Youtube censorship: the impossibility of proving your innocence (even against allegations so specific as "promoting violence" and "hate speech").

[Yes, that's a long title, above, but it draws attention to the incongruous contrast between the current phase of negotiations and the one immediately prior: youtube employees have completely ceased to suggest that I am guilty of "promoting or glorifying" violence. That claim narrowed down the dangerously vague allegation of "hate speech" into something that I should be able to defend myself against —and so, just as suddenly as the allegation was introduced, it has now disappeared from discussions.]

Hi there, [Sept. 27th, 2025, circa 6:00 PM]

I hope all is well. 

Thanks for reaching back.

I truly understand how deeply you must be feeling right now, and I want to acknowledge the immense importance of understanding the precise reasons behind the decision. It's not just a matter of curiosity; it's a fundamental human needs to understand why something significant has happened, especially when it impacts your creative work and livelihood. It's completely natural to seek closure, to want to piece together the events and gain a sense of resolution. Believe me, I genuinely wish I could provide you with that sense of closure.

Unfortunately, I find myself in a position where our established policies restrict me from divulging the detailed information you're seeking. This isn't a decision made lightly, but rather a necessary measure to uphold the security and fairness of our review processes. We've implemented these policies to protect the integrity of our systems and ensure that all creators are treated equitably. I realize that this explanation might sound impersonal, but it's crucial to understand the broader context.

Still, kindly know that you are still more than welcome to check out our Community Guidelines resources.

If you have any additional concerns, please feel free to reach out. 

Best,
Ark 

—————

Hi Eisel, [Sept. 27th, 2025, 7:49 PM]

Thanks for reaching out.

This is Jon, a manager from the YouTube support experience team.

I understand you are facing a series of "Hate Speech" violations which you are convinced are being applied in bad faith, not as a genuine enforcement of policy.

I recognize that your core issue is with the integrity of the review process itself. You are citing the lack of specific evidence from YouTube and the near-instantaneous rejection of your appeals as proof of a systemic problem, which you believe constitutes employee misconduct. Let me assist you here.

To avoid confusion with the resolution and duplication of work for this video, please refer to this case: [4-4615000039678] YouTube Support for resolution.

To ensure fairness and consistency, our review process is thorough, therefore, submitting additional appeals or contacting us repeatedly will not change the outcome of the decision we have reached.

While I recognize this isn't the outcome you wanted, I want to assure you that my support team has dedicated significant effort to investigating your situation, utilizing all available resources and reviewing every detail. Regrettably, even after this thorough process, we are unable to provide a different resolution or share any further information beyond what has already been communicated.

I hope this clears things out. Your understanding and cooperation will be highly appreciated!

Regards,

Jon

—————

So if I upload the same video again ("I am too ugly to lead the vegan movement") what would I need to delete from it, to avoid having the video censored (again) as hate speech?

There must be a specific moment in that video (and in each of the videos) justifying your claim that they promote (or glorify) violence: it must be possible for me to remove the portion of the video you've identified as hate speech, to then upload it again.

I would also point out, not hypothetically, exactly the same videos have been uploaded again (already) without anyone at YouTube perceiving the same statements as hate speech (or as promoting and glorifying violence, in particular).

Either you are telling the truth, or you are lying: either it is true that each of these videos actually contain hate speech (e.g., the parody song "Monk Mode", e.g. the video about the declining popularity of the vegan movement aforementioned) or else they do not.

This is a very simple, binary question.

You know you are lying: you know you are part of the world's most laughable "cover up" in claiming these videos promote and glorify violence (against a racial minority that is never specified, but always remains vague, I note) when the videos contain nothing of the kind —very clearly nothing of the kind at the time stamp provided (e.g. a chart showing declining interest in veganism, being discussed from a pro-vegan perspective, I might add).

I will repeat here, for your convenience, the list of videos that have been deleted under false pretenses: not a single one of these videos contains hate speech: the decision to delete these videos should be overturned.

HOWEVER, if these videos WILL NOT be reinstated ("unbanned") then please provide me with guidance as to what should be censored out when I reupload them (as I already have done, in many cases, without being censored again).

Sept. 25th, 2025
https://youtu.be/ZlHEEbYyzaQ
MONK MODE! @Hamza97

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtu.be/xdEhTXBU_KI
I'm still too ugly to lead the vegan movement.

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtube.com/live/82zFz7lx7Oo
Stop saying, "dating is a numbers game". #blackpill #incels

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtu.be/oDmp7KyD71I
Blackpilled Incels: Refugees from the Toxic Optimism of Christianity

Oct 1st, 2024
https://youtu.be/6g8Yn0wnsKE
Genetically inferior, morally inferior, intellectually inferior.

September 30th, 2024
https://youtu.be/YEp8rbvbzpg
The Last PUA in Japan: Tkyosam's Deleted Videos.

September 27th, 2024
https://youtu.be/F0pac_Y9ItE
She is not an Anastasia: Hamza Ahmed's new girlfriend is a Jessica.

E.M.

What happens if there are dishonest and immoral people working within Youtube?

 

What if I can prove that these are false allegations?

What if the enforcement system is rigged?

Welcome! Your Case ID is 4-4615000039678. Refer to this if you need to contact us again.

Hi my name is Leigh, how are you doing today? [11:16 PM]

Hello Leigh.

Hi there.

At the end of conversation number 4-1747000039900 the youtube employee told me that I could speak to "a supervisor" —I asked to speak with someone at a higher level of management.

