YouTube Gets Its Own Social Network With Launch of YouTube Community (techcrunch.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

YouTube Gets Its Own Social Network With Launch of YouTube Community (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @12:20PM from the sign-in-with-your-Google-account dept.

The earlier reports were right when they said YouTube was working on launching its own social networking service for content creators. Instead of the "YouTube Backstage" branding, YouTube has decided to call their social networking service "YouTube Community," which allows content creators to use text, GIFs, and images to better engage viewers. Given the controversy surrounding YouTube in regard to demonetizing videos that are not deemed "friendly to advertisers," many YouTube creators have been or are thinking about leaving the site and joining competing services. These new tools are designed to help keep creators from departing to competing platforms. TechCrunch reports: YouTube has been testing the new service over the past several months with a handful of creators in order to gain feedback. It's launching the service into public beta with this group of early testers, and will make it available to a wider group of creators in the "month's ahead," it says. Access to this expanded feature set is made available to the creators and their viewers by way of a new "Community" tab on their channels. From here, creators can share things like text posts, images, GIFs and other content, which the audience can thumbs up and down, like the videos themselves, as well as comment on. Viewers will see these posts in their "Subscriptions" feed in the YouTube mobile application, and can also choose to receive push notifications on these posts from their favorite creators, YouTube says." Only time will tell whether or not this new move will be better received than YouTube's Google+ integration...

73 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialogue! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 12:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

NOT.
If Google+ failed, lets try with another name! by JcMorin · 2016-09-13 12:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

Google will try again the same thing with a different name.
1. Re:If Google+ failed, lets try with another name! by unixisc · 2016-09-13 12:32 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  That's what I was wondering. To change how my icon looked in YouTube, I had to go into Google+ and edit it. So now, would those capabilities by in the new YouTube community? And would YouTube community automatically take out all Google+ members whose sole reason for getting in was via YouTube?
2. Re:If Google+ failed, lets try with another name! by AHuxley · 2016-09-13 13:07 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Recalls the last efforts with the "Google Plus Finally Gives Up on Its Ineffective, Dangerous Real-Name Policy" (July 17 2014)
  http://www.slate.com/blogs/fut...
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
3. Re:If Google+ failed, lets try with another name! by cayenne8 · 2016-09-14 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  That's what I was wondering. To change how my icon looked in YouTube, I had to go into Google+ and edit it. So now, would those capabilities by in the new YouTube community? And would YouTube community automatically take out all Google+ members whose sole reason for getting in was via YouTube?
  I've had my YouTube account pre-Google takeover.
  They kept prodding me to change to a Google+ account but I've always refused to do that OR to link it to a google account.
  I've not been able to comment on my stuff or other content for quite awhile.
  I wish they'd free that part up, as that I really don't wanna associate another thing with a google account.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Cool. Can I turn it off? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 12:33 · Score: 0

I browse YouTube to watch videos, I don't need pictures and tweets cluttering up the feed.
1. Re:Cool. Can I turn it off? by sexconker · 2016-09-13 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  :kappa:
Whats missing by johnsnails · 2016-09-13 12:35 · Score: 2

Can they fix the current comment section on desktop, you cannot read the comments and watch the video like you can on mobile.
1. Re:Whats missing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 18:53 · Score: 0
  
  Even if they fixed the comments section, it would be pointless as you still can't read them.
  Why are you reading youtube comments in the first place?
2. Re:Whats missing by KozmoStevnNaut · 2016-09-13 23:17 · Score: 1
  
  Here's a Chrome extension to fix the problem: https://chrome.google.com/webs...
  
  --
  Eat the rich.
3. Re:Whats missing by dinfinity · 2016-09-14 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  User CSS to fix it:
  body[data-spf-name="watch"] #player { position: fixed; top: 60px; z-index: 3; left: 50%; margin-left: -501px; }
Oh, this should be good by PopeRatzo · 2016-09-13 12:35 · Score: 2

Have you ever seen the "community" over at YouTube?
https://youtu.be/n8M6m5UiDaI
Enjoy the comments over there, but don't blame me if you end up drinking rat poison.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
1. Re:Oh, this should be good by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 16:14 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The most widely viewed YouTube videos do tend to end up with pretty terrible comments, but there are quite a few smaller, more niche channels have some of the nicest commenters I've encountered anywhere on the internet.
2. Re:Oh, this should be good by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-13 19:40 · Score: 1
  
  While many videos do get a lot of low grade comments, what the hell did you expect on a video about the alt-right and Men Going Their Own Way?
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Money for nothing by fabioalcor · 2016-09-13 12:37 · Score: 1, Insightful

