Shirrako got banned on YouTube for a RDR2 gameplay video

[G.T.Ace]

I believe you can do better than that...

I believe you ran out of arguments. The context is exactly the point.
Showing videogame violence and showing videogame violence, while making a theme of targeting a certain demographic are two different things.
Targeting a character, who is actually portraying an important part of women's rights history just makes it extra worse.

 

[Lord Protector]

It's not promoting this same degree of violence as Shirrako's videos. No one is saying they want to do this too. Unlike Shirrako's videos where many of the comments demonstrated people wanted to harm others.

So now Shirrako is responsible for others ideas too? Hilarious and even then, harm others??? IN THE GAME

 

[samurai8juice]

Actually the point of freedom of speech is that you can't be imprisoned for saying them. It doesn't guarantee you the use of a private company's platform to say them, and Youtube closing someone's account because they don't like the content they posted is not a free speech issue.

And thus:

​

Agreed, but it's a very slippery slope when said company bans one video, but doesn't ban another that features more violence but is less politically charged.

 

[ImaRobot]

So now Shirrako is responsible for others ideas too? Hilarious and even then, harm others??? IN THE GAME

I do believe he is at least responsible for the things he himself uploaded, don't you think? He obviously did it for a reaction, so can we really say he's not to blame? I can understand if the instance was just a random happening through the game and got the reaction we're seeing, but that's not exactly what's happening, politics aside.

Agreed, but it's a very slippery slope when said company bans one video, but doesn't ban another that features more violence but is less politically charged.

While just like the Police, they can't catch every single person at once I would imagine - The "But he was speeding too!" reasoning isn't really a good one, in my opinion. With such a popular/sensitive subject this is, it just happened to get rushed to the frontlines it seems.

 

[samurai8juice]

While just like the Police, they can't catch every single person at once I would imagine. With such a popular subject this is, it just happened to get rushed to the frontlines it seems.

Replace the feminist with any other NPC and it's just another RDR 2 video that won't get taken down.

 

[ImaRobot]

Replace the feminist with any other NPC and it's just another RDR 2 video that won't get taken down.

Exactly, He made it very specific. That's the problem I think. If I made a video titled "I love to kill black people!" and all it is is me killing black people endlessly throughout the video, do you think I wouldn't be hit with some repercussions?

My skin isn't as thin, so I'm not too bothered by the instance, but we can't really pretend that he's not at least partially at fault for what happened to him, can we?

 

[Lord Protector]

Exactly, He made it very specific. That's the problem I think. If I made a video titled "I love to kill black people!" and all it is is me killing black people endlessly throughout the video, do you think I wouldn't be hit with some repercussions?

My skin isn't as thin, so I'm not to bothered by the instance, but we can't really pretend that he's not at least partially at fault for what happened to him.

Are you serious? You’re saying it’s okay to kill people in general but it’s too much to kill a black man? Look at the video I linked. On the thumbnail he did, he shows his character executioning a bunch of WHITE officers. Why is that okay with you? You’re such a pharisee...

 

[ImaRobot]

Are you serious? You’re saying it’s okay to kill people in general but it’s too much to kill a black man? Look at the video I linked. On the thumbnail he did, he shows his character executioning a bunch of WHITE officers. Why is that okay with you? You’re such a pharisee...

No I didn't say that at all.

 

[baldgye]

In the current political climate, I definitely believe some of them are very serious in their comments.



Sure, you can be weird and do awful things. But spreading it online and promoting the same violence is definitely isn't the right thing to do.

He's definitely promoting violence. Especially with the very negative titles that he gave the videos.

Glad YouTube did something good for once and removed his channel. Fair play

 

[Lord Protector]

No I didn't say that at all.

React like a man.

 

[ImaRobot]

React like a man.

No idea what that means in response to the post. You said I'm saying something, and I said no I didn't say that at all.

React like an adult.

It's funny though, and I bit ironic of a statement given the context of this thread

 

[Lord Protector]

No idea what that means in response to the post. You said I'm saying something, and I said no I didn't say that at all.

React like an adult.

It's funny though, and I bit ironic of a statement given the context of this thread

If you “didn’t say that” then you must have the same attitude to the video I linked.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The game is not designed to do this. It actually even encourages feminism, anti-racism and anti-white-supremacy.
You really don't see how especially picking out a feminist character is problematic?

If it can be done in the game without a hack, then the game is designed to do this. I don't see how it's problematic that's why I asked you to explain it.

 

[ImaRobot]

If you “didn’t say that” then you must have the same attitude to the video I linked.

Really don't have an idea what you're meaning with these posts to be honest. The more you respond the more off base they're getting.

If you're having trouble understanding what I meant, it's all about repercussions. I'll say again - If I made a 5-10 minute titled "I love killing black people!" and went through many instances of me doing just that, in an attempt to be edgy and over the top, do you think I'm free from the repercussions of my actions? Now again I'll mention that I don't particularly care about this issue, it doesn't bother me, I'm just pointing out that regardless of the situation, people are responsible for what they say - especially if it's intentionally done to get a rise out of someone.

 

[Rallywagon]

The problem isnt a 1st amendment issue. The problem isnt that people were killed, how they were killed. The problem isnt the way the game was being played.
The problem is that youtube doesnt like the content. Their platform, their choice, their rules.
I bet had he not gone on to make (11?) more videos about it after the first, this post wouldnt exist. But that doesn't matter. If people aren't liking what YT is up to, anyone can go ahead and create a new streaming platform. You would have no issue finding content makers and subscribers. But until then. Its YTs platform, it's their rule. For better or worse, hypocracy or otherwise.