Thanks for sharing your concern.

I understand that you're concerned about the status of your channel.

I would like to speak with someone at a higher level of management now. That was promised to me at the end of conversation number 4-1747000039900 (and the the youtube employee suddenly ended the conversation).

I know how important it is for you to have this issue sorted out. No worries, I got you and I'm more than willing to check this out for you.

Quote, "I understand that you're concerned about the status of your channel."

Not really.

I have a very carefree and jovial existence, to be honest.

Quote, "I know how important it is for you to have this issue sorted out."

Let's be honest: it's not really very important at all, is it?

😉

I understand where you are coming from, let's get the bottom of this.

Great.

There is already a lot of information in that earlier conversation, number 4-1747000039900

Do you have any questions for me?

I'm checking the details here.

But before we proceed, just a quick verification. Is this the channel in question?

https://www.youtube.com/heijinzhengzhi

Correct. That is my main youtube channel. Thank you for your time and consideration.

But this channel is active.

Correct: it was deleted (banned) and then undeleted (unbanned) within the last year.

Thanks for confirming the channel.

Let me check the details here.

Can I put this chat on hold for 3-5 minutes while I check this for you?

I am happy to wait, Leigh.

Thanks. I'll be right back.

Thanks for patiently waiting. Are we still connected?

I'm here, and happy to continue.

Thanks for confirming.

I am very sorry to hear about your experience and how frustrating this must be for you, especially given the history with your channel.

I'm not frustrated at all!

I understand that you feel your channel is being targeted and that the policy enforcements are a result of intentional misconduct.

Please know that all content is reviewed against our Community Guidelines by a combination of trained human reviewers and automated systems to ensure fairness and consistency. These decisions are made based on the content itself, not on any personal factors.

I am a carefree and jovial person, you know:

I upload comedy videos.

Leigh, I will remind you that I began this conversation by providing you with the case number linking to an earlier conversation:

that (earlier) conversation concluded with the promise that I would be allowed to talk to someone from a higher level of management.

I am asking for you to keep that promise now.

While I cannot comment on the alleged misconduct of other team members, I can confirm as per your last conversation, my colleague have forwarded your case to our supervisors and kindly wait for their response within 24 hours.

I cannot speak with a manager or a supervisor now?

And I can see here that you already have an existing case with one of our managers here in this case ID: 8-7390000039423.

Please check your email and look for your case number 8-7390000039423.

If you have further questions, you may ask through the email thread. This will help us focus on one case and avoid confusion. Please refrain from creating new chat sessions to avoid multiple cases.

Thank you for your time and consideration, Leigh. Sadly, in my case, I have real evidence of youtube employee misconduct:

Quote,

"Please know that all content is reviewed against our Community Guidelines by a combination of trained human reviewers and automated systems to ensure fairness and consistency. These decisions are made based on the content itself, not on any personal factors."

This is just not true.

I understand that your job may be to pretend that it is true, but my case really does provide incontrovertible proof that this is not true.

I understand. Let me transfser your chat to my supervisor. They will get back to you here on chat shortly.

Please stay connected.

Thank you.

You’re connected with agent Victoria. [11:40 PM]

Hi! My name is Victoria, and I'm a manager here with the YouTube Support experience team. How are you doing today?

Hello, Victoria. I am having a perfectly delightful day.

That's good to hear.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have, but I assume you need a few moments to read the (copious) text leading up to this point.

I'm reading your previous interaction with our representative,

Just to confirm, you to speak with a higher-level manager regarding their channel’s history of being deleted and reinstated.

You believe YouTube employee misconduct may have affected their case and want direct escalation, as previously promised in an earlier conversation.

Is that correct?

No: it is possible I misunderstand you, and it is possible that you have misunderstood me, too.

I'm sorry for the confusion.

Are you referring to the warning for a strike on your channel?

I will use the word mysterious here, intentionally:

over a period of more than one year

a series of MYSTERIOUS censorship decisions have been made against my youtube channel.

Several of these MYSTERIOUS decisions have happened within the last few days.

Several of these MYSTERIOUS decisions happened (approximately) one year ago.

They are allegations of hate speech that are flagrantly wrong: attempts to appeal or even discuss the details of these decisions (with youtube management representatives like yourself) have had MYSTERIOUS results.

That is my succinct synopsis of the situation.

I see.

To avoid confusion can you please tell exactly on what do I need to check?

Quoting conversation 4-1747000039900, for example, about events that transpired within the last 48 hours…

Quote, "Just to inform you, our internal team didn't provide any timestamp on the videos and the specific reason why it was removed."

So that is regarding the warning that you received on your channel.

Is what I need to check?

No.

The situation is more extreme than that.

More dangerous.

Please tell me exactly on what do I need to check.

So that I can assist you accordingly.

Are we still chatting?

(1) My channel already was deleted (banned) for "hate speech" one year ago. All three of the videos ("three strikes") used to justify that decision are still banned today. Every single one of these decisions was MYSTERIOUS: very obviously, none of the videos contain hate speech. If you look at the timestamp, etc., there has (evidently) been flagrant employee misconduct.

The youtube employees did not enforce community standards: youtube employees have been intentionally violating the rules (falsely claiming these videos contain hate speech, manipulating the system from within).

(2) This is happening again right now, with a series of videos being banned within the last three days.

(3) Higher levels of management need to look at the evidence for each and every one of these videos and actually reverse the decision to ban the videos.