Well, we'll demonetize all your videos and you'll not be able to pay your bills anymore, but hey, here's an another pathetic Facebook wannabe/comments on steroids where you and other youtubers can mourn your imminent bankruptcy.
1. Re:Money for nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 13:45 · Score: 0
  
  on the other hand i'm glad no one can be a millionaire for playing video games saying 'haha raped!!!!!' on camera anymore Just useless millenial freeloader income
2. Re:Money for nothing by rtb61 · 2016-09-13 15:12 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Demonetise your videos, tough, suck it up and get a real miserable job like the majority. From a non-you tuber context, I guess that means if you see an ad before the video than that you tuber is an advertiser friendly arse hole very likely to lie to you, to sell what ever it is they are being paid to sell you. No ad and probably they are, well, not advertiser friendly and likely to be genuine in their videos.
  This as a broad policy driven by nothing but the Big Shit from Alphabet and pure cynical greed. If Advertisers do not want their commercials to be shown with videos make the fuckers look at them and decide one by one, which videos their ads will be shown with and which will be ignored, rather the secret back room pay to play, revenue censorship.
  How about the end user the viewer having a choice. How about being able to block uploaders on you tube when you log in. Peoples who videos you never want to see because they are crap with scammy headlines and lead in images, apparently that crap is advertiser friendly because you get to show more ads. How about counting videos as being seen, only of the majority of the video was viewed and not just the first few seconds to realise the video was crap and drop out.
  Evil is as evil does and Google has become a pit of lies.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
3. Re:Money for nothing by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-13 19:43 · Score: 1
  
  A blocking feature would be great, just to filter out the crap. Imagine Usenet without a kill file.
  Oh, wait, sorry I forgot that blocking shit is censorship and does irreparable harm to arseholes I don't want to listen to anyway.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
4. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:16 · Score: 1
  
  For this to work, you still had to provide some kind of "valuable service". Yes, a kid yelling to the camera can be that, if there are people who consider it valuable enough to watch that junk.
  Free market at work, give people what they want and they will let you earn money with it. What's wrong about that?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
5. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  ME deciding what I want to see is fine.
  YOU deciding what I am allowed to see it not.
  Do you finally get the difference?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
6. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:24 · Score: 1
  
  If you implement that people had to see the majority of the video to "count", most videos would be MUCH shorter than they are now. Which would probably be good for some videos, but for others, all this would create is people gaming the system by splitting up their videos even more than they already do. We'd essentially get the video version of those ridiculous webpages where you have a letter-page sized article cut into 10 half-screen sized snippets to ensure you load 10 different ads if you want to see the whole thing.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
7. Re:Money for nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 22:30 · Score: 0
  
  Google: "Advertiser - tick this box if you don't care who sees your ad"
  Let them decide. Large companies may not want to be running alongside such objectionable content as: conservative opinions, Trump supporters, white males, sweary hangouts and videos with people getting hurt, Other companies likely don't care who sees it. They just want eyes.
  So the funny that people actually enjoy can be monetised for those companies.
8. Re:Money for nothing by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-13 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  This argument is made when people suggest adding optional filters. The ggAutoblocker is a great example. Totally voluntary, gives control to users, but condemned as censorship. Disabling comments on YouTube is another example (remember when GamerGate thought that Sarkeesian was Jewish?)
  You have some crazy assumptions about me.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
9. Re:Money for nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 22:57 · Score: 0
  
  Everything. Millenials should all just LDAR.
10. Re:Money for nothing by KozmoStevnNaut · 2016-09-13 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  Nobody every made any sort of guarantee that you could make money off making videos and uploading them to Youtube.
  
  --
  Eat the rich.
11. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 23:37 · Score: 1
  
  To be honest, I didn't really follow GamerGate too closely. It even took me a while to understand what the hell is going on at all. As soon as I did, I wished I hadn't wasted my time.
  And I have no idea why it would be of any relevance what religion Sarkeesian has.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
12. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 23:49 · Score: 1
  
  I don't get the reason. It's not like I am forced to watch the shit, and YouTube's algo has at least this far been good enough to spare me the crap in my "recommended for you" pile, so what's the problem?
  Apparently there is a market for it and some people like to watch it. Because else, well, people would stop making that kind of movies. I don't have to like them, I can very easily just ignore them. And so can you. They also have no impact on people wanting to make other videos, like, say, videos I do want to watch.
  Hence I fail to see the reason why I should demand that they must not exist.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
13. Re:Money for nothing by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-14 00:03 · Score: 1
  
