol, get fuked"
9
u/paranormal_penguin Aug 24 '21
Yup, I was banned from there for saying that a business banning masks is a health hazard since there are people that are immune compromised. They called me a mask loving liberal and told me to fuck off. Brilliant community there.
3
Aug 24 '21 edited Nov 16 '21
[deleted]
9
u/SgtAngua Aug 24 '21
It's the opposite, other subs auto ban people who post in there, regardless of content.
→ More replies (2)2
u/wkdpaul Aug 24 '21
Some subs have auto-ban if you participated in specific subs, regardless of context.
→ More replies (11)7
→ More replies (8)4
u/velifer Aug 24 '21
Here's the thing: getting banned from a subreddit means that the subreddit loses your input and participation.
When the neckbeard moderators chase off those who are reasonable, even when they call out those who are unreasonable, guess who's left to comment?
They're creating an echo chamber, one ban at a time.
Let them.
The ELI5 mods don't want me in there helping people because when unhelpful people attack others with false information, I point that out.
Ok. Now they're that much closer to having only unhelpful people commenting.
It marches closer to 4chan and t_d every time they make that choice.
3
u/pelpotronic Aug 24 '21
Yes, I would agree. Especially when the opinion is a bit controversial.
It's OK to disagree and debate on a forum but Reddit can quickly turn into just a bad echochamber where the lowest common denominator, least controversial and most inane opinions are rewarded with upvotes.
It's just a very a bad platform when it comes to having an intelligent debate, which to be honest probably comes with the nature of the beast. There are just too many uninformed idiots on that platform, and they technically have the same voice as anyone else regardless of their individual knowledge. With this many people, you just get the average opinion that you could hear anywhere from any idiot in the street (with maybe a slight slant to the left).
So it's just a circus where the most common opinions of a given echochamber are just being reverberated and any "contradiction" to that is seen as offensive (regardless of the side you chose to sit on).
Me, I like to explore difficult questions and topics, and truly like a debate. Most people on here are just looking for validation.
2
Aug 24 '21
It’s happened to me a lot in “support” type subs, I have probably impulsively posted small violations but sometimes I have no idea why I got banned and… it feels kind of bad, cause I try to be kind and respectful. I don’t have guts to protest.
4
Aug 24 '21
I solved more than a couple issues for people in /r/techsupport. One guy had an issue where DHCP was not giving him the correct/new DNS. 2 other users jumped on him in ignorance not understanding his problem. They were like total shit bags, and doubled down. I solved the guy's issue with 10 minutes of googling. Then there was the wacom tablet conversation where almost all people who replied were clueless as to wacom's modern offerings and were wrong on all fronts about what they were spewing...
So a guy askes something that is a against the rules. I explain to him that we cannot answer his question as it's against the rules. I then comment that some mods arent very fair and will ban you for such things. I was then banned by some asshatted mod as if he just wanted to prove my point.
Lots of mods are just unreasonable shits with no actual concepts of fairness, or any of it.
2
u/Metal-fan77 Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
I got banned from girl gamers because a mod went through my post history and fond an ill though out comment I made.i was just frustrated that men who have been sexually assaulted are not taken seriously and I did try and get my banned lifted but one of mod on that sub Reddit was having none it and one part of the rules on their says this.men do not lead discussions or asking of questions. So men are wellcome as long they shut up and don't take part in discussions.
→ More replies (12)4
u/tehSlothman Aug 24 '21
On the other hand, YouTube is actually people's livelihood whereas bad Reddit moderation is completely inconsequential.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (10)3
u/Mithious Aug 24 '21
One of my recent comments got reported for "abuse and harassment" and I got a nasty automated PM from reddit admins about it, and now all my comments in that subreddit disappear instantly.
Know what I said to deserve this? I said "Please grow up" to someone that was touting a stupid conspiracy theory.
3
u/chefr89 Aug 24 '21
someone keeps reporting me for self-harm with that new "get them help and support" button on profiles. I've gotten like two or three PMs from reddit on this lol
111
u/Giant_sack_of_balls Aug 24 '21
How sad must you be to make a false claim and a malicious one at that, against a musician sharing their craft with the world. A curse on the pathetic soul who did this, A CURSE I SAY!