Thanks for those information.

And, furthermore, (4) we need to prevent this from happening again.

It is now happening for the second time in (approximately) one year, as already described.

Just to confirm, you want me to check the community guidelines strikes on your channel?

Is that your main concern?

No.

No, I do not think that is a reasonable summary on your part, Victoria.

Sorry for the confusion.

I'm not the one who does the review for a violation but I can check on what are the options you can do to resolve this and how to prevent this.

Please give me five minutes.

I think you need to speak to an even higher level of management about a serious problem of employee misconduct within youtube.

In my case, I can really prove that many videos (at least six) that do not contain hate speech have been intentionally flagged as "hate speech" by youtube employees.

That is the problem. And it is an ongoing problem, threatening my channel with deletion right now.

Thank you for your patience. I just wanted to check in—are you still with me? [11:59 PM]

I am still with you, and I am actively putting together the list of links to the banned videos concerned.

Thanks.

I need more time to check this.

Please give me another 5 minutes.

Each one of these decisions about "hate speech" needs to be investigated and overturned. There is palpable evidence of intentional youtube employee misconduct involved. These are not just accidents. These are not examples of incompetence.

Sept. 25th, 2025
https://youtu.be/ZlHEEbYyzaQ
MONK MODE! @Hamza97

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtu.be/xdEhTXBU_KI
I'm still too ugly to lead the vegan movement.

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtube.com/live/82zFz7lx7Oo
Stop saying, "dating is a numbers game". #blackpill #incels

Sept 24th, 2025
https://youtu.be/oDmp7KyD71I
Blackpilled Incels: Refugees from the Toxic Optimism of Christianity

Thanks again for your patience while I looked into this. Are you still there?

I'm still here, and I'm happy to wait.

Sorry for the wait.

Please give me another 5 minutes.

Those are the most recent four examples of totally false allegations of hate speech from Youtube employees:

the allegations (circa) Oct 1st, 2024, are also demonstrably false.

I have already uploaded a youtube video showing the timestamps that the (false) allegations of hate speech indicate (from that Oct 1st, 2024 era).

This is a very serious case of intentional misconduct on the part of youtube employees: anyone in management who is willing to consider the evidence will understand the nature of the problem.

Thanks again for your patience while I looked into this. Are you still there?

The final example mentioned from September 24th of 2025 (https://youtu.be/oDmp7KyD71I) is discussing the type of university education you would need to get a job as an English teacher in Japan, and this is contrasted to the experience of another youtuber (who wanted to be an English teacher but could not get this kind of job). That is the discussion at the timestamp 00:03:23.

It is totally impossible that someone sincerely misinterpreted this as hate speech.

Sorry for the wait and thanks for those information.

Upon checking, you already have contacted us regarding this and one of my co manager has already consulted this to our internal team.

There was also an email that was sent to you regarding this.

Let me share the information again with you.

After reviewing the videos, we determined that they violate our Community Guidelines.

While we aim to allow a wide range of content, hate speech is not permitted on YouTube. Our policy prohibits content that promotes violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on protected group status, as outlined here: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801939.

Examples of hate speech include dehumanization, use of slurs or harmful stereotypes, claims of inferiority, or conspiracy theories targeting protected groups. In some cases, limited exceptions are made for content with sufficient educational, documentary, artistic, or scientific context.

Following our review, we removed the video under our Hate Speech policies because it contained content that praised or glorified violence against individuals or groups based on these protected attributes.

[Dear reader: you have just been reminded of the particular videos called into question. Do any of them "praise violence" against people "based on these protected attributes"? Does the parody song "Monk Mode" praise or glorify violence?]

We hope you understand that these actions are intended to keep the YouTube community safe. For more details, you can review our Hate Speech policy here: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801939

Evidently, Victoria, I need to speak to someone at a higher level of management.

You are just copying and pasting information that was already in emails sent to me.

One of the managers here and there is no more escalations that we can do here.

Here are the links to the earlier examples of banned videos.

Oct 1st, 2024
https://youtu.be/6g8Yn0wnsKE
Genetically inferior, morally inferior, intellectually inferior.

September 30th, 2024
https://youtu.be/YEp8rbvbzpg
The Last PUA in Japan: Tkyosam's Deleted Videos.

September 27th, 2024
https://youtu.be/F0pac_Y9ItE
She is not an Anastasia: Hamza Ahmed's new girlfriend is a Jessica.

Even though the titles may sound provocative, you can see what was actually said at each of the timestamps in THIS VIDEO, discussing the case, proving that none of the videos contained hate speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcgy9PNWAEA

This was also been escalated by one of my co managers.

I can see that you also replied to that email.

Let me ask you, Victoria, why do you think my channel was banned an [sic] unbanned?

Please wait for the response of my co manager for your email.

I am afraid that we do not have further specifics of the review. We recommend that you familiarize yourself with the community guidelines policy - (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9288567?hl=en&sjid=6505435379497266163-AP) so it would be easier for you to determine whether your content is aligned with our policies or not.

Why do you think someone at youtube decided to reverse the decision, after my channel had been banned?

At least one person in youtube management decided that a terrible mistake had been made.

I'm a partner:

I earn money from youtube.

I get adsense revenue.

All of that was stopped.

All of that started again.

Why?

MYSTERIOUS, isn't it?

We are always here to help you.

I am asking you to help right now.

That is why you can appeal if you got a violation.

