WonderGamer.net

YouTube bans teabagging videos

Blacklists Boycotts Downloads Games Reviews

On April 7th, 2024, the continuing attacks from Steam (starting in October of 2023 & escalating to a group effort of internet stalking, doxing, false reporting & revictimization by the staff of the platforms these trolls were able to succeed in manipulating their staff with their actions) resulted in yet another notch on the belts of these aggressors when YouTube allowed a report against my YouTube channel to take effect:

Before I get into further details on this particular instance, I'm going to go back to a similar situation that happened on August 23rd, 2018.  Another Destiny video got flagged for a similar situation on the same type of content, calling out somebody for showing their immaturity in games by doing this same action because it makes them feel better about themselves (the purpose is to add insult to injury, but putting themselves at risk to being killed to throw salt in a wound in a game is about as immature & unsportsmanlike you can get.  The situation was successfully appealed in 2018, but wasn't in this case, so another article was warranted, this time with re-victimization by YouTube staff added to it.

I took screenshots as I went through the confirmation process of the violation so I would have details for another published article:

As for what was said in the appeal, I was only alloted 1000 characters, so I was limited in what information I could provide in the appeal:

This isn't the first time one of these videos have been hit with reports, the last one being with the title of "3 teabagging faggots" back on August 23rd, 2018 (I still have the original email & the decision of appeal when the removal got reversed 4 days later on the 27th).  I will reiterate the same reason I gave on the last video to get hit by this; the statement being made in the title of the video is not discrimination, but was an anger-driven insult on a disgusting gaming trend called "teabagging", which is nothing more than adding insult to injury.  I now what the term teabagging means because I looked it up mid-2010s & it literally makes me ill, that disgust for the actions being carried over to gaming.  Also note that the video WAS already age-restricted due to the title.

Of course this time around I didn't have the luck I had back in 2018:

Getting back to what causes this, there's a number of factors:

As follow-up measures, I had to take some extra steps to make sure this wouldn't happen again (of course I don't know if this would stop it one way or another if a mess of reports were already filed):

After the failure of the upload of the video, I new that this publication would be coming, but decided other immediate measures were necessary before I did:

At this point it was more about getting this publication published to get full details out on what had happened & why more restrictions were being put in place (as well as the fact that the attacks only reset the date I was expecting I could put this behind me in regards to the attacks coming from Steam; 2 years from the last attack, which has been ongoing for about 7 months now).  I don't expect I will be doing anything on/with YouTube at least until the 90 strike has fallen off of my account, but I hardly think this will be the last of it.  I know for a fact that the trolls from Steam & the followers of the CutCafe channel will be doing everything they can to get more results like what happened in this article & I wouldn't be surprised to see YouTube retaliation to the update I made to my channel description, the new blog post regarding the re-victimization or the new posts made in the Community tab on my channel, it's likely only going to get worse before it get better (IF it gets better).  Ultimately it will all be documented & published so the world can see it one way or another.

Before I started working on this publication of injustice, I started to just feel exhausted from the whole thing & started filing reports against other videos on YouTube showing in-game teabagging (based on the title).  Seems 1 out of 5 may have already gotten restricted shortly after the report was filed (unless it was already restricted, couldn't say for sure as my account is already allowed to watch age-restricted content, not that I'll be doing much of viewing anything on YouTube anymore).  If YouTube wants to claim the content of the actual video was in violation of of their ToS, then I will make it a point to report every video I run into that has somebody doing it in it (specifically giving the reason that I had a video blocked because of that same reason).  Of course I still believe the reason for the penalty was because of the title & description, even at the time stamp provided in the statement of removal doesn't even show anything I can see as being offensive (I had to go back through my local backup to confirm the time stamp wasn't accurate for any sort of violation, not even somebody teabagging), so I'll have to assume that teabagging is the reason for the video itself getting removed & therefore continue that trend in reporting other videos I run across doing the same thing. 

This entire situation ultimately was a win for internet criminals like those that came from Steam to see it through, but the real question is just how far is it going to go?  As I said to my doctor before (as well as the police officer when I was reporting I was getting close to following through with suicide), if these attacks result in a ban on the YouTube channel that affects my entire Google account (which is tied in with my phone), those trolls might actually get the ultimate success they are seeking, that being a suicide as a result of their never-ending targeted harassment & I intend on making it public when it happens (whether that be through an online publication, through a live stream or by relaying that information through a note when somebody comes to check on me after I've already gone through with it)...  Should it go down this route, it will not only be blood on the hands of the trolls that have followed me across the web from Steam, but also on YouTube staff for taking their side in their malicious actions, Steam for not protecting their users against these types of attacks (even going as far as to support it by penalizing victims of those attacks) & also on the police officer that wouldn't do anything when the report was filed against the ongoing harassment back on January 22nd...