 

[Northstar]

In the current political climate, I definitely believe some of them are very serious in their comments.



Sure, you can be weird and do awful things. But spreading it online and promoting the same violence is definitely isn't the right thing to do.

He's definitely promoting violence. Especially with the very negative titles that he gave the videos.

He had my sympathy right up to the point I saw this. One video I can pass off as just being a badly thought out joke, but posting several shows he put thought into it which means he should have been aware of the risks of posting the videos.

If it can be done in the game without a hack, then the game is designed to do this. I don't see how it's problematic that's why I asked you to explain it.

I wouldn't say it's designed to do it since as far as I'm aware there isn't a mission where the objective is to kill her. What I would say the game is designed to do however is give you lots of rope with which you can hang yourself with (metaphorically speaking of course).

 

[TexRex]

The game is not designed to do this.

I think it's more accurate to say that the game is not designed to not do it, which is to say nothing of whether depictions of anything in particular is appropriate.

 

[Liquid]

I don't agree with what Shirrako did and I don't find it particularly funny.
However, it's his prerogative to play the game in that way.

I don't agree with what YouTube did because it's a huge overreaction and sets a big whatabouttery precedence for other gaming content.
However, it's their website and they're free to close any account they wish for any reason they wish.

Next issue, please.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Here's an idea, if you don't like it, boycott YouTube.

...

But you won't, because they provide you with a free service with unparalleled amounts of content anywhere you have a suitable device, and even generates some of you an income.

 

[CinnamonOD]

It seemed more like Youtube succumbed to media pressure and found the only way to get out of it was banning the guy, who also was the perfect scapegoat, and couldn't handle the situation himself.

 

[huskeR32]

Agreed, but it's a very slippery slope when said company bans one video, but doesn't ban another that features more violence but is less politically charged.

Replace the feminist with any other NPC and it's just another RDR 2 video that won't get taken down.

Hang on a minute. Which one is it? Slippery slope, or clear line being drawn between different types of content? It can't be both.

 

[LittleSpike]

Well, judging by how he and his defenders reacted to this, blaming SJWs, acting blissfully unaware of their own context afterwards and not even being brave enough to step up to the plate and admit they went just a little too far, I'll say that he definitely deserved it.

I don't like so-called "SJW"s either, but there's a big difference between being offended over something that's completely not implied, and being upset over someone gleefully killing a character in a video game for the sole blatant reason that they're presented as feminist. They're a feminist, so I'm going to kill them in humiliating ways and describe them using derogatory words, because they're a feminist. Don't pretend that's not the context, that's absolutely what it's supposed to be. It says it right in the titles that that's the reason for this. Just say that you hate women and be done with it.

And yeah, publicly stating you'd kill people in real life because they're feminists, what jokesters... We only said we want to kill people with differing opinions to us, get a sense of humor! Why do we gamers get such a bad reputation, I don't get it.

 

[PzR Slim]

Well, judging by how he and his defenders reacted to this, blaming SJWs, acting blissfully unaware of their own context afterwards and not even being brave enough to step up to the plate and admit they went just a little too far, I'll say that he definitely deserved it.

I don't like so-called "SJW"s either, but there's a big difference between being offended over something that's completely not implied, and being upset over someone gleefully killing a character in a video game for the sole blatant reason that they're presented as feminist. They're a feminist, so I'm going to kill them in humiliating ways and describe them using derogatory words, because they're a feminist. Don't pretend that's not the context, that's absolutely what it's supposed to be. It says it right in the titles that that's the reason for this. Just say that you hate women and be done with it.

And yeah, publicly stating you'd kill people in real life because they're feminists, what jokesters... We only said we want to kill people with differing opinions to us, get a sense of humor! Why do we gamers get such a bad reputation, I don't get it.

This.

 

[Suzumiya]

Very obviously inciting violence towards feminists, it's not titled "killing a random npc" it's called "KILLING ANNOYING FEMINIST!!!!" with it promoting the comments to go haywire, full r/cringeanarchy style. So yeah. Deserved.

 

[Famine]

Agreed, but it's a very slippery slope when said company bans one video, but doesn't ban another that features more violence but is less politically charged.

Nonetheless, it's up to them.

 

[TexRex]

Here's an idea, if you don't like it, boycott YouTube.

...

But you won't, because they provide you with a free service with unparalleled amounts of content anywhere you have a suitable device, and even generates some of you an income.

Yes, yes, yes!

And that's just the motivation I need to scour YouTube for videos of people complaining about the hypocrisy demonstrated by YouTube in actions such as this and post in the comment sections of said videos that using YouTube as a platform to complain about YouTube doing things of you don't approve is itself hypocritical.*

*But not really--I have better things to do with my time. Now you'll have to excuse me, I'm going to take this micrometer and check the thickness of every hair on my head for uniformity, an absence of which could be indicative of absolutely nothing.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

TL;DR - YouTuber does something to get a reaction from people, succeeds.

 

[mustafur]

Kill a feminist in a video game for a joke - Banned.
Film a dead body hanging in a suicide forest for views and money - YouTube Red Original movie

NPC Lives Matter

Edit: He got unbanned

 

[ImaRobot]

wouldn’t both of them be for views and money?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Kill a feminist in a video game for a joke - Banned.
Film a dead body hanging in a suicide forest for views and money - YouTube Red Original movie

NPC Lives Matter

So long as the dead guy wasn't a feminist