Active shooter at Youtube headquarters

Harry Palmr

BattleCorp wrote: »

What chance have they of success? The firearms manufacturers are making legal products that aren't defective. From a legal point of view, what's the problem there?

Would Slazenger be sued if I attacked someone with a tennis racquet?

The logic is that guns are for shooting bullets and lots of them are shot at people, tennis racquets are not a threat in the scheme of things unless you live next door to a very petulant child.

TomSweeney

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

News Alert: Woman carries out mass shooting.
Guardian: Yeah, but it's usually men.

They're not even trying to pretend to be anything but a propaganda outfit at this stage.

Guardian are a disgrace

fattymuatty

emeraldwinter wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/04/youtube-shooting-gun-attacks-in-the-us-are-rarely-carried-out-by-women


Don't worry it's only men....

They didn't say it is 'only men' they said it is mostly men, which it overwhelmingly is. What is wrong with stating facts?

BorneTobyWilde

Have to agree with her. Her videos were not anywhere near as bad as others yet they filtered her, took away her freedom to express. Again it's giant companies like youtube and Facebook trying to control the world and what is viewed.

2 Scoops

fattymuatty wrote: »

They didn't say it is 'only men' they said it is mostly men, which it overwhelmingly is. What is wrong with stating facts?

It's point scoring, nothing more.

Shooter seems disturbed and it's pretty sad since some of her beliefs like animal rights are admirable. Looks like a revenge mission over her youtube videos.

TomSweeney

fattymuatty wrote: »

They didn't say it is 'only men' they said it is mostly men, which it overwhelmingly is. What is wrong with stating facts?

They are facts, but why bring it up now ??

They want to take the seriousness of this instant away to push their own narrative of evil white men being the problem.

Imagine this, imagine after that idiot drove into those Muslims praying last summer and killed one man if a news organisation ran with the headline.

Most murders by deranged drivers using their vehicles as weapon commited by Muslims

Facts also, but can you IMAGINE THE OUTRAGE ????

They would be done as a news organisation if they did it - even Fox news wouldn't stoop so low.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

News Alert: Woman carries out mass shooting.
Guardian: Yeah, but it's usually men.

They're not even trying to pretend to be anything but a propaganda outfit at this stage.

Why don't they allow comments on their articles like other newspaper sites?

inforfun

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Why don't they allow comments on their articles like other newspaper sites?

That would get in the way of their donation begging.

AndrewJRenko

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Have to agree with her. Her videos were not anywhere near as bad as others yet they filtered her, took away her freedom to express. Again it's giant companies like youtube and Facebook trying to control the world and what is viewed.

Me arse they took away her freedom to express. She can express all she likes, but she'll need to pay for the platform if she wants to reach a global audience with her video.

I don't disagree with your point about large companies trying to control, but this isn't a freedom of speech issue.

Skylinehead

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Why don't they allow comments on their articles like other newspaper sites?

They do on opinion pieces.

20Cent

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

News Alert: Woman carries out mass shooting.
Guardian: Yeah, but it's usually men.

They're not even trying to pretend to be anything but a propaganda outfit at this stage.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Have to agree with her. Her videos were not anywhere near as bad as others yet they filtered her, took away her freedom to express. Again it's giant companies like youtube and Facebook trying to control the world and what is viewed.

Fair enough, they may want to control what's on their platform. But it is their platform. They own it, they have every right to decide what does or does not appear on it. It's not like she paid for a service and didn't get it. It has nothing to do with any freedom or right. She's perfectly free to launch her own platform.

It's not unusual. Boards won't let you say anything you wish on their forums, and rightly so.

Pelvis

It's rare that a female would carry out this kind of act I don't see any harm is highlighting in the news. The coverage I watched last night brought it up multiple times, I didn't see an issue, it was used to point out the fact that the motive of the attack might be different considering its a female, as in most cases it is usually a related to a domestic dispute.

I do feel sorry for the poor white men who feel hard done by though...

eeguy

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Have to agree with her. Her videos were not anywhere near as bad as others yet they filtered her, took away her freedom to express. Again it's giant companies like youtube and Facebook trying to control the world and what is viewed.

Totally disagree.
Her freedom to express existed well before Facebook and Youtube. Both a private companies and well within their rights to exercise whatever content control they want.
There's plenty of other streaming sites and social media outlets besides those, and plenty of other avenues to get your message across.
No excuse to get a gun and shoot the place up.

Also, plenty of Youtubers are affected by content filtering and demonetization. It's an ongoing saga at the moment that just hasn't been resolved. Don't see any of them taking up arms.

Hande hoche!

20Cent wrote: »

Facts don't care about your feelings.

Shapiro fan?

banie01

If taking away "freedom to express oneself" is a valid reason to go on a shooting spree, Boards.ie would need to invest in Kevlar!
As would everyone with me on ignore....:mad:
But they'll never see it coming!
Because I'm on ignore! Muahahaha!:rolleyes:


Youtube is a company, companies can and do dictate policies to allow access to their service. Those policies are subject to review and periodic change. A company of any type is under no obligation to provide a free platform.
It is under even less of an obligation to ensure that any person can monetise any old guff they spout!

