Yeet_far
17d ago
spelling: oops, thanks!
content: Interesting. I have had a very different experience, but I think we tend to follow very different types of youtube channels.
However, this is kind of irrelevant to my original point. The statement I was responding to was simply:
I mean, ideally I'd be able to pay the individual channels that I like watching money, based on my usage, and have YouTube take some percentage of that.
Given that my only option though is to pay $13.99 directly to YouTube, I think I'll pass
My point is that you can do that, right now. You can give money to specific channels you like. You don't even have to give youtube anything. If you claim to want to be able to pay channels individually, go do that. It'll get you away from the (much more annoying) youtube ads, at least.
Or, like, get a Nebula subscription. They have exactly that model, and no ads on any of their videos at all.
???
Does it not?
Watching videos on Patreon definitely gets rid of youtube ads. And the only creators I've ever followed on Patreon have Patreon cuts without internal ads. I guess there could be someone who doesn't edit out the ads in the Patreon version of their videos? But that would be a bit shit and I certainly wouldn't give them my money.
Is there a specific creator you're thinking of that has a Patreon with ads?
*edit: spelling
Yeet_far
17d ago
Many (most?) youtube channels have patreons where you can actually do that. Usually with extra perks.
Yeet_far
20d ago
In the US context, he's mostly wrong, yeah?
Depending on your political alignment, "best president" lists vary widely, but I don't think I've ever seen one where adding territory was a particularly important criterion? It's not nothing, but domestic economics and policies (JFK on one end or Regan on the other) tend to generally be considered more important that territorial expansion?
Or winning wars (Washington, Lincoln, FDR), I guess, but most of those didn't actually come with territory.
The US is so big already and has so much wilderness already that adding more doesn't really move the needle all that much.
Do you think adding territory is what great leaders do in the modern day? Are there specific leaders you're thinking of?
...and? Do you support them?
More options
Context Copy link