If your channel was terminated before and you filed an appeal that means that your appeal got approved.

I'm sorry if I do not have the details for the review.

That's not true, is it? [This was said in reply to the statement about the appeal process, above: the normal appeal process was not followed —not at all— just as the normal "three strike" process was not followed before it.]

Re: "That is why you can appeal if you got a violation."

So what is the help I am now asking for?

I'm sorry but your appeal got rejected.

My co manager had already filed an appeal on your behalf.

Right. So what is the help I am asking for.

What is the situation I am in now.

Please wait for the response of my co manager for your issue. We have received the email that you have sent us.

Please understand that reaching out to multiple different agents won't speed up your resolution. In fact, it often slows things down because we have to spend time sorting through duplicate cases and figuring out which team is handling the official review.

What happens if there are dishonest and immoral people working within Youtube?

What happens if I can prove there is zero "hate speech" in a video (more than six videos now) but youtube employees are intentionally lying about "hate speech"?

What if I can prove that these are false allegations?

What if the enforcement system is rigged?

[As a digression, I should note: the allegation of hate speech is —specifically— that these videos "glorified violence against protected groups", which is even more surreal when you consider how heterogenous the accused videos now are.  If the parody song "Monk Mode" (sung to the tune of the 1964 song "My Girl" by the Temptations) is supposedly glorifying violence (against an unspecified racial minority) is it really possible that the same allegation of glorifying violence is equally true when directed at the livestream discussing the university credentials required to become an English teacher in Japan?]

Echoing back the same with you might not be something you’d be happy to hear. But you deserve clarity to make sure your expectations are met.

I'll be sending you an email at [email address omitted] about the interaction we had within 24 hours. I'll be closing this chat and I hope you have a safe day ahead.

Thanks for contacting YouTube. Have a great day. [12:21 AM]

Should I say "surreal", or should I say "Kafkaesque"? This is the third strike in the second banning of my youtube channel.

Welcome! Your Case ID is 4-1747000039900. Refer to this if you need to contact us again.

Hi my name is Ashyy, how are you doing today? [2:04 PM]

Hello, Ashyy.

This is linked to but separate from an earlier case,

8-7390000039423

Hi there.

^ I assume that number allows you to compare the record of what is happening with that case.

I received a very suspicious email from youtube today

referring to that case as if it were already over

but in fact the status of the case is still open and ongoing.

Thanks for bringing this up.

I have continued to receive new notifications for videos that have been (even more recently) banned for "hate speech".

In fact, these videos do not contain hate speech.

The message I received from youtube today was under the title:

Re: Requested conversation copy

I understand that your concern is about the email that you received.

This is, already, suspicious.

The sender is:

yt-partner-support@google.com

I will now quote the email in full for you.

—————

Hi there,

I hope all is well.

This is Ark, the manager you were previously in contact with in relation to your concern regarding your video.

I've raised your concerns to our internal teams and have received a response, let me share the details:

We have reviewed the videos and determined that it is in violation of our Community Guidelines.

While we try to allow as much content as possible, hate speech is not allowed on YouTube. We remove content promoting violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on protected group status as outlined here.

Content that incites hatred against individuals or groups based on their protected group status isn’t allowed on YouTube. This may include dehumanization, using slurs and stereotypes, inferiority claims, and/or conspiracy theories. We review educational, documentary, artistic, and scientific content on a case-by-case basis. Limited exceptions are made for content with sufficient and appropriate context.

Upon review, we have removed the videos per our Hate Speech policies as it contains content that praises or glorifies violence against individuals or groups based on the attributes noted above.

We hope you understand that our intent is to keep the community safe. If you need more help, check out the Community Guidelines resources.

That being said, I apologize if I don't have better news for you. I've explained and relayed all the applicable context here along with all the details you've provided during our interaction and sadly, our teams have upheld their decision.

That being said, the enforcement action on your channel are only warnings for the videos and not necessarily strikes. The channel is currently not scheduled for removal. However, if the channel does receive 3 strikes, then the removal will take place.

If you have any additional concerns, please feel free to reach out.

Best,

Ark

—————

Thanks for the detailed information.

And here is my (very brief) reply:

—————

You do not provide me with a quotation (or a time-stamp) from the video that contains hate speech.

You do not provide a single example of this video containing hate speech.

You explain, "Content that incites hatred against individuals or groups based on their protected group status isn’t allowed on YouTube. This may include dehumanization, using slurs and stereotypes, inferiority claims, and/or conspiracy theories."

There is not a single example of hate speech (by this definition) in any of the videos we are discussing: the specific video that was banned is a discussion of the decline in popularity of veganism (and I am a vegan myself, I am regretting the decline in popularity) with statistical charts on-screen at the time stamp (marked as "hate speech" to be banned).

I think it is very significant that you refuse to provide an example (i.e., a quotation) of my words being hate speech.

I have presented evidence that these videos ARE NOT hate speech, that they SHOULD NOT be banned, and that there should be NO STRIKE against my channel. Your replies are evasive and vague.

E.M.

—————

Let me check the case ID.

To help you better with this concern, I'll go ahead and check this matter further on my end. Is it okay if I place this chat on hold for 3-5 minutes while I look into this?

This is new:

https://youtu.be/ZlHEEbYyzaQ

^ This video, also, has been (insincerely) deleted for "hate speech".

Note that the time-stamp for the supposed offense says:

———

You can see an example around 00:00:07, although there could be other instances.

