this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
956 points (97.2% liked)
Linus Tech Tips
1053 readers
3 users here now
~~⚠️ De-clickbait-ify the youtube titles or your post will be removed!~~
~~Floatplane titles are perfectly fine.~~
~~LTT/LMG community. Brought to you by ******... Actually, no, not this time. This time it's brought to you by Lemmy, the open communities and free and open source software!~~
~~If you post videos from Youtube/LTT, please please un-clickbait the titles. (You can use the title from https://nitter.net/LTTtranslator/ but it doesn't seem to have been updated in quite some while...)~~
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Citing an article that cites a Reddit post isn't great. Let's link to the original https://old.reddit.com/r/LinusTechTips/comments/t1e1if/you_destroyed_my_life/
While the story is tragic, somebody running a million plus sub YouTube channel is going to get the full Internet experience. It's pure muckracking to say Linus was responsible for this. It's just sensationalism.
The reason for the harassment was that the kids channel was purchased from someone else and also had paid subscriptions/views, hence why he never got a silver play button.
I think watching that auction video is very illuminating about his personality. He's in full narcissist mode, but you can see him work out what he's doing. And then he starts to backpedal, because I don't think he's a bad human being. He doesn't want to hurt this guy. He just needed to time to stop being a narcissist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDZfh5IjGv8
All that being said I think it's incredibly unfair to bring normal people onto a large media platform. Just fucking going into the auction and recording people for the channels just not cool.
Edit: I originally said videotape, but I realize nobody does that anymore
I think we can go beyond the malice standard and talk about reasonableness. I didn't see anything in that entire auction scenario that was unreasonable. We can nitpick about lots the specifics but nothing was unreasonable. Even managing the audience was all reasonable.
To bring this scenario up at this time, as that article does, is just trying to add field to the fire. And not actually be constructive.
If that article, " journalist", had done some fact checking research, then at least they'd be adding to the discussion, and it'd be maybe not reasonable but justifiable to bring it up.... Like finding the name of the deceased, verifying they died, verifying they died at that time for that reason. Verifying the story about the mother also being dead. All of this should be discoverable public record to a journalist who wants to verify a story. Talking to the father getting their position. What were the contributing factors to the event. What evidence of systemic harassment was there? Like all of this would be fundamental to journalism. But no it's just shit posting pointing to somebody's post on the internet which they haven't done any verification of...