idiotic youtube strikes

D

david tiberio

New Member
Stupid Youtube Content Reviewers

shutterstock.com/video/clip-17343565-school-girls-sitting-writing
STRIKE 1 C0988 school girls sitting and writing
Reason: Violation of YouTube’s policy on nudity and sexual content. Learn more
Acknowledged on Apr 4, 2018
Expires on May 20, 2018 Learn more
Appeal Rejected

shutterstock.com/video/clip-17343844-school-girls-wearing-skirts
STRIKE 2 C0041 school girls wearing skirts
Reason: Violation of YouTube’s policy on nudity and sexual content. Learn more
Acknowledged on Apr 6, 2018
Expires on Jul 5, 2018 Learn more
Appeal Rejected

Youtube gone crazy. Maybe they only hire content reviewers from Saudi Arabia.
 
I wouldn't thought much of that video clip.
Especially that first clip.
And don't see any nudity or sexual content in it.

Content reviewers MIGHT be from Saudi Arabia as you said...
 
I know what is going on. This is some of the "child protection algorithm gone wrong" mess. They are seeing your stock clips as fetish-sexualization of minors.

What else was in these videos, and can you tell us the story sequence of them? Do be careful; you are one strike away from channel termination!
 
I received a communauty strike for nudity too on a video with balloons.... It's a video for kids with balloons to learn colors... There is no nudity or sexuel content
 
Last edited:
My working theory is that this is a bot gone wrong. Neither contains nudity or sexually explicit content and aren't against the community guidelines (unless showing people in videos counts as that, which I highly doubt).

Even more surprising to me is that your appeal was rejected because this clearly is a case of some mistake being made.
 
videoeditgr said:
nope. bots are made by people. people go wrong.

nevertheless, to be honest, this picture can be a thumbnail
fitting for anything under the suitable title.
As they say there are no dirty meanings, just dirty minds...
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. There are actually bots out there that make other bots. Of course, because the bots aren't human the first few iterations of them always do some wacky, weird, unintended stuff. Which is why human input is needed to tell the bot-making-bot what worked and what doesn't, so it can use the designs that worked and improve upon them. Rinse and repeat until you have a bot that does something really, really well. This is the reason why sometimes when you ask software engineers at big companies how their bots work they can answer "I dunno" and not be lying. CGPGrey actually did a video on this.

Of course, this doesn't take any responsibility away from YouTube. A human had to approve the bot for use after all. It's just an attempt from me at explaining what appears to be a clear case of something that follows the community guidelines being striked.

I mean, unless these strikes were done manually as a result of someone flagging the videos that is, then the people responsible change.
 
iron said:
I received a communauty strike for nudity too on a video with balloons.... It's a video for kids with balloons to learn colors... There is no nudity or sexuel content
Click to expand...
We received a strike but was not told why specifically. Just that it didn’t abide by community guidelines. I’m sure our appeal was rejected by a computer; no one could have watched the video and still rejected the appeal. So what can be done now? Nothing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Kristy said:
We received a strike but was not told why specifically. Just that it didn’t abide by community guidelines. I’m sure our appeal was rejected by a computer; no one could have watched the video and still rejected the appeal. So what can be done now? Nothing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The reason is in the e-mail. They removed my communauty strike but they put the video +18.
 
iron said:
The reason is in the e-mail. They removed my communauty strike but they put the video +18.
Click to expand...
This is all my email says,

“Hi Kamdenboy & Kyraboo,

As you may know, our Community Guidelines describe which content we allow – and don’t allow – on YouTube. Your video "GROUP WARHEAD CHALLENGE: Kyraboo and cousins challenge each other WARNING GROSS" was flagged for review. Upon review, we’ve determined that it violates our guidelines. We’ve removed it from YouTube and assigned a Community Guidelines strike, or temporary penalty, to your account.”

Reading this does not help me understand why. And my appeal shows rejected but no further communication was sent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top