———

^ It is totally absurd to suggest that there is hate speech in the first few seconds of that video.

^ The earlier examples, as I've mentioned, were also totally surreal.

These videos do not contain hate speech.

I need to escalate the appeal to a higher level of management before my youtube channel is deleted (again).

Thank you for waiting! Just checking if we are still connected?

I am still connected. I am happy to wait.

Thanks for confirming.

I know that you do not have time to investigate this in detail, but this is a very short video (less than 50 seconds long) showing just how absurd these allegations of "hate speech" are against my youtube channel:

https://youtube.com/shorts/ZMBWEewOamE

It is not possible that youtube's employees are sincerely enforcing youtube's own rules.

After reviewing here in my end, your main issue is about your video that was removed by terms and policies.

No: I need the complaint escalated to a higher level of management because there is evidence of youtube employees acting in bad faith.

You have already spoken with one of our managers and received the email that he sent as a record of the resolution that he provided.

The new example: what is actually said in the first seven seconds?

(The video is a satirical song, BTW: this is comedy / parody.)

In the first few seconds (before the singing begins) the youtuber quoted (who is not me, BTW!) regrets that he does not want to date women any more, he wants to avoid women until he can get married.

He says that he has figured out what he wants in a wife, and he is now going to focus on getting married (not casual sex).

How could this be "hate speech" by youtube's definition?

All of the examples are equally absurd / surreal.

I apologize, but there is no option to escalate this concern to a higher department. The internal team that reviews your channel and videos to ensure compliance with YouTube's guidelines and policies does not communicate directly with creators.

No, this is a new complaint, concerning a new video.

I sent you the URL to the new video that has been banned, circa 20 hours ago.

Just to inform you, our internal team didn't provide any timestamp on the videos and the specific reason why it was removed.

This is a new dispute, requiring a new resolution.

You are given the option to appeal if your believe that the video removal was a mistake.

This concerns the banning of a new video (that happened more recently than the prior case and case-number).

Thank you for your reply: I need to escalate this to a higher level of management.

I understand, my apologies but there is no option to escalate this to a higher department.

Why?

You may check this Help center so that you will be guided on the appeal: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/185111?hl=en&sjid=7056973078303288038-NC

Please remain on the line:

The internal team that reviews your channel and videos to ensure compliance with YouTube's guidelines and policies does not communicate directly with creators.

I will click now to appeal.

Alright.

Are you telling me that after I click "appeal" it will then be possible to escalate to a higher level of management?

If you click appeal it means that you believe that the removal of the video was a mistake

I have now clicked the mouse-button to appeal. [2:22 PM]

And our internal team will review the video again.

This conversation we have had now: does it have its own tracking number?

Does this have a "case" number?

Yes, there is. This is the case ID of this conversation: 4-1747000039900

Okay: so youtube will send me the record of this conversation, and after the appeal has been processed (for the most recent two videos) then it will be possible for me to continue this conversation…

…and request that the appeal be escalated to a higher level of management? Correct?

As previously stated, clicking "appeal" indicates that you believe the removal of the video was an error. Our internal team will then conduct another review of the video. Following the review, they will send you an email with the appeal decision.

Right: and I will return to this google support interface, asking to escalate the question to a higher level of management.

My case contains real evidence of employee misconduct within youtube:

I understand "enforcement", but the rules are not being enforced.

Youtube employees are breaking the rules.

Videos that do not contain hate speech are being cynically misinterpreted as a pretext to justifying the banning (and deletion) of my youtube channel.

You may also wait for the response of our Manager Ark, since you replied to his email.

Please stay on the line:

I have just now received the response to the appeal. [2:28 PM]

Within just a few minutes, suspiciously, the appeal was decided.

Almost instantaneous judgement.

Don't you find that remarkable?

Such a fast decision?

I already received the email confirming the decision to ban the video as hate speech.

So, now, I must request that the matter be escalated to a higher level of management.

Do you want a screenshot of the email I just received?

Sure!

Exhibit03.png

Thanks for the screenshot.

^ Almost zero time elapsed between my clicking the mouse-button to appeal and this decision from youtube. This is not normal: this is evidence of what is really happening here, and why.

Upon reviewing the screenshot, I regret to inform you that your appeal has been denied. Our internal team has reviewed the video and determined that it violates our Hate Speech policy. As a result, the video will remain removed and will not be restored.

I just submitted another appeal on another video (falsely categorized as hate speech) just now.

We will get a reply within one or two minutes, I expect, just like the last example.

This is a new link to a video not mentioned previously that is now, also, banned from my channel: https://youtu.be/oDmp7KyD71I

———

Case ID

8-7390000039423

My case contains real evidence of employee misconduct within youtube:

I understand the "enforcement" of community standards, but the rules are not being enforced.

Youtube employees are breaking the rules.

Videos that do not contain hate speech are being cynically misinterpreted as a pretext to justifying the banning (and deletion) of my youtube channel.

This is an example that is less than 50 seconds long:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZMBWEewOamE

This is a longer discussion of several videos that were incorrectly banned from my channel for "hate speech", but they (like the short example above) do not contain any "hate speech" whatsoever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcgy9PNWAEA

Thank you for your time and consideration.

—————

I understand your frustration, but please know that we have thoroughly investigated your request and, I’m afraid there is nothing more I can add at this stage.

I am not frustrated.

Now, with the appeal process complete, I need to escalate my complaint to a higher level of management.

I understand, let me transfer your concern to my supervisor, they will get back to you here on chat shortly.