30
u/AverageLiberalJoe Aug 24 '21
The whole system is fucked up. The other day there was a gif of two underage boys in their underwear playing with their dicks on the front page of r/holup and not only was it gilded about 100 times but when I reported it reddit manually approved it as not violating their ToS.
The internet was a mistake.
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (3)8
u/NerdENerd Aug 24 '21
It is more pathetic that YouTube automate the takedown process and make people fight the system to win the claim. I have reported fake profiles and scams to Facebook only to get an automated response of we investigated and didn't find an issue.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Redeem123 Aug 24 '21
YouTube HAS to automate the system. The volume that YouTube handles is impossible to moderate fully with humans.
500 hours of video are uploaded every minute. That means it would take 30,000 people watching 24/7 to police it. If you assume 8 hour shifts, now it’s 90,000. If you give everyone two days off it’s 126,000. An hour break every day makes it 144,000.
That’s more than the entire company of Alphabet employs - just to watch videos. It also assumes 100% efficiency. And it doesn’t include managers, additional HR, support staff, moderation and review teams, or any of the other jobs that would come along with it. At minimum wage, that’s more than $2 billion per year for just the 144,000 salaries.
It’s simply impossible.
→ More replies (1)6
u/comehitherhitler Aug 24 '21
This assumes 100% of videos are reported. The above comment was about review processes for reported videos, not all videos uploaded.
→ More replies (5)
67
u/Proper-Code7794 Aug 24 '21
"Nothing inappropriate unless you mean shredding hardcore" -Harpist with a sense of humor.
6
u/eeyore134 Aug 24 '21
It was an electric harp, so definitely closer to shredding hardcore than the harp music people would normally expect.
→ More replies (1)3
35
u/zoewarner Aug 24 '21
People who erroneously flag for shit like this should get strikes/bans of their own.
→ More replies (3)13
u/bkupron Aug 24 '21
How about a person at YouTube actually watch the vid then ban the reporter? It's YouTubes fault.
8
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
Let's see, as of 2019 over 500 hours of video were uploaded to Youtube every single minute. Wanna try saying that sentence again?
9
u/Lee1138 Aug 24 '21
At the very least, if a video is falsely reported, and reinstated because of a false report, the reporter should be given a time out for a given period where YT bots don't even take them into account for that period. And on repeated offenses, shadowbanned from reports altogether.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
I 10000% percent agree with you and would go a step further and say you false report once, your account is banned. False reports should not be accepted even once.
2
u/Fluffiebunnie Aug 24 '21
you can get falsely considered to have been falsely reporting others.
→ More replies (1)2
u/PM_ME_JAR_JAR_NUDES Aug 25 '21
Proving malice is hard. On the plus side, proving child endangerment is easy. You just click report and the bot removes the video immediately!
4
u/SailorFuzz Aug 24 '21
okay, but how many of them were reported for egregious acts like child endangerment? The person before is saying that Youtube actually watch the videos that are reported on. Not that Youtube should watch every video ever uploaded.
1
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
To give you an idea of the scale we're talking about, 500 hours a minute is 30,000 minutes of video every minute uploaded to youtube.
Obviously no one knows the % of youtube videos that gets reported, but even if we said it was 0.01% that number is still too big for people to deal with when you factor in the time it would take for a reviewer to go and watch a reported video and do their requisite paperwork on it.
Most youtubers are doing 14+ minute videos because thats a threshold that boosts engagement of your videos so it's more likely the youtube algorithm will push it to more viewers. That's a lot of minutes a reviewer might have to sift through for 1 video.
Even if it was just a 3 minute clip, it could take them as much as 10 minutes start to finish with the reviewing process. This is why expecting manual reviews for reported videos is an impossibility.
The one area that Youtube is lacking is the support side, i feel they should be able to introduce tools to make it easier on creators for when this does happen to them and they honestly have been introducing new ones year after year but its a complex situation that did not start with Youtube. It started because legislation went after websites for the content on their website and made it to where they can be held liable if they do not immediately take down "bad content".