  I was referring to this: https://twitter.com/srhbutts/s...
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
14. Re:Money for nothing by Opportunist · 2016-09-14 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  My perpetual reminder that adding -gate to a "controversy" means that it's mostly hot air used to inflate a balloon and hoping that associating it with one of the biggest scandals in US political history would give it some attention... anyway.
  It's a caricature. And, let's face it, she doesn't really have any features that lend themselves to caricature exaggeration (though her earring hoops could be used, more prominently than in that caricature). Anyway. I don't see any association with this picture being "Jewish" in some way, is it the nose or what is supposed to say "Jew"? I don't really "get it", to be honest, to me this looks like someone wanted to create a demeaning picture of her and couldn't find a feature to use for it.
  Though I have to say the text above it is despicable, that's really uncalled for.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
15. Re:Money for nothing by AmiMoJo · 2016-09-14 00:41 · Score: 1
  
  To be fair it makes more sense in the wider context of what they were saying. There was a rumour that she was Jewish and trying to steal people's money via Kickstarter. Kinda shocking to see people repeating that sort of thing, often seemingly unaware of the historical context, let alone the attacks on her.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
16. Re:Money for nothing by Greyfox · 2016-09-14 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  YouTube's been increasingly itchy since Google took over. Perhaps it's time we start scratching.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
17. Re:Money for nothing by cayenne8 · 2016-09-14 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  ...such objectionable content as: conservative opinions...white mailes...
  Seriously?
  Conservative thoughts and being a white guy are now considered objectionable content?
  Geez, I knew it was thought of as unfashionable at least in liberal circles, but "objectionable"...?
  Wow, just.......wow.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
18. Re:Money for nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-14 05:34 · Score: 0
  
  It's an edit of a racist cartoon caricaturing a jewish person. But then, Sarah Nyberg is not a person to trust, least of all on these matters. Besides shopping and cherrypicking, she's a self-admitted child predator.
19. Re:Money for nothing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-14 06:45 · Score: 0
  
  Yep. Being a "White male" is all it takes to provoke visceral hatred. Twitter and facebook are bad for it... the worst place is Tumblr.
20. Re:Money for nothing by ArylAkamov · 2016-09-14 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  Oy vey!
Rats in the Ceiling by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 12:41 · Score: 0

I recall dining out several years ago at a restaurant in which a large rat fell out of the ceiling. I conjectured that the kitchen must be full for them to have started wandering into the dining area.
Years later, the YouTube comments section is full of the worst breed of trolls that will now begin to wander over to the YouTube Community page. That's the real reason for its creation--keeping YouTube from exploding in a mess of non-sequitur vitriol and a black mire of abysmal hate speech. Think of it like a pressure valve that releases assholes instead of air.
Competing Service? by muphin · 2016-09-13 12:43 · Score: 2

"many YouTube creators have been or are thinking about leaving the site and joining competing services" ...
whos a competitor to YouTube? vimeo has limite video plays ...

http://www.dailydot.com/upstre... ??

--
It's not a typo if you understood the meaning!
1. Re:Competing Service? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 14:51 · Score: 0
  
  I think vid.me has benefited from all the youtube drama.
2. Re:Competing Service? by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  If everything fails, there's certainly a video service in China. As long as you just post stuff that isn't against their party, you should be ok. They have real problems, they don't give a shit about our imaginary ones.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:Competing Service? by KozmoStevnNaut · 2016-09-13 23:19 · Score: 1
  
  Dailymotion is a decent option, a few of the Youtubers I follow also upload their videos there.
  
  --
  Eat the rich.
Is that what these annoying fucking alerts are? by TWX · 2016-09-13 12:43 · Score: 2

YouTube Gets Its Own Social Network With Launch of YouTube Community

Is that what these goddamn alerts on my cell phone are? Jeeezus.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Dear Screwtape by sinij · 2016-09-13 13:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

Dear Screwtape,

Today I expanded YouTube comments section to social network. Tomorrow I will make it mandatory to use to access any other Google service. This is all as planned, and I will finally succeed into turning Internet into private hell that is Youtube comments section.

Sincerely yours,
Wormwood
... and chicks for free. by Lead+Butthead · 2016-09-13 13:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Sorry, growing up in the 80s sort of drilled that song into my subconscious...

