YouTube should not be a babysitter
Exactly, and there is no better way to put it!
Parents should be aware of what their children are watching no matter what and thats their job to do so, not YouTube's.
I agree. I've never understood why people believe "it's YouTube" so it's ok to do that. Would they send a kid to their room to watch unrestricted cable? That's basically what YouTube is. Cable/satellite TV offers channels that are inappropriate for 6 year olds, and so does YouTube. Right now YouTube is going through a growing pain as they transition from what they were to what they want to become, but even once they get there, it is still the responsibility to the parent to...
PARENT their children. (Gasp! Right?!)
They used to already have age-restricted content. Did that go away at some point?
They still have the age-restricted content warning they've always had. I don't log into my account for general YouTube surfing and come across the content warning [You must be 18/log in to view this content] regularly. More with movie previews than anything else.
For someone on a forum centered around YouTube, you don't seem to like the platform so much xD
Just 'cause you're a kid at the park doesn't mean you automatically like every new jungle gym they install!
Neils, after reading more about this... something seems fishy... YouTube has been rating videos for content since the beginning, so the whole keemstar "they're rating videos" isn't news. Rating channels, that's a new one. And interesting. But for it to be the cause of the unsub bug? I find it hard to believe that, that many "kids" were subscribed to "mature" channels. Lots of holes in that theory.
As far as a "new" rating system for videos/channels being rolled out, doesn't seem like a stretch to expect at some point that YouTube would rate channels for "viewer discretion", that's what networks do and that's what YouTube wants to be. But if YouTube were to institute a program that selectively hid videos based on age, it would make them the first company in history to proactively protect younger viewers on such a massive scale. If you're as big as Google, and on the verge of being the first to do something so universally monumental... would you really botch it like this?
Your assertion that videos aren't being seen in "restricted mode" and are thus the basis for the unsub bug is dubious. Anyone viewing in "restricted mode" wouldn't have seen the videos to begin with and resultantly wouldn't have sub'd to the channel. Further, in the system as described by keemstar, viewer discretion is not improved. You have to see something to act on your discretion to watch it or not. By hiding videos, viewer discretion is worsened because people are not given to opportunity to exercise discretion.