Is there a way to see in our YouTube studio and natak section that who exactly disliking our YouTube video? Even if we go to the YouTube today and taxation under likes and dislikes option, we can see where does the likes or dislikes are coming from.
I mean we can see the countries list from where the dislikes are coming. By answering, you agreed to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Sign Up Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people's questions, and connect with other people. Have an account? Sign In Now. Sign In. Privacy appears to be an issue that YouTube has taken very seriously. This is probably another reason they prefer keeping identities under wraps.
Any upvotes or downvotes you receive are stored as numbers. You may have come across some people out there asking you to install a link or visit some website to check who liked your comment on YouTube.
Until YouTube agrees to reveal the identity of those that like comments, we can only enjoy the fact that someone out there agrees with our views. Ublock is the first thing I install and it's been on my machine for many many years, but the YT ads seem to be pushing through reply.
Are you using Firefox? If not, it blocks additional resources when compared to Chrome. I'm using a flavor of chromium, but have noticed no ads when watching of FF. It didn't click that Google made changes to restrict ad-blocking effectiveness on YouTube at the browser level; thanks reply. Shut up and swallow some more ads! SponsorBlock has a video highlight part option now, as more users start submitting it, you could use that to judge.
Sure harassment is one aspect of it, but this drives up the clicks for Youtube and therefore the ad revenue. I'd be curious to see if people get overly annoyed by how many unworthy videos they watch and thereby reducing overall engagement. Harassment could be solved in way saner ways, like detecting unusual peaks of dislikes at some content. Without the like vs dislike ratio, I'm less likely to use Youtube.
I've started using Bing more and more as well. I never thought I'd see the day. The changes they've made over the years have made a huge difference in the amount I use it. I used to often spend a lot of time discovering new channels and videos and overall just enjoying entertaining content.
Compared to today, I've uninstalled the YouTube app from my phone and when I visit the site in a browser I generally ignore the homepage and just search for updates on the content I'm interested in, watch one video if I can find anything that looks relevant and then close the page. If their goal is to show more ads, they're shooting themselves in the foot. A popular streaming service inflates the ratings of the content offered on its service to the point that I'm hesitant to use it that much.
Channels can already disable the like and dislike bar. Then why not keep counts and ratios optional? It's already optional. The owner can choose not to show it reply. This is exactly the kind of thing that creators should be able to opt-in to, just like disabling comments. Very disappointed to see this shielding of everyone's eyes from videos. If a creator wanted to opt to hide it, sure, but flat out hiding it is unfortunate.
MereInterest 2 days ago root parent next [—]. Why would be poster of a video receive special privilege for videos that they post? That would be like a seller being allowed to remove unfavorable reviews of their product. Uploaders have had this ability for a while now already. Displaying both identically gives a deliberately false equivalence. I suppose we still have upvotes as a percentage of views to fill in some of the gap.
MereInterest 1 day ago root parent next [—]. True, though that still makes it ambiguous whether content in a video is heinous, or merely boring. Because hidden dislike numbers is information that compares people who hide dislikes to people who show likes unfavorably. People downvote based on their expectation. So you can have content that you would probably find bad that has a lot of upvotes because it has a niche that likes it, and my sense is that the excursions in dislike ratio are more often driven by distribution channel or brigading than the intrinsic value of the content.
Doesn't this directly contradict your experience as a creator? Let's not be stupid about this. The only people benefitting from this change are the shady ones. Jensson 2 days ago root parent next [—]. They do it so the likes can be displayed while hiding the dislikes.
This encourages controversial videos, which is good for youtube since "all engagement is good engagement". Controversial videos aren't necessarily shady. I'm not sold on that idea personally. The videos I create are based on what I'm doing in my day to day as a developer or if someone comments with a video suggestion since that's almost always in my wheel house of video topics which I greatly appreciate when this happens.
YouTube does let video creators disable voting but whenever I see that on any video I almost always think the channel owner is trying to do something nefarious. Maybe they're trying to avoid transparency by hiding downvotes or they are super self conscious about making videos and my internal bias suggests the video will be worse quality when compared to others. That's not always the case but it's true more often than not, at least for my own subjective take on video preference mainly tech and hardware, no news.
I always strive for maximum transparency and let the results figure themselves out naturally. In the end, this is mainly a huge downgrade for consumers of videos.
It sounds like the algorithm will still take downvotes into account and video creators can still see the downvotes. It's the viewers who can no longer use this as a metric to quickly gauge a video's quality.
In a world with so many amazing videos to watch, losing this quick filter hurts a bit. What fraction of videos on YouTube are political in nature? Seems like a lot of throwing the baby out with the bathwater in this. In last months comments often just disappear randomly. Youtube outsourced their spam filter and it was messed up - randomly deletes comments on basis of poorly set machine learming model and wrongly set keywords.
I mostly watch videos on wood and metal working. What YouTube recommends to you is just that, their recommendations. It doesn't reflect the actual amount of content that exists, it reflects what YouTube wants you to watch to drive engagement.