Thank you for your time and consideration, Ashyy.

Thanks for waiting! All of our specialists are still engaged at the moment. Let me go ahead and convert this chat to email. Rest assured that you will receive an email from us in the next 24 hours.

I'll be ending the chat now. Please feel free to reach out again if you need further assistance. Have a great day!

I am happy to wait. [2:44 PM]

Thanks for contacting YouTube. Have a great day.

[Now, more than ever:] Comedy Makes Enemies, Politics Makes Friends.

Uploaded to à-bas-le-ciel for the first time.

LINK: https://youtu.be/cBVGeH2B0hQ

The campaign to get à-bas-le-ciel banned from Youtube, 2024–2025: a campaign consisting, perhaps, of just one man?

• "The problem here is not a misinterpretation of the definition of hate speech…"

• "This is not something that has happened accidentally: this is not the result of an algorithm responding to a word-search."  

——————————

Welcome! Your Case ID is 8-7390000039423.
Refer to this if you need to contact us again.

Shai · 9:45 AM

Hi my name is Shai, how are you doing today?

Hello, Shai.

Hi there!

I am in a very serious situation:

How can I help you today?

someone at youtube is trying to (cynically) ban my channel.

Within the last few hours, three different videos have been (insincerely) banned as hate speech: my channel is going to be banned / deleted. This happened before, approximately one year ago, in exactly the same way.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZMBWEewOamE

I'm sorry to hear about that.

Thanks for sharing the video link.

I need an independent reviewer to look at my channel, and to look at the three videos now (suddenly) banned as hate speech: it cannot be the same person who has made the decision to ban them.

When I clicked on "human review" (today and one year ago) the review happened instantly:

normally, it is not such a fast process.

It is quite suspicious that these videos were banned, and the human review happened so quickly.

I see. Thanks for sharing the details.

Right now, my channel is (suddenly) facing "three strikes" for hate speech: none of the videos contain hate speech. They are not even discussing racism.

In the short video I sent you (already) you can see that there is just a mathematical chart on screen:

the video has been banned for hate speech at a moment flagged with a statistical discussion of the declining popularity of the vegan movement.

I'm sorry to hear about that. Can you share the video URL that received the violation?

I know you do not have a lot of time to investigate this in depth, but I already made a youtube video showing the details of what happened one year ago, when the same employee (or employees, plural) at youtube banned my channel, with false claims that specific videos contained hate speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcgy9PNWAEA

This is not something that has happened accidentally:

this is not the result of an algorithm responding to a word-search.

Thanks for sharing the video URL.

Someone inside youtube is breaking the rules, intentionally.

One of youtube's employees (or more than one) is very intentionally lying.

This happened one year ago, and it is happening again today.

Thanks for all the details you shared.

I know how important it is for you to have this issue sorted out. No worries, I got you and I'm more than willing to check this out for you.

(1) I am reporting employee misconduct within youtube. (2) I am reporting the intentional misuse of the censorship system against hate speech. (3) I am reporting that my own channel is about to be deleted (banned) again —this happened in the same way approximately one year ago, as I just mentioned. I really need this case to be escalated to higher levels of management on an emergency basis.

Thank you for listing all your request.

First off, your 1st and 2nd request is only possible with sending a feedback through this link : https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/4347644

As for your 3rd request, let me go ahead and check your channel first.

This is the channel url in question right? https://www.youtube.com/heijinzhengzhi

The problem here is not a misinterpretation of the definition of hate speech: all three "strikes" have come in (on old videos that nobody is watching anymore) simultaneously. And look at how little time elapsed between my requesting human review and the response from the reviewer. A youtube employee is doing this intentionally, again. One person at youtube (or more than one person) is contriving a pretext to ban my channel.

I understand where you're coming from.

Can you share a screenshot of the 3 violations you're seeing on your end?

The first two arrived at 7:27 AM and 7:28 AM. Does that sound normal to you? Does that sound possible to you?

I received the two emails, for two Community Rights Violations, one minute apart.

It is not possible these were based on complaints from the audience. It is not possible this is the result of the normal process of community guideline review.

I do understand your point, it's just that I can only see 1 Community Guideline violation here on your channel that's why I am asking for a screenshot of what you're seeing on your Studio.

The first video I sent you:

did you watch it?

It is only a few seconds long.

Exhibit01.png

Yes, I did watch it. I needed the actual video link that you're explaining in the video.

^ You asked for a screenshot.

^ That screenshot shows "three strikes".

All of a sudden, three different videos are marked as "hate speech". None of them contain hate speech. This is intentional misconduct by a youtube employee: it is a kind of corruption.

I see. Thanks for the screenshot. Can you confirm that this violation is under this channel : https://www.youtube.com/heijinzhengzhi

You say: "Yes, I did watch it. I needed the actual video link that you're explaining in the video."

https://youtu.be/xdEhTXBU_KI

^ That is the video. And the timestamp for the "hate speech" violation is 1:43 (as you could see in the short video).

This is really an emergency: I hope that someone at a higher level of management can intervene.

Thank you for confirming.

To help you better with this one, I'll just place our chat on hold for 3-5 minutes. Please stay connected.\

I will stay connected.

Please give me few more minutes here.

I am happy to wait:

this is a very difficult case,

and there is a long record of prior correspondence with youtube about it.

