A LOT of big youtubers don't monetize or let themselves stay demonetized because they monetize their Youtube viewership in other ways, and couldn't care less about Youtube's shitty ads. When I've seen breakdowns of revenue, at most Youtube ads only make up like 15% of the monetization a big channel gets.
But then you contradict your own point that it's totally justified (or maybe you think this was one of the parts that should be struck out) to penalize Crowder 20% or whatever it was, for being demonetized.
It 100% is within his control, outside of very unusual circumstances, as he full well knows since it is his primary platform. Big channels like him get special treatment and don't get banned easily, moreso because he does politics and if he got banned, the whole Right would get up in arms. This actually happened once years ago and Ben Shapiro personally intervened with Youtube to help Crowder.
The fact that they demonetized and then tried to ban him for mocking a lisping communist homosexual Mexican speaks volumes. That they didn't succeed 100% last time is no reason to say that it is in his own hands. It may be not be as bad as Reddit, but that is not saying much.
So DW would give him a 90 day grace period and fight on his behalf before anything changed. If that didn't work out, there are legal principles such as "mutual mistake of fact" where the contract would fail and the parties could re-negotiate. The contract does not specifically contemplate "what if your ban is total bullshit and outside of your control". This is once again something that could be negotiated.
It speaks only of bans, which would cover "when your ban is total bullshit and outside your country".
Lawyers are not PR agents or diplomats. The lawyer's job is to protect the client.
Eh, I'm sure you can write a provision that penalizes Crowder if he goes over the line intentionally, but not if he is attacked by Youtube without adequate cause.
No, I just made it up. It's just my own opinion.
It's almost word for word Adam Smith, so you definitely got it from him, even if unconsciously.
Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.
I didn't say "selfishness is goodness" I said "harnessing selfishness to produce good is goodness". That is what capitalism does.
And I agree, but then it follows that not everything done in the name of that is good.
Ukraine was minding its own business and no threat to Russia.
That shithole puppet non-country was importing weapons, attacking the Donbas, threatening to produce nuclear weapons days before the start of the war, and lobbying the US to sanction Nord Stream 2. Most certainly not minding its own business.
You yourself, early in the war when you thought victory was possible,
Possible? Guaranteed, if Russia keep its act together.
where Russia would somehow use Ukraine's population and resources to launch its next war of aggression until it took over the whole world and Putin finally stopped the gay pride parades
That sounds like the fantasy of anti-Russia morons.
No no no. Shadversity makes hours-long videos he spends a ton of time researching and getting assets and such for. Crowder's content is nothing like that, it's exactly like Ben Shapiro's daily show. He just sits at a desk alone and talks to the camera.
From what I have seen, he has quite a bit of prepared material. So it is not as easy as you suggest.
The demands placed on Crowder were actually really low, and MUCH lower than what Ben does himself. Ben does his show 5 days a week, does 2 shows (one for youtube, one for DW's site) though it's really just 1 show split.
You work harder for yourself than you do for others.
IDK how people in this sub are sitting there acting like Crowder was being slave-driven. When I worked at law firms they worked me to the bone, 60+ hour weeks were normal.
See, I heard about that, and that's why I decided to become a Reddit mod and not a lawyer. I'm a lazy European.
But then you contradict your own point that it's totally justified (or maybe you think this was one of the parts that should be struck out) to penalize Crowder 20% or whatever it was, for being demonetized.
It was 20% for being banned, which is totally generous. If Crowder got banned from Youtube now, he would lose way more than 20% of his income.
It's almost word for word Adam Smith, so you definitely got it from him, even if unconsciously.
It's an obvious enough concept that I didn't get it from him, just like I didn't get gravity from Newton. It's just the concept that capitalism takes selfish human nature and forges it into a system that leads to consistent growth and development.
That shithole puppet non-country was importing weapons
Literally every country does this. "omg they have a military, HOW DARE THEY".
attacking the Donbas
You mean "the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine"? I don't think they were "attacking" anyway, even though it was their own country. The front lines there were just sitting stalemated for years and years.
threatening to produce nuclear weapons days before the start of the war,
lol no. that didn't happen. maybe you have a tweet from some rando? maybe? but nobody believed that Ukraine had either the capability or the will to actually try to develop nukes. What Ukraine DID have was shitloads of nukes which they voluntarily gave up for false promises of security. Big regrets there. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. Then they never would have been invaded.
and lobbying the US to sanction Nord Stream 2.
lol that's not a justification for war. Countries can say whatever they want.
Possible? Guaranteed, if Russia keep its act together.
Sounds like the Wagner group is going to run out of Russia's entire prison population well before they even manage to take Bakhmut.
he has quite a bit of prepared material.