--
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
1. Re:... and chicks for free. by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:14 · Score: 2
  
  No, no chicks, that's against the policy now.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
And is it federated? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 13:17 · Score: 0

Oh, so it's not federated. Well then, up yours, Youtube.
The Internet needs another walled garden like it needs a hole in the head. Please do enjoy the inmates in your intellectual prison.
Re:Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialog by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 13:20 · Score: 0

Same goes for any comments section really, but youtube has always gone to great pains to make its comments section as unusable as possible. If a video has 5000 comments, the 4900 of them that google *didn't* pick to be at the top of the pile may as well not even exist for the sheer amount of clicking it would take to ever find them.
The purpose of most comments sections on is not to promote intelligent discussion, but simply to create a (futile, pointless) way for people to emotionally "engage" with the content, which increases their loyalty to the site and the odds they'll come back. Only the thinnest pretense that their angrily-typed essay will ever be read by anyone is sufficient.
Youtube Backstage better by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 13:22 · Score: 0

Fire the marketing guys..I like 'Youtube Backstage' WAY better. Way more 'catchy' and 'enticing'...with a flare etc. 'Youtube Community' is so.....utilitarian...sure it says what it is but really? Some marketing guy was paid good money to create that name?
Send me the money I'm sure I can do this job without much thinking.
1. Re:Youtube Backstage better by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:29 · Score: 1
  
  Definitely. Who wouldn't want to go "backstage"? Backstage is the forbidden area where only the really cool kids can go, losers like you or me ain't allowed there. And now I can go there? Really? Oh my, sign me up! I'm cool now!
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
2. Re:Youtube Backstage better by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 23:00 · Score: 0
  
  I'd rather go up your backdoor, fagboy.
3. Re:Youtube Backstage better by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 23:46 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, sweetheart, but you're too small for this ride. Maybe when you're a little older.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Let's just get ahead of the curve here: by rainwalker · 2016-09-13 13:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

We have just announced on the Official Google Blog that we will soon retire YOUTUBE COMMUNITY. We know YOUTUBE COMMUNITY has a devoted following who will be very sad to see it go. We're sad too.
There are two simple reasons for this: usage of YOUTUBE COMMUNITY has declined, and as a company we're pouring all of our energy into fewer products. We think that kind of focus will make for a better user experience.
Thank you again for using YOUTUBE COMMUNITY as your COMMUNITY platform.
1. Re:Let's just get ahead of the curve here: by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 16:08 · Score: 1
  
  I know right lol. All they have to do is add a few good features to Youtube channels like a 128 character status update and allow comments on it. It could completely kill Twitter overnight. Instead they seem to create entire new shitty platforms that are almost identical with a different name (Gaming, Red, etc..). Just add a few features is that so hard? It's like Google doesn't think it's a good product unless it has menus and options inside of menus with obscure icons spread out to the four corners of the earth. Clean up your damn UI! It's like you've never heard of continuity in design. You know, making every page look the same with settings in the same place on every page for your entire product range. I'd like to smack their entire UI team with a smelly trout.
Re:Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialog by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 13:56 · Score: 1

'The purpose of most comments sections on is not to promote intelligent discussion, but simply to create a (futile, pointless) way for people to emotionally "engage" with the content, which increases their loyalty to the site and the odds they'll come back. Only the thinnest pretense that their angrily-typed essay will ever be read by anyone is sufficient'
For a moment there I thought you were talking about Slashdot.
Re: Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialo by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 14:00 · Score: 0

I dunno. I used to have some good conversation on YouTube, pre Google+ integration. Nowadays the comment system is so unusable that only fanbois and flame lords bother posting any more than a single sentence.
Didn't we already do this? by bigdavex · 2016-09-13 14:58 · Score: 2

Google + ?

--
-Dave
1. Re:Didn't we already do this? by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:30 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm... Google+... in the light of the recent changes in YouTube's policy, why not call it doubleplusgoogle?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
2. Re:Didn't we already do this? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-14 16:07 · Score: 0
  
  G++
Re:Holey shit by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 15:01 · Score: 0

bye bye now
Ok... by boarder8925 · 2016-09-13 15:02 · Score: 3, Insightful

And nothing of value was gained.

--
Keep your eyes to the sky.
that will end well by slashmydots · 2016-09-13 16:57 · Score: 1

A central place for creators that are pissed off, confused, and losing money to vent their frustrations? OHHHH NO! This is going to be Reddit on steroids. They better coat the servers in fireproof gel for this one because the flame wars are going to be starting.
No by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-09-13 17:32 · Score: 1

No. Not just "no", but "FUCK NO".