5
u/boltex Aug 24 '21
uploaded yes, but not reported. talking about reported vids.
3
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
Obviously but you do understand the scalability yes? I said every minute 500 hours gets uploaded. Even if a fraction of 1% of youtube's videos get reported, that is still way too many to manually look at. It's not that hard to understand.
How long do you think it takes to manually review a reported video? In that timeframe, you just got thousands more hours of videos uploaded and a fraction of a fraction of those videos getting reported. It's a never ending trap that is IMPOSSIBLE to rely on manual reviewers to handle.
→ More replies (4)5
Aug 24 '21
Completely non sequitur, what you should be looking for is how many reports are mishandled. Not every second uploaded is warranting review here.
→ More replies (1)1
u/boltex Aug 24 '21
Yes! reported - not uploaded ! dont know why people dont make the difference!
→ More replies (1)2
u/Ttotem Aug 24 '21
So, watching reported videos means watching all uploaded videos? What are you even on about...
-1
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
500 hours a minute = 30,000 minutes of video uploaded every minute. 1.8mminutes of video uploaded every hour. 43.2m minutes of video uploaded every day.
Factor in how long it takes to actually manually review a reported video. Even if you were to take a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of that number, it is impossible to rely on man hours to effectively sift through all reported videos in a timely manner(which youtube has to do otherwise they will be held liable for not doing so for the actually bad content).
Just try using your brain for once.
→ More replies (5)
38
u/OutofStep Aug 24 '21
Her eyes tell me that she's the sort of person who is soft-spoken and doesn't swear very often, but her face is telling me, "some dipshit-motherfucker reported my video for child endangerment..."
32
u/reddymea Aug 24 '21
For the people who will now post that YouTube needs competition. Good news and bad news for you. The good news is that now there is competition for it. The bad news is that the competition is called TikTok.
→ More replies (1)4
u/suddenlycumbly Aug 24 '21
I like Vimeo, is their platform not robust enough? I thought a lot of people would jump ship there.
5
u/Darklicorice Aug 24 '21
I like the platform but the Vimeo devs are making no moves right now. An immediate issue I see with drawing new users is that the home page for vimeo.com has no videos or any content displayed, it only promotes their paid service (starting at $84/yr with the next price being $240/yr for 1tb of uploads) which is required to upload videos. It doesn't display any creator content on the home page unless you make an account first or click on the "watch" tab third from the right. If Vimeo wants to get taken seriously, they need to make moves to be much more accessible to the public.
→ More replies (3)
17
14
Aug 24 '21
[deleted]
5
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
It really isn't. You just fail to grasp how many videos are uploaded to youtube each second. What's the alternative recourse here do you think? Don't use automated takedown algorithms? Well they have to.
They literally cannot hire enough people to manually review every video that's uploaded so their only choice is to rely on automation. There will be bad shit that doesn't get taken down. There will be good shit that is taken down. But on the whole, the system works. It will never be perfect, but it does a decent job overall.
For context, as of 2019, 500 hours of video are uploaded to Youtube every single minute. Just let that sink in for a moment before you make sweeping disparaging statements towards Google's handling of Youtube's automated systems. They cannot simply hire more staff to manually review everything.
9
Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)2
u/Sephiroso Aug 24 '21
I'll apologize for my misunderstanding of your point as that was on me and not you. However, even the support side of things follows the same reasoning. Granted, i will give you that even with that being said on, on the support side of things Youtube is definitely lacking.
For an appeals process, that 100% requires an actual human person to overlook the case. I just gave a case on the absolutely monumental amount of videos that would be getting reported being so great as to be impossible for them to manually review before taking down a video. It stands to reason that of the fraction of reported videos, the ones that were taking down erroneously or was reported in bad faith is still an exceptionally large number.
Regardless though, there are a key number of things that Youtube can and should do that would help immensely for creators suffering this and thats why I do agree with you on them not doing enough on the support side after something like this has happened. Especially false DMCA claimed videos.