I do not know if you (at your computer) can see the evidence of the earlier decision to ban (and then unban) my channel:

July 14th, I received the email, "After taking another look, we can confirm that your channel does not violate our Community Guidelines."

^ This is really very important.

Thanks for patiently waiting. Are you there?

Yes. Can I show you a screenshot of the July 14th email from youtube?

Exhibit02.png

As per checking here, the violations you received is a bundle violation and it is counted as 1.

I’ve checked your channel and it appears that the enforcement action on your content has already been appealed on YouTube Studio. This means that a human reviewer was able to reevaluate your content and was able to determine that it does violate our Community Guidelines.

Your video is under 10 minutes the reason for the quick review.

I know that the result is something that creators like you wouldn't like to hear because of the hard work and time you've given to every content on your channel. We appreciate that you're always making sure that your channel doesn't violate any policies as it's also our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all.

You may check this: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801939?

I need you to escalate this to management:

the decision made today (by a human reviewer) is an example of egregious misconduct.

I need to escalate this to a higher level of review.

Please note that my manager uses the same resources and will share the same information with you.

Good: let me talk to your manager.

You can schedule me to speak to your manager.

I need to talk to the manager.

Alright, kindly stay connected.

We have an egregious example of employee misconduct within youtube: that "human review" you're talking about is important evidence.

Thank you, Shai, for your time and consideration.

You’re connected with agent Ark.

10:25 AM

Hi there! This is Ark, a manager from the YouTube Support Experience team.

Hello, Ark.

I assume you need a few minutes to read the correspondence above, and to look at some of the attached videos and images.

Hi, please allow me a moment to go over your previous interaction. Thanks!

That would be correct.

Hold on, please.

`Thanks for waiting. I understand you've reached out today because you've received enforcement actions on your videos, which you mentioned have not violated any policies and may have been falsely flagged.

Thank you for taking the time to read through these messages, Ark. The situation is a little bit more complicated, because…

(1) This happened before. Exactly the same thing happened one year ago, resulting in all of my youtube channels being banned-and-deleted.

I am sharing this image for a second time:

Exhibit02.png

Yes, I totally understand what you mean. This was only a summary of what transpired. But, I've also viewed all the details you've provided.

No need to repeat the mentioned details, I've got it noted.

(2) All of the evidence indicates that this is not happening accidentally: these are decisions being ade [sic] intentionally by a human being. In the first video link I sent…

(I will now send it again:) https://youtube.com/shorts/ZMBWEewOamE

…you can see that this is just a discussion of statistics (about veganism, not about race).

(Source video, again:) https://youtu.be/xdEhTXBU_KI

Someone inside youtube intentionally (and very rapidly) marked three different videos as hate speech.

They do not contain hate speech. And this is the same pattern (exactly the same set of actions) that happened one year ago.

Sometimes "hate speech" is a matter of subtle interpretation:

this is not a problem of interpretation or misinterpretation (in these videos, on my channel).

I get your point, no worries at all. That being said, please allow me some time to fully review all the details here to ensure that I fully understand the context of your concern. I'll be checking your channel now along with the videos.

I'll be right back, please give me 5 minutes. Thanks!

This same moment (of this black man complaining about difficulties in his own life: he complains that his own mother was too religious, for example) was used as an excuse to delete my youtube channel one year ago.

Exhibit03.png

^ I know you do not have time to watch these videos in full, but you will recognize his face (the black man complaining about various sorrows in his life) in this screenshot, above, comparing it to the following timestamp in the following video…

https://youtu.be/zcgy9PNWAEA?si=HxAa-cruef6c0dTF&t=720

^ At the 12:00 mark (twelve minute mark)

this is the same man, complaining about his life.

This is not hate speech.

However, it is significant that the same youtube employee(s) found this example (of this back [sic] man complaining) to create a kind of hoax, claiming that I am guilty of hate speech, approximately one year later.

I appreciate you adding more details. I'm still checking a few more things here, kindly give me 5 more minutes of your time.

I am happy to wait.

BTW, sorry about that typo:

I have "back man" as an error for "black man", above.

Thank you so much for waiting!

Are we still connected?

I say again: I am happy to wait.

Perfect. Just checking in. Alright, I've reviewed all the details here and just to help you out, I will be requesting assistance from our internal reviewers to have this re-reviewed again ALONG with the context you've provided today.

If you have any other details to add, I'll pass it along to the team.

Thank you very much...

I think there are further details that may be important.

Sure thing, I'll wait for you.

On Oct. 10th, 2024, remarkably little time elapsed when the decision to delete my channel was made: I do not believe the original decision went through the proper process of review. I did not receive the normal "three strikes" process. I did not receive notification of a single example of one of my videos that violated the rule in question with a time-stamp. Youtube told me "a single case of severe abuse… can cause channel termination without a warning or a strike and that's what happened to your channel." I genuinely do not know of a single example of this kind, but if one video breaks the rule, ban that one video, not the channel. On June 14th, 2025, youtube admitted the error, and my main channel was reinstated, after a 9 month ban: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWPKJM4CT6ES2BrUz9wbELw

^ The three videos that were banned (circa October 10th, 2024) have remained banned.

^ These three videos do not contain hate speech, and I prove this in my more recent video (link already shared above) discussing what happened and why.

To be clear, what I mean to say is, this (more recent) video contains the evidence of exactly what the original videos did say (that was insincerely and erroneously flagged as hate speech).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcgy9PNWAEA

Some details about who I am should be stated briefly: they are important (in judgements about hate speech).