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 22:10 · Score: 0
  
  And the funny thing is we can use youtube itself to help drive the point home.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Nope by XSportSeeker · 2016-09-13 18:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Given the controversy surrounding YouTube in regard to demonetizing videos that are not deemed "friendly to advertisers," many YouTube creators have been or are thinking about leaving the site and joining competing services. These new tools are designed to help keep creators from departing to competing platforms"
Huh? No they are not. This has been in development for a long time, way before the demonetization "scandal" happened.
And somehow, I don't think YouTube is too worried about creators departing to competing platforms. They did way worse before, and no one left.
What happens again and again is the drama, bunch of people complaining about it, threatening to leave, usually not fully understanding what they are talking about, then they all realize that YouTube is the only service with such a huge audience, and then they just give up.
Which I know is bad in itself, but the top statement sounds a bit like guesswork. Did you just try to bungle together two separate things there?
YouTube Community is here because quite frankly, the current commenting system is outdated, a mess and cumbersome. Not because Google+, not because YouTube commenters are the worst, but because the system itself is horrible. You can't find anything in it, browsing through it can sometimes be impossible, the webapp is often not synced with the mobile app, you can't do much of anything other than scroll and reply to people, it's probably among the most primitive commenting systems out there. Commenters can't even see a history of their own comments. There's zero customization.
But this has been an issue and a constant complain for quite a while now, so I guess YouTube is finally doing something about it... no clue if it'll be worth anything though.
Re:Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialog by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 18:21 · Score: 1

Listen, it's fashionable to hate on YouTube comments... but scanning through the comments is half the fun of a YouTube video.
Yes, lots of them are stupid. There are nuggets of comedy gold mined out that that stupid.
I remember someone posted the full sound track of The Jockey from Left 4 Dead 2. If you haven't played the game then The Jockey grabs someone's head and starts a mad laugh. The laugh gets more and more hysterical until he's basically screaming.
So, I watching this video which contains the full track that Valve recorded for the character from first grab, to full hysteria, to cool down.
Top comment on the video: "Sounds like me having sex".
YouTube isn't a social network already? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-13 20:18 · Score: 0

As title.
We didn't start the flame war by Opportunist · 2016-09-13 22:31 · Score: 1

peeps were hating on it before I left my comment.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
what more could we ask for? by AndyKron · 2016-09-14 00:02 · Score: 1

Another stifled, censored social network. What more could humanity ask for?
Attention Deficit? by lroylw · 2016-09-14 02:05 · Score: 0

What do you expect from those Loonix users?
Re:Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialog by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-14 02:12 · Score: 0

I just modded you '+1 Funny', but damned if I wasn't oh-so-tempted to click on 'Insightful' instead. Well done!
Re:Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialog by UnknownSoldier · 2016-09-14 02:25 · Score: 1

While I agree that the majority of the YouTube comments are indeed "noise" (such as the redundant "I'm watching this in year ####") there is still a few that are add a useful / interesting "signal". I've seen people add meta-data such as:
* the Song Name, Band, and/or Albumb,
* Interesting links about the topic at hand
The biggest problem with YoutTube's comment section is that slow repetitive partial loading. Both /. and reddit allow you to link directly to a message, YouTube doesn't -- this makes finding a particular message extremely time consuming.
Another problem was that comments will sometimes fail to post when the generic "Error" without _any_ indication of _why_. Why are URLs sometimes allowed and other times dis-allowed??
If YouTube would actually think about fixing their crappy comment User Experience comments could actually be useful to the majority of people. Right now they are mostly useless with their brain dead UI.
Re: Yes, because YouTube comments make great dialo by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-14 06:24 · Score: 0

+somebody Darude Sandstorm.
Picture: /../sandstorm.png
Music: /../Darude - Sandstorm.mp3
Subscribe. Thumbs Up
Youtube never liked G+ by nicolaiplum · 2016-09-14 08:54 · Score: 1

Youtube never liked G+. They didn't like the integration removing their independence and they only gave in and G-plussed themselves when Vic Gundotra put on his "I AM THE VOICE OF LARRY" [1] act and ordered them to do so. I am sure they didn't like G+ then either and were happy it failed.
This is Youtube taking control of their community services and features instead of letting the G+ guys do it, and providing better community features than Youtube had before it got G-plussed. Youtube always felt it had a separate brand image and separate community of users, and they do - that's why it's still called "Youtube" instead of "Google Video".
Of course the Youtube "community" is a sewer of rancid toxics that makes the Twitter trolls and the racist parts of Reddit look quite reasonable, so they're not improving the Internet in general by fostering it. Youtube: NEVER READ THE COMMENTS.
But they are taking more control of their own destiny and seeking more autonomy in how they interact with their users.
[1] Imagine a bad version of Alan Rickman as the Metatron in "Dogma".

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"