Comments by "Laurence Fraser" (@laurencefraser) on "Upper Echelon" channel.

Nevermind innocent until proven guilty, half the time this nonsense is "guilty even once proven innocent". Nonsense like this, among its Other problems, massively undermines the credibility of women who actually Are being/have been harased and/or abused when they attempt to seek redress through legitimate means.
39
Oh, it's not the first time. It's getting their attention in the first place that's hard. Once you've got it they will do whatever benefits the platform most. Which means, Usually, complying with the law and otherwise siding with advertising companies over creators, taking whichever side in creator vs creator disputes benefits them most (usually the larger creator unless there is good legal reason not to or it will cause huge backlash among demographics they can't afford to alienate), and they'll usually take the side of a youtube creator over an outsider unless that outsider has the capacity to make things legally and/or financially difficult for youtube in excess of any benefit. Basically, you just have to consider what the law says and what benefits youtube (the company, not the platform) and things like this become less surprising. The hard part is getting them to acknowledge you actually Exist if you don't have an implausibly high subscriber count and youtube advertising revenue.
3
... that would be a reasonable complaint though?
2
... well, there are laws about harasment for a reason. It is a legitimately problematic thing. Of course, those laws have actually reasonable standards for what is and is not harassment. Or assault, for that matter.
2
@zuko9085 they announced it because then others would pile in and Also sell short, which in turn made it seem like the company in question was doing worse (after all, people were trying to get rid of shares in it!), Driving the price down further, making profit both bigger and more likely for the short sellers.
1