This womans father has confirmed his belief that this was due to Youtube restricting access to her videos and the impact that had financially.
That was what he felt was a prime factor in this.
Youtube restricted her access to easy ad reveneue!
This person could use any platform at all to espouse her belief, the one she chose, made a policy change that impacted her income.
Rathet than choose an alternative platform, the animal loving Vegan decided to shoot people?!?!

Hardly a rational response?

20Cent

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Shapiro fan?

No can't stand him.

diomed

conorhal wrote: »

I'm just baffled by the neurotic obsession by some regards the gun laws of another country that has nothing to do with them, I wonder about the mental health of those the spaz out every time this happens in America. It's an international news story, and yet for some bizarre reason folks with no input and who it doesn't impact seem to be having emotional melt downs.

Then keep your gun shooting news stories to yourself.

yermanoffthetv

fattymuatty wrote: »

They didn't say it is 'only men' they said it is mostly men, which it overwhelmingly is. What is wrong with stating facts?

Because its not at all relevant to the story and seems to down play her actions just because of her gender. If you continued with that line of logic you'd have to write 'but its mostly black men that commit homicide' (which is stating a fact) That would be outrageous.

Thats the problem with continually politicizing events like this. each side is looking to blame the other and reinforce their own beliefs rather that solve the issue, . The left seems to blame white men for all ills and the right blame minorities. Americas problem is completely and utterly refusing to collectively deal with widespread mental health issues mixed with extremely divisive identity politics mixed with a high drug use rate mixed with easily obtained guns....A recipe for complete and utter chaos.

cursai

YouTube link?

Summer In the City

yermanoffthetv wrote: »

Because its not at all relevant to the story and seems to down play her actions just because of her gender. If you continued with that line of logic you'd have to write 'but its mostly black men that commit homicide' (which is stating a fact) That would be outrageous.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the Guardian piece. It was written quickly before all the facts were known and references previous attacks by women in the States. It's a bit tabloidy but that's what they are now. The main problem seems to be with the headline which is click bait like all headlines now.

bloodless_coup

Vegan blogger , not surprising.

fattymuatty

yermanoffthetv wrote: »

Because its not at all relevant to the story and seems to down play her actions just because of her gender. If you continued with that line of logic you'd have to write 'but its mostly black men that commit homicide' (which is stating a fact) That would be outrageous.

Thats the problem with continually politicizing events like this. each side is looking to blame the other and reinforce their own beliefs rather that solve the issue, . The left seems to blame white men for all ills and the right blame minorities. Americas problem is completely and utterly refusing to collectively deal with widespread mental health issues mixed with extremely divisive identity politics mixed with a high drug use rate mixed with easily obtained guns....A recipe for complete and utter chaos.

It may yet be relevant to the story. I've seen it reported that she is a biological male, I'm not sure how accurate those reports are but I read a news article where she was called a trans woman.

tayto lover

I was very lucky.
I was actually on Youtube at that very time.

Summer In the City

doylefe wrote: »

Vegan blogger , not surprising.

They're well known for taking up arms alright.

_Dara_

conorhal wrote: »

I'm just baffled by the neurotic obsession by some regards the gun laws of another country that has nothing to do with them, I wonder about the mental health of those the spaz out every time this happens in America. It's an international news story, and yet for some bizarre reason folks with no input and who it doesn't impact seem to be having emotional melt downs.

Isn’t the point that people in other countries aren’t spazzing out anymore, rather shrugging their shoulders?

_Dara_

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Why don't they allow comments on their articles like other newspaper sites?

You can comment under lots of Guardian articles. Not all but most. Generally, it’s opinion pieces or features or reviews that have comment sections rather than straight news reporting on the site but I have no idea where you got the idea that the Guardian don’t allow any commenting.

TomSweeney

https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/981384762458820610

I can't imagine why she didn't make $$$$ with videos of this quality.

2 Scoops

Pretty sure that's a dude, the Guardian will be delighted but at the same time confused.

punisher5112

YouTube should be ashamed for even allowing that yoke to upload videos....

A 5 year old would make a better video.

ohnonotgmail

TomSweeney wrote: »

https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/981384762458820610

I can't imagine why she didn't make $$$$ with videos of this quality.

her issue is that she was making money off her videos until FB pulled them.

Vincent Vega

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Have to agree with her. Her videos were not anywhere near as bad as others yet they filtered her, took away her freedom to express. Again it's giant companies like youtube and Facebook trying to control the world and what is viewed.

With all the problems with demonetization over the past year I'd imagine there is a collective biting of the tongue amongst many Youtube content creators right now.

Insensitive maybe but I can't imagine a great many of those making a living through the platform didn't at least envision murdering a few people at Youtube at some point.

Obviously though, there's a gulf between such intrusive thoughts and acting on them and she was clearly unhinged.