(I'm still here btw, just letting you finish as I can still see you typing. Do let me know when you're done.)

My ethnicity is Jewish.

Ethnically, I am Jewish.

In the past, years ago, I can remember one of my videos being flagged as hate speech, but I was just talking about other people being racist against me (because I am Jewish, i.e., antisemitism).

https://youtu.be/RE-pSfgQzvk

^ This video shows me talking to my daughter (about antisemitism).

I am an atheist, but my ethnicity is Jewish: this is significant in the evaluation of some of my videos criticizing racism.

The person at youtube [who is marking these videos as hate speech] has repeatedly made use of quotations from this black man (who is not me, he is another person being quoted) as if he is being racist, and therefore I am guilty of racist hate speech. The black man is shown here, in a screenshot of the video that was banned today (banned just within the last few hours).

Exhibit03.png

It is possible that the excuse for banning my videos (and banning my channel) as hate speech relies on confusion about who I am (in these videos) and who is being quoted or criticized (i.e., even if I quote someone who is racist, that does not mean I am racist, if I am criticizing them).

On July 14th, I did not receive any detailed explanation from youtube: whoever did the human review apparently thought the earlier decision to ban my channel was ridiculous, and the decision (to unban my channel) was apparently simple. However, today, I have learned that I am still in danger of the same thing happening again and again.

I hope that my channel will have some kind of long term protection against this kind of cynical misinterpretation of hate speech in the future.

It is terrifying to see that exactly the same tactics can be used by youtube employees (to contrive to ban my channel) at any time.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Do you have any questions for me?

Is there any more information or evidence you would like from my side?

I believe you've already provided sufficient context here. But, if I do require additional information. I'll let you know via email. With that, can I contact you via [EMAIL ADDRESS]?

Yes, that is still an email account I use every day.

Perfect, thanks for confirming. I'll be in touch within 24 hours.

Thank you, again, for your time and consideration.

If you have any other concerns aside from this one, please feel free to reach out anytime.

11:03 AM

When being banned on youtube leads to being banned in real life. ;-)

Notoriety hath its privileges.

[Meanwhile:] The still-ongoing debunking of Carlos Castaneda AND his PhD in Anthropology.

This article was published in 2024. Good luck finding a comedian willing to satirize it.

Perhaps nobody did more to discredit Anthropology as a science, as a university subject, and as a profession. I can't exactly say he's discredited religion, now can I?

Wallace’s account of her first “encounter” with Castaneda is chillingly clinical. His explanation of the act as a spiritual necessity to her is as bizarre as it is unsettling.

“You have to give your poto to the nagual,” Castaneda tells Wallace. Sex with him is not for pleasure, he claims. Sex is for sorcery reasons.

“For magical purposes we must have a ‘close encounter,’ ” he says. “It’s the only way left to us.… The hole between a woman’s legs is magic and when the nagual leaves his juice inside it goes directly to her brain.… It’s the fastest way.”

She is playful in response, not believing him. He is in his late 60s. He was friends with her father. She is 30 years younger. “Oh, are you a dirty old man guru, then?” she says.

“This is a serious proposition, chola!”

She isn’t interested. But Castaneda is relentless in calling her. Three times a day. Six times a day. Eventually, she relents. For their first time, they drive to a motel on Wilshire Boulevard. He doesn’t use a condom, claiming he has supernatural powers.

“Hey, you better not have gotten me pregnant,” she says.

“Me make you pregnant? Impossible! The nagual’s sperm isn’t human. It doesn’t match your juices. You’re human!”

The experience is cold, odd. She doesn’t want to repeat it, and she tells him so.

“That’s fine, chica, that’s fine,” she recalls him saying. “But let me tell you, being around the nagual is like being on a drug.… You’ll have to rest after seeing me. But you’ll want more of this drug.”

Despite her refusals, his calls kept coming, morning and night, as if he were always there. He oscillated between being sweet and romantic and erupting in rage. “You whore!” he said on more than one occasion. “You’re spoiled rotten—born with a silver spoon—up your culo!”

Link to the full (book length?) article: www.altaonline.com/dispatches/a60923618/carlos-castaneda-cult-geoffrey-gray/

Now tell me, honestly, do you suppose anyone can really understand the life of the body without also, in contrast, understanding the life of the mind? These believers drape the clothing of a human being over an animal, and wrap the skin of a wild animal over an exceedingly domesticated human being, trying to figure out which one excites them more --and then grow old, without understanding what it once meant to be young.

Charlie Kirk is Dead: World's First Global Warming Fatality.

 

a.k.a. Jimmy Kimmel vs Charlie Kirk: Cancelgeddon 2025.

LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoQalSicbnk

[Other voices:] The original sin of mixing philosophy and autobiography.

Mixing the earnestness of philosophy with the deceptive art of autobiography soon enough turns the author into a figment of his own imagination. Even the most well-intentioned among us can fall prey to the pattern that makes anthropologists into cult leaders, as who we are becomes an aspect of what we teach, and increasingly we are forced to fictionalize who we are as a mere instrument of that instruction.

This is a mistake I would never make myself, you understand: one of the most influential authors of the 20th century (lamentably) was Tuesday Lobsang Rampa —although the extent to which that was his real name, or he ever was a real person, or how many of the books attributed to that name were actually written by him, is all very dubious indeed.

I am reasonably certain that the one book he claimed was written by his own cat ("Fifi Greywhiskers") was in fact entirely written by a human being.