So like 2 interns wrote him an outline and got screenshots of shit off the internet? lol that's not a lot of work.
It's an obvious enough concept that I didn't get it from him, just like I didn't get gravity from Newton.
Of course you did. Otherwise, you would be a genius of Newton's stature to figure it out on your own.
Literally every country does this. "omg they have a military, HOW DARE THEY".
And as you know very well, mass armament and mobilization is often regarded as rather threatening by neighbors. Particularly when you are assaulting the Donbas and have every intention of occupying the Crimea.
You mean "the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine"? I don't think they were "attacking" anyway, even though it was their own country. The front lines there were just sitting stalemated for years and years.
Yeah, the regions who don't want to go along with the coup against the president they elected. Problem?
lol no. that didn't happen. maybe you have a tweet from some rando? maybe?
What Ukraine DID have was shitloads of nukes which they voluntarily gave up for false promises of security. Big regrets there. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. Then they never would have been invaded.
As John Mearsheimer said at the time.
lol that's not a justification for war. Countries can say whatever they want.
You claimed Ukraine was minding its own business. Clearly not. I'd be rather cross if my neighbor was trying to sabotage me as well.
Sounds like the Wagner group is going to run out of Russia's entire prison population well before they even manage to take Bakhmut.
No. I actually have throughout my life refused to read philosophers or "thinkers" because I want to think for myself and not copy the ideas of others. I've never read Adam Smith, therefore I could never take anything from him. Even on shit that comes up a lot, like "The Prince", I never read them directly, I only read the condensed version bullet points from other sources.
I understand the concepts better than those "geniuses" did because they're hundreds of years old and my knowledge is more pure and recent. Borrowing conclusions and thought from others is commonplace and leads to errors. It's like taking the vaccine and getting hit with the antigenic original sin. I spent my youth reading. I spent my adult life gathering primary data from living and witnessing with my own eyes. I also regularly research data, but I don't give the slightest shit about someone else's opinion, because I don't know if I can trust their process.
And as you know very well, mass armament and mobilization is often regarded as rather threatening by neighbors.
Ukraine didn't mobilize until after it was invaded, unfortunately, because that idiot Zelensky didn't want to "cause a panic".
link
"According to him, if these consultations do not happen again or their results do not guarantee security for our country, Ukraine “will have every right to believe that the Budapest Memorandum is not working and all the package decisions of 1994 are in doubt.”" 100% fair and correct. But it doesn't mean Ukraine would even try to get nukes. He doesn't even mention nukes.
Mearsheimer
is a clown living in the 1800s. I've debunked his nonsense before.
No. I actually have throughout my life refused to read philosophers or "thinkers" because I want to think for myself and not copy the ideas of others. I've never read Adam Smith, therefore I could never take anything from him. Even on shit that comes up a lot, like "The Prince", I never read them directly, I only read the condensed version bullet points from other sources.
Not reading them directly does not mean that you are not influenced by them, or that you did not get your ideas from them. It is laudable to think for yourself, but you did get your idea of gravity from Newton. You and I put together are not smart enough to come up with gravity.
I understand the concepts better than those "geniuses" did because they're hundreds of years old and my knowledge is more pure and recent.
You have solely arrogance in spades in thinking that you are better than actual geniuses in the past.
I spent my adult life gathering primary data from living and witnessing with my own eyes. I also regularly research data, but I don't give the slightest shit about someone else's opinion, because I don't know if I can trust their process.
Well, I can't disagree with that, and I do like that you don't care the slightest bit about what most people think.
Ukraine didn't mobilize until after it was invaded, unfortunately, because that idiot Zelensky didn't want to "cause a panic".
A mobilization would have been a casus belli. Most people thought the US was simply trying to incresae tensions, which to be fair, it probably was.
"According to him, if these consultations do not happen again or their results do not guarantee security for our country, Ukraine “will have every right to believe that the Budapest Memorandum is not working and all the package decisions of 1994 are in doubt.”" 100% fair and correct. But it doesn't mean Ukraine would even try to get nukes. He doesn't even mention nukes.
What do you think the Budapest Memorandum said?
is a clown living in the 1800s. I've debunked his nonsense before.
Human nature has not changed since. And if there's any refutation of your claims about Mearsheimer, it's that he got the issue of the corrupt puppet non-country giving up its nuke 100% right.
But then you contradict your own point that it's totally justified (or maybe you think this was one of the parts that should be struck out) to penalize Crowder 20% or whatever it was, for being demonetized.
The fact that they demonetized and then tried to ban him for mocking a lisping communist homosexual Mexican speaks volumes. That they didn't succeed 100% last time is no reason to say that it is in his own hands. It may be not be as bad as Reddit, but that is not saying much.
