Except if he stopped it would still be censorship because Carlos is still trying to make him stop challenging his views, which he does through his humor.
-
-
Replying to @MarcWeinstein2 @NealEason and
Forcing him to stop is censorship. Him stopping on his own is an act of kindness.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheSpookyScott @NealEason and
Maybe, but he's not obligated to stop making jokes just because someone doesn't like them. Claiming otherwise is inappropriate.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarcWeinstein2 @NealEason and
Nah, but Carlos isn't obligated to just stay silent about it either. He can tell YouTube about it and try to get people on his side. As long as he doesn't promote harassment or violence.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheSpookyScott @NealEason and
The problem is he DID go whining to Youtube about his hurt feelings like a standard crybully. Now all of YT's creators are being harmed because he couldn't handle being challenged.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarcWeinstein2 @NealEason and
You are saying Steven Crowder can make jokes (and he can). Carlos can make jokes back and complain if he wants. Just as Steven can complain too. You are not allowed to determine who is allowed to say what. I don't see why you seem to believe you can. That is censorship.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheSpookyScott @MarcWeinstein2 and
Steven can go to YouTube about Carlos as well and he has. No reason to silence either. Since when did jokes or being a crybully make need of sensorship?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheSpookyScott @NealEason and
About the same time that Carlos decided to be a crybully to try to censor Crowder. But notice, Steven has gone to YouTube about Carlos, yet they do NOTHING about Carlos. But the instant Carlos opens his mouth, Crowder is harmed by YouTube?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarcWeinstein2 @NealEason and
Well you have given me some time to think on this. I looked at Steven's response. I have looked at other YouTuber's responses. I have concluded that this is by no means censorship. That is Steven's view, but it isn't true. That simply fired him. He can still make videos. He isn't
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheSpookyScott @MarcWeinstein2 and
Let me get this straight: You are mad that Steven got demonetized, but you are also mad Carlos didn't? You support censorship, just not against Steven clearly.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
YouTube isn't required to give Carlos or Steven money. Not saying that Steven should have been demonetized for good, but (as of now) people can't choose what companies do with their money.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.