🐷 Ethan Oliver Ralph / TheRalphRetort / Rad Roberts / Jcaesar187 / Rage Pig / "Killstream" / "Tequila Sunrise" - 5'1'' fat alcoholic, owner of a gunt, convicted felon and revenge pornographer, property of the ugly failed tranny pornstar Lucas Roberts. Has quadruple titties.

[DunrikNurd]

There is still a stream. It's not on the ideal platform, but I'd much prefer some obscure competitor's server crashing due to new traffic over neutering yourself to conform to the monopoly's increasingly narrow policies.

TRR have lost! No youtube, no fight, no fun. Just a bunch of boring nobodies with limited vocabulary taking about shit nobody cares about on a platform nobody knows. Mr Ralph wasn't smart enough to stay in the game. The stuttering foolski is soon to follow.

Don't kid yourself. Nobody really cares about the cancer kids. Not the MSM, not the nazi larpers.

 

[PREACHERGOKU]

TRR have lost! No youtube, no fight, no fun. Just a bunch of boring nobodies with limited vocabulary taking about shit nobody cares about on a platform nobody knows. Mr Ralph wasn't smart enough to stay in the game. The stuttering foolski is soon to follow.

Don't kid yourself. Nobody really cares about the cancer kids. Not the MSM, not the nazi larpers.

I care about cancer kids. Jokes aside I think Ralphs showing on a never heard before platform shows that he does have an audience.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

That's nothing special. Even fat women who do nothing but eating lard have an audience.

I wouldn't be so sure that the big tech companies can't harm him just because he streams on another western or foreign platform.

 

[DunrikNurd]

I care about cancer kids. Jokes aside I think Ralphs showing on a never heard before platform shows that he does have an audience.

Of course he has an audience now, but for how long? The hashtag he made will soon get old and he will be forgotten.

Misunderstand me correctly, I'm not happy that he got booted or his healstream destroyed, but he is off YT, he lost.

 

[PREACHERGOKU]

Of course he has an audience now, but for how long? The hashtag he made will soon get old and he will be forgotten.

Misunderstand me correctly, I'm not happy that he got booted or his healstream destroyed, but he is off YT, he lost.

Uh what exactly has he lost though, he still has his audience he's still making money, if anything he's gained some more exposure. I think even he figured they wouldn't last long on YouTube.

Edit: ah perhaps you mean that since he's off YouTube he'll fall into irrelevance, maybe we'll just have to see.

 

[cecograph]

Youtube loses money anyway. It doesn't matter to google. Youtube is a lab for their machine learning programs

Yeah, but if I were the controller of Google's machine learning eldritch abomination, I'd want absolutely everyone and everything on youtube, no censorship, so I could feed my creation on the unfiltered shitshow that is humans on the internet.

What youtube is doing here actively goes against the interests of the poor insane machine learning engineers at its cold cold heart.

 

[Spectre_06]

WSJ officially has the "story" up, after saying they were waffling on publishing it previously. If you don't have a subscription, I'll provide the story to you.

Spoiler

After Robert Bowers stormed the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh on Oct. 27, far-right personality Ethan Ralph launched a