It speaks only of bans, which would cover "when your ban is total bullshit and outside your country".
Eh, I'm sure you can write a provision that penalizes Crowder if he goes over the line intentionally, but not if he is attacked by Youtube without adequate cause.
It's almost word for word Adam Smith, so you definitely got it from him, even if unconsciously.
Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.
And I agree, but then it follows that not everything done in the name of that is good.
That shithole puppet non-country was importing weapons, attacking the Donbas, threatening to produce nuclear weapons days before the start of the war, and lobbying the US to sanction Nord Stream 2. Most certainly not minding its own business.
Possible? Guaranteed, if Russia keep its act together.
That sounds like the fantasy of anti-Russia morons.
From what I have seen, he has quite a bit of prepared material. So it is not as easy as you suggest.
You work harder for yourself than you do for others.
See, I heard about that, and that's why I decided to become a Reddit mod and not a lawyer. I'm a lazy European.
It was 20% for being banned, which is totally generous. If Crowder got banned from Youtube now, he would lose way more than 20% of his income.
It's an obvious enough concept that I didn't get it from him, just like I didn't get gravity from Newton. It's just the concept that capitalism takes selfish human nature and forges it into a system that leads to consistent growth and development.
Literally every country does this. "omg they have a military, HOW DARE THEY".
You mean "the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine"? I don't think they were "attacking" anyway, even though it was their own country. The front lines there were just sitting stalemated for years and years.
lol no. that didn't happen. maybe you have a tweet from some rando? maybe? but nobody believed that Ukraine had either the capability or the will to actually try to develop nukes. What Ukraine DID have was shitloads of nukes which they voluntarily gave up for false promises of security. Big regrets there. Ukraine should have kept its nukes. Then they never would have been invaded.
lol that's not a justification for war. Countries can say whatever they want.
Sounds like the Wagner group is going to run out of Russia's entire prison population well before they even manage to take Bakhmut.
So like 2 interns wrote him an outline and got screenshots of shit off the internet? lol that's not a lot of work.
Of course you did. Otherwise, you would be a genius of Newton's stature to figure it out on your own.
And as you know very well, mass armament and mobilization is often regarded as rather threatening by neighbors. Particularly when you are assaulting the Donbas and have every intention of occupying the Crimea.
Yeah, the regions who don't want to go along with the coup against the president they elected. Problem?
This didn't happen: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/ukrayina-iniciyuye-provedennya-konsultacij-u-mezhah-budapesh-73001
As John Mearsheimer said at the time.
You claimed Ukraine was minding its own business. Clearly not. I'd be rather cross if my neighbor was trying to sabotage me as well.
Sounds like a win-win.
No. I actually have throughout my life refused to read philosophers or "thinkers" because I want to think for myself and not copy the ideas of others. I've never read Adam Smith, therefore I could never take anything from him. Even on shit that comes up a lot, like "The Prince", I never read them directly, I only read the condensed version bullet points from other sources.
I understand the concepts better than those "geniuses" did because they're hundreds of years old and my knowledge is more pure and recent. Borrowing conclusions and thought from others is commonplace and leads to errors. It's like taking the vaccine and getting hit with the antigenic original sin. I spent my youth reading. I spent my adult life gathering primary data from living and witnessing with my own eyes. I also regularly research data, but I don't give the slightest shit about someone else's opinion, because I don't know if I can trust their process.
Ukraine didn't mobilize until after it was invaded, unfortunately, because that idiot Zelensky didn't want to "cause a panic".
"According to him, if these consultations do not happen again or their results do not guarantee security for our country, Ukraine “will have every right to believe that the Budapest Memorandum is not working and all the package decisions of 1994 are in doubt.”" 100% fair and correct. But it doesn't mean Ukraine would even try to get nukes. He doesn't even mention nukes.
is a clown living in the 1800s. I've debunked his nonsense before.
Not reading them directly does not mean that you are not influenced by them, or that you did not get your ideas from them. It is laudable to think for yourself, but you did get your idea of gravity from Newton. You and I put together are not smart enough to come up with gravity.
You have solely arrogance in spades in thinking that you are better than actual geniuses in the past.
Well, I can't disagree with that, and I do like that you don't care the slightest bit about what most people think.
A mobilization would have been a casus belli. Most people thought the US was simply trying to incresae tensions, which to be fair, it probably was.
What do you think the Budapest Memorandum said?
Human nature has not changed since. And if there's any refutation of your claims about Mearsheimer, it's that he got the issue of the corrupt puppet non-country giving up its nuke 100% right.