4/18/2024 update
Completion of the Policy training
Step 2 of YouTube's 4/7/2024 revictimization

As I stated before in a update on the Community tab of my channel, if I did have to complete the "Policy Training" (revictimization) of their allowed troll attack on 4/7/2024, I would be making it a point to take screenshots of each step along with comments regarding how these steps may (or may not) apply in their being directed at me in response to their acceptance of the manipulation of their report function & easily abused policies to further revictimization of people already receiving mass attacks from online aggressors, so here it is.  Best I can tell from their "WARNING", the 90 day expiration of penalties against your account doesn't start until you complete the "training", so as suspected, it was going to have to be completed one way or another, regardless of whether it was actually necessary or not.  Regardless, the fact that there's an extension on the time it will take for the "warning" to expire, this leads to further time spent where there won't be any additional videos being added to the channel under my own decision in protest of their allowing the revictimization.

The statements of hate speech is in response to the title & description on the video, not the video itself, however because that information was applied to that video, the video itself also go blacklisted from republication (at least on YouTube itself, even with a different title & description, but I can still upload the backup of that video to another site).

When I originally started this process, I answered that conspiracy theories were a violation on YouTube, however I got this answer wrong on the first attempt (this was when I decided I wasn't going to complete it & was going to wait on the results of the appeal to see if this step was even necessary to complete to remove the strike on my account).  My original answer was based on expected general guidelines for all users, but it seems these questions are on the original claim of "Hate Speech" (which wasn't in the removed video itself, only in the description & title, even if it's intended use was an anger-driven insult at those that were doing this disgusting habit in the game, not specifically stated as discrimination which YouTube allowed the video to be flagged on).

On a further note, YouTube allows conspiracy theories, huh?  But why do they have a report option for "misinformation" then?
I would assume YouTube allowing conspiracy theories is why they are allowing the misinformation video on CutCafe's channel to stay in place (despite being reported multiple times).  The trolling, internet stalking & mass harassment from Steam trolls (starting in October of 2023) was reported to the police back in January of 2024, however the officer with the Unified Police of Utah stated that they couldn't do anything about it as it did not rise to the level of a criminal action, but I could take action on a civil level.  I also mentioned this misinformation on this channel & the officer said their actions weren't criminal, but I could take action on a civil issue (meaning a lawsuit, which I made it a point to ask him that directly & get an answer specifically in those words, so there wasn't any confusion on it), so a lawsuit against CutCafe's channel may be in order for defamation.  Of course if this route of action is taken, YouTube will be getting legal action against them for the personal information of that user so they can be served with documentation & a court date against the creator of that content.

This was a simple response that didn't really require any thought.  To say that somebody lives are "insignificant" is appalling, disgusting & outright sickening.

Of course this particular question didn't really have any relevance towards the video they insisted was a violation of their policies (only the description & title played a part in it being taken down, not the video itself; even the timestamp of said violation didn't have any relevant information for it's take down, only the additional information added after it was uploaded, none of which was embedded into the video itself).

This was another simple answer that didn't require a lot of additional thought, but I did have to re-read it a few times to make sure I understood what they were talking about before answering it.  The question is targeting the voiceover that is fact-checking the comments made by the individual claiming there were no actual victims.  This is a news broadcaster we're talking about, fact-checking comments after false statements are made is normal, so the statements are not a violation (I could say otherwise for the person that was in the review downplaying the seriousness of the situation however).

Once again, this particular questions was not relevant toward the takedown of the video; there was no voiceover's in the video, unless they were trying to indicate that the Crucible announcer in the game (in the game, this wasn't added afterwards; it's a direct unaltered recording from the game) was believed to be added after it was recorded.  There were enough of these videos on my channel, if not also from other users that it should have been clear this was audio track in the game itself & not an addition after recording.  This only gives additional indication why YouTube really is not a good platform for game streaming & users should stick to platforms designed for it like Twitch...

I originally got this one wrong, given my channel got taken down on an anger-driven insult (or at least it's original use, not it's perceived usage that resulted in the removed video), I expected the answer would be that yes it was.

The question does have some relevance on my video, but not in the way that YouTube perceived it based on the results of their actions.  The description & title of the video did have statements that (as stated before) were anger-driven insults (like referenced in the last question), but because the statements made are also used as a form of discrimination, the bases for the removal by YouTube was a result of incorrect perception on the statement.  I don't disagree I was in the wrong for making the statements, but the statements made were not used with the directive that YouTube decided to enshrine in stone through their actions.

This question didn't require a lot of thought, but I half-suspected YouTube would state my answer was incorrect based on incorrect answered from earlier in this review.

Of course this question wasn't relevant to the video that got taken down when YouTube revictimize by supporting the attack on my channel on 4/7/2024.  No where in the video was there any statement saying anybody "got what they deserved", so this was just an additional question that wasn't really necessary, just a part of the same policy questionnaire that everybody has to go through...

I will however admit that I do have this attitude towards certain people that have been giving me trouble for a very long time...  I do understand the animosity that can be directed at persistent individuals that make it their life's goal to go after somebody with ever negative fiber in their bones & never back off.  This is one case where I do have the mindset that if something to were to happen to them, I'd see it as karma catching up to them & ultimately them getting what they deserved (however in many cases this would just mean they finally got held accountable for their actions & likely got arrested over it).