It might be 0. And what drives engagement more than enraging political content? Of course they're going to shove politics in your face even if you've never watched a single one before. VBprogrammer 2 days ago root parent prev next [—]. Interestingly we have similar hobbies. I have to actively hit the don't recommend this to me button on all the political stuff.
It generally works for a while and then I accidentally watch something close to controversial and I get another flood. NavinF 2 days ago root parent prev next [—]. I wonder how YouTube decides which videos to allow in that special row. The algo loves some ragebait. I ruthlessly remove bad recs and yet I watch one self-help video and suddenly the algo shows me far-right suggestions.
It must assume I am because of my interests and watch history. Not interested, YT. The fraction of political videos on Youtube is "definitely not small"?! I'd be surprised if it's more than 0. Sure, but many "Normies" are aware of this dynamic and adjust their expectations accordingly. If some video critical of gamers, anime fans, or WoW players gets piled with downvotes it's no mystery.
Same with political content. It's well understood that controversial things get more negative reactions. And this makes the system useless. Removing it is the healthy solution to interrupt the game. How does it make the system useless? It simply means the bar for "should I watch this" re: [dis]like ratio changes at least in part based on video content. It seems unlikely that giving someone more information makes something worthless.
This system is useless because it does not communicate the reasoning behind a downvote, nor is it objective in the first place. People downvote for many reasons, and quality is the seems usually to be the most likely. You could make the most informative and objective correct video, and toxic communities could downvote it because they feel triggered for some absurd reasons, or because it competes with their favored content-creator, or because of reasons which are independent of the video itself You must be pretty deep inside the bubble of the topic, as also the bubble of the content-creator, to be able to evaluate the value of the rating.
And that makes it worthless, because most people can't be that deep and follow everything. And the people who are, are more likely re-enforcing their own ignorance.
The Ratio is one of those tools which are making sense when they are fresh, but become corrupted over time, making it useless after a while. Useless for controversial content maybe, not for non-controversial content. What percentage of content on YouTube is controversial do you think? The system is fine. What if we applied this logic to elections?
Just get rid of them altogether since they're prone to brigading. There's plenty of clickbait videos that have horrible like to dislike ratios and you can save yourself time by seeing the dislike bar. This is just removing an important piece of functionality and making the site less functional and less user friendly. Yes, elections suck, but that's their purpose. Mankind is not able to act smart on scale, but there is the interesting effect that we will act sane enough on scale.
Elections usually aim to utilize this balance, because all other known solutions are sucking even more. And not to forget, in a healthy working democracy, you can't game elections like you can do it with dis likes.
With online-services, it's relative easy to get thousands of alt or hacked accounts, which you can use to manipulate the numbers as you like. How do you know? How many of those horrible videos are you actually watching yourself to confirm their quality? And on how many of them does your own bias comes into play? This is why a certain political party in the US tries to disqualify so many people from voting. If we had a mandatory voting system in the US with a federal holiday our government would look very, very different.
Nesco 1 day ago root parent next [—]. No, because if the US had a better voting system it would also require voter ID for example reply. Healthy solution? It's hammering a needle with a hydraulic press. There's another side to this too - downvote the authoritarian state propaganda. When all forms of political participation are verboten, you use what you have. Now we have even less. The views that are forbidden here are rule of law, democracy, political representation, freedom of speech, freedom of faith, human rights and so on.
People who try to oppose this are regularly imprisoned, tortured, killed, repressed or forced to leave the country. But youtube isn't removing the button or the signal from their algorithms - they are just removing the optics of having a disliked video which a lot of users including myself found useful reply.
Because the channels they want to protect are politically aligned with YouTube. That's your belief but you have no evidence to prove this. And even if true, why does the entirety of content of YouTube need to be punished for the undesired behavioral patterns that YouTube has cultivated on controversial videos they've pushed on everyone?
Can you please elaborate? You have a way to compare a raw metric counts against a ratio like vs. This makes me think of how steam does indeed have some smarts to warn users when a game may be getting review brigaded. I think it's a combination of volume of reviews by time, and perhaps the referrer? It does seem to work fairly well afaict. Steam also allows a user to view the raw information if they want.
At least the last time I looked. The option could definitely be more obvious though. This information should include a graph of the total views over time as well as likes and dislikes over time in parallel. Not giving users this information and removing like dislike counts just makes it so that a small number of people at YouTube have even more ability to control what is pushed on that site.
With this change users have even less ability to check the validity of a video; validity means different things to different users here. A quick skim through the comments section of any even remotely controversial video will reveal such anger and vitriol in the comments that one might consider it a smart move by the company to keep simple likes, and dislikes, anonymous.
To find past comments you've left on YouTube videos, see our article, " How to easily find your past YouTube comments and edit or delete them. For you. World globe An icon of the world globe, indicating different international options. Get the Insider App. Click here to learn more. A leading-edge research firm focused on digital transformation.
0コメント