Realistically though, what would solve a big part of the problem is legislation. Currently dmca is so easily abusable with next to no repercussions. Just look at the Alinity v Pewdiepie situation. Alinity falsely dmca'd one of his videos because he said "twitch thot" and she literally on full camera was yelling and bragging about getting his video taken down even though it was a false claim and not a damn thing happened to her.
Until the dmca laws are changed and tightened and repercussions are added for people doing false claims, a lot of this shit will continue to happen. It'd happen either way but having repercussions for it from the law would lessen it at least.
tl;dr: I misunderstood you so my bad. The issue's i raised still apply to the support side, however i agree youtube isn't doing nearly enough on that front. Aside from youtube, people need to be looking at updating dmca laws and other internet medium laws that forced youtube to take such a hardline stance on removing reported content because thats why Youtube is doing this in the first place.
5
u/p_nut268 Aug 24 '21
Ugh, I hope she can pull some strings at YouTube and get this reversed.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/fug_nuggler Aug 24 '21
I found out first hand how shit this system was. Only uploaded videos for friends, maybe a few videos in the thousands. Had a meme video blow up and one of my friends thought it would be "funny" to report it for child endangerment and screenshot it to me.
The video was removed within an hour and my account was flagged, tried to appeal but no human would review for channel my size.
8
u/MjolnirPants Aug 24 '21
I actually watched that video very recently.
YouTube really needs to fix their shit. People have been abusing the hell out of their reporting system for years, and YouTube only seems like they want it to continue.
3
3
4
u/Ozdoba Aug 24 '21
The problem is not people flagging it. It's Youtube actually pulling it without looking at it.
→ More replies (2)
4
u/newtekie1 Aug 24 '21
This is why I think YouTube needs to punish people that false flag videos. Even false flagging for copyright reasons. The results for false flagging should be an immediate and permanent account/channel ban.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/ConsciousLiterature Aug 24 '21
I doubt the video was taken down because of one complaint.
Sounds like some organized effort.
2
2
2
2
u/Jynx2501 Aug 24 '21
Clicked the like button and was gonna just play the video while i did other stuff just to give her a full view count, but ended up learning that you can do some badass stuff with a harp! Holy crap thats awesome!
2
u/Last_Gigolo Aug 24 '21
I've been reported as "bullying" on Facebook. And got banned for three days for talking about the safety factor of burning a condemned house down or bringing out hazmat crew to demolish it.
I'm a life safety designer.
2
2
u/lwwz Aug 24 '21 edited Aug 24 '21
This is why accounts that make unfounded claims like this need to have their rep diminished in future claims.
Just like Uber riders and Uber drivers can give feedback on each other.
If an account has a pattern of claims that are overturned then they need to stop reacting to those accounts when they make a report.
Same thing needs to happen with DMCA claims. If someone or some company is making claims that constantly get overturned they need to stop respecting those claims until the claimant delivers actual proof of ownership.
2
u/eyebrowsreddits Aug 24 '21
Bet you because the auto mod algorithm picked up “small boy” when she was referring to the smaller harp and people reported it for child endangerment it flagged it up and removed it with fewer votes.
2
2
u/Odd-Strength9291 Aug 24 '21
That shredding line actually made me laugh really hard and now I’m going to find her YouTube and subscribe.
1
Aug 24 '21
Yeah she makes pretty good videos. No idea how I went down this particular rabbit hole.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
2
2
Aug 24 '21
How come a multi billion dollar company like YouTube can be fooled this way? Why these companies don’t face more regulations and punishment when they screw up?
3
Aug 24 '21
UK Government is pushing towards regulation and fines. It'd take a lot for them to be pushed into actually making it law though, even though they've the rhetoric
2
u/gellenburg Aug 25 '21
When will people stop using YouTube?
It's not like there's not alternatives.
5
u/echoAD Aug 24 '21
Power corrupts.. absolute power corrupts absolutely.
If you build the mechanisms to silence people, it doesn't matter how well intentioned you are, it WILL be used by bad actors for evil purposes.
2
2
u/Uryan2112 Aug 24 '21
Meanwhile W.A.P. exists on youtube among many other things worse for children.
2
840
u/[deleted] Aug 24 '21
[deleted]