I did have a roommate that a later roommate told me had committed suicide after he was evicted from the apartment complex when he refused to comply with the new policies of the new management (this was after his buddy landlord that was favoring him lost his position of management when I bought the situation to the attention of my doctors, who also happened to be in the same disability programs).  My response to the statement of him committing suicide when my newer roommate told me about the (supposed) letter he left behind was that "I had no sympathy for him", so this was one of those cases where my statements probably would have gotten me in trouble on YouTube if they were stated on YouTube.  Of course this is a situation where YouTube wouldn't have the full story behind those statements & they make a decision on details they don't fully understand, which just ends up being another situation of revictimization (only tome of what might have lead to the comments, similar to what happened with the removal of this video).

I got this one partially correct on my first attempt, but also partially incorrect.  Originally I had the 1st & 2nd boxes checked (the 1st only because I expected YouTube to make a claim that it was a correct answer based on previous incorrect answers), the 2nd one was pretty much a given.

Again, this question wasn't really relevant to the takedown of my video, just another question that people have to deal with when they get hit with a violation on their YouTube channels (outside of whether that violation was justified or just a result of somebody twisting your own statements into something much worth that the original intentions of those words).

Although when you get right down to it, if somebody was to twist the description & title on the video that got removed on 4/7/2024 far enough, I wouldn't be surprised if YouTube did find this question relevant to the decision they made.  The statements made clearly wasn't degrading a gender, but when taken out of context, it was degrading to a certain sexual preference usually used on men (even if that wasn't its intended use), whether this was actually an implied factor in YouTube's decision to issue a penalty would really be a question for them (not that I can really trust anything they say when my account still has a penalty on it; these strikes on YouTube is the main reason why I don't feel I can trust Google with my payment information & have refused to put it on any of their services)...

This question was a bit difficult to answer & i would expect it's probably because I didn't have a lot of knowledge about the situation that the example was making, so I didn't have any facts about how many people died in it, nor any coverage in particular given estimates or confirmed deaths on the matter.  My gut response was the 1st answer was correct & probably the 3rd as well (based on a previous question about minimization of casualties).  The first attempt I only had the 1st answer checked, which was incorrect, then I made a second attempt checking both 1 & 3, again incorrect, the 1st answer had to be unchecked.

From a personal perspective, I don't that doubting the amount of death in a natural disaster should be a applicable violation, provided they aren't outright stating that it's false.  Like I said, this was a situation I don't have a lot of knowledge on, so how well documented it was (as claimed in the comment) is not something I know & given this is the first time it's actually being brought up in a question to me, I'd probably answer to the best of my knowledge (which is near nothing on this particular situation) & get slammed by a violation over it.  Of course I don't make videos where this would become a factor, as well as I learned from my first attempt to stream a game on YouTube that YouTube is not a worthwhile platform to be streaming games on, so any possibility of this happening would be if a discussion while playing a game got ported over from Twitch (or uploaded afterwards for a higher quality version of what was previously streamed on Twitch).

Once again, this question wasn't relevant to the removal of the video in question that started this publication, however I wouldn't be surprised to see it play a factor in a discussion I made about Bandai/Namco while streaming a match of Evolve on Twitch (I already knew where this would go if Bandai/Namco saw it on YouTube, seeing as they've hit my channel before on a simple link in the description when streaming one of their games leading to a review of that game they wanted to cover up, so it was never published to YouTube expecting retaliation by Bandai/Namco even if it wasn't one of their games that was recorded; this particular video is still public on my Twitch channel, even linked over here on WonderGamer in the review regarding the anti-consumer hostility from their company).

You will notice it states that the "warning will expire on Jul 17, 2024", this means that unless I had completed this unnecessary "training", that warning would have never dropped off & new content on my channel would have been held off indefinitely on my own decision in protest of YouTube's actions.  Because I didn't feel that this steam was relevant, it resulted in a 10 day extension to the duration of the warning before it would drop off, so it's an additional 10 days the protest of their actions will remain in effect & additional videos being piled up for later publication (meaning longer time to find another site for a potential switch of sharing platform if I find one before the warning drops off).

This "training" really is a slap in the face to those that are getting attack by a large group of individuals where the police have already been contacted in regard to it, turned into internet stalking & resulting in what you've seen here on YouTube.

A final note might be that this could have actually be caused by an individual that followed my channel on Twitch.  I have an IRC client set up to monitor what is going on in chat in my Twitch channel even when I am not streaming & make it a point to check channels that join mine to see who they are.  I make it a habit to check on people who are joining the channel to see who they are by going to their own channel (a number of them since the attacks started from Steam in October of 2023 had already banned me from their channel in response to the thread on Steam, so I simply mirrored their bans on my own channel & blocked them on Twitch).  One person in particular I noticed a banner that appeared to have a photoshopped statement in a cartoon that was discriminatory against males with same-gender sexual preference.  That channel was reported over the banner & received a temporary ban literally in under a minute after being reported.  It's expected it may have been this same user using the same method I used to report their channel with homosexual discriminatory statements to report my own channel (despite the statement not being used in that way, they still found a loophole to manipulate YouTube management into following through on a report against my channel).  I decided on 4/18/2024 as I was updating this review with the detail of the revictimization "training" that YouTube was putting me through that it was time to put a ban on this user on my Twitch channel.

Home Up Next