TomSweeney

2 Scoops wrote: »

Pretty sure that's a dude, the Guardian will be delighted but at the same time confused.

:D brilliant

ceadaoin.

Do words not mean anything anymore? "Female" should be used to denote biological sex, that's what the dictionary definition refers to. Will this be recorded in the statistics as a woman perpetrating a mass shooting even if they are actually a biological male? That's going to skew the figures massively and won't be an accurate representation

conorhal

Vincent Vega wrote: »

With all the problems with demonetization over the past year I'd imagine there is a collective biting of the tongue amongst many Youtube content creators right now.

Insensitive maybe but I can't imagine a great many of those making a living through the platform didn't at least envision murdering a few people at Youtube at some point.

Obviously though, there's a gulf between such intrusive thoughts and acting on them and she was clearly unhinged.

I'd say that after hearing that Youtube were giving Logan Paul his own talk show.(He of laughing at dead bodies in Japan's 'suicide forest' and tazing dead rats fame) .. quite a lot of Youtubers who have been demonitized and pushed to the bottom of 'so called trending' must have had the same idea cross their mind.

Pelvis

Pelvis wrote:

I do feel sorry for the poor white men who feel hard done by though...

Ffs.

Manic Moran

eeguy wrote: »

Totally disagree.
Her freedom to express existed well before Facebook and Youtube. Both a private companies and well within their rights to exercise whatever content control they want.
There's plenty of other streaming sites and social media outlets besides those, and plenty of other avenues to get your message across.
No excuse to get a gun and shoot the place up.

Also, plenty of Youtubers are affected by content filtering and demonetization. It's an ongoing saga at the moment that just hasn't been resolved. Don't see any of them taking up arms.

Agreed with this. My own channel (Mainly revolving around equipment used in WW2, such as tanks) is on the fringes of the potential new Youtube rule. We await further clarification on their new policies.

There are other possibilities. A number of folks I work with are affected by Youtubes policies, and have already started moving to other sources. Originally it was just monetisation, so Patreon stepped in. They are making more on Patreon than they are on Youtube now. Then they started looking for other platforms to host their videos on entirely. Believe it or not, Pornhub has stepped into that role. I strongly suspect that if many more channels jump, they'll set up a new domain name. Gunhub exists for some firearms channels, for example. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/22/596161899/restricted-by-youtube-gun-enthusiasts-are-taking-their-videos-to-pornhub

Youtube is convenient, but the more proprietary and restrictive they get, the more they open themselves up to competition.

Maxpfizer

emeraldwinter wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/04/youtube-shooting-gun-attacks-in-the-us-are-rarely-carried-out-by-women


Don't worry it's only men....

https://twitter.com/ScrumpAdmin/status/981417797820534784

Summer In the City

Maxpfizer wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ScrumpAdmin/status/981417797820534784

Persians are white.

eyerer

That video reminded me of lady gaga

TomSweeney

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

her issue is that she was making money off her videos until FB pulled them.

She made money on those ????

I'm starting my own YT channel later lads ...

ohnonotgmail

TomSweeney wrote: »

She made money on those ????

I'm starting my own YT channel later lads ...

apparently so. I'm as mystified as you are.

punisher5112

Kids that are watching the likes of these tools are in serious trouble further on in life.

Sure the little one is picking up on all the American slang etc.

Seriously limit the amount they can watch and what exactly they are watching.

That yoke was some serious fruit and I'm shocked at how it made money from making a fool of themselves.

We are doomed if this is classed as informative.....

the_syco

Pelvis wrote: »

I do feel sorry for the poor white men who feel hard done by though...

www.duffelblog.com/2017/03/high-value-target-disappointed-raided-rangers-instead-navy-seals/

TomSweeney

punisher5112 wrote: »

Kids that are watching the likes of these tools are in serious trouble further on in life.

Sure the little one is picking up on all the American slang etc.

Seriously limit the amount they can watch and what exactly they are watching.

That yoke was some serious fruit and I'm shocked at how it made money from making a fool of themselves.

We are doomed if this is classed as informative.....

Sure just look at this moron ...

https://youtu.be/Gs4O2R7Z55o

Is this considered funny by todays young people ???

18M subscribers - so he makes a comfortable living from it I'm sure.

10000maniacs

I went to her website and while she is obviously deranged, she campaigned against cruelty to animals (which is a good thing).
www.NasimeSabz.com
She had linked a video of Chinese baby bears getting skinned alive. I was not aware of this disgusting practice. I won't repost the video here, too traumatic, but the bears are still alive and grimacing with pain after being skinned.

B.A._Baracus

Just watched her video there. Yeah she's mad.... And actually "her"? That's clearly a bloke.

I had no idea until now. Why where the media saying female so much.

Pero_Bueno

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43639634

Disgusting from the BBC - the headline, glorifying it

Nasim Aghdam: Vegan bodybuilder who 'railed against YouTube'

Would they have said the same about it if it were a Trump supporting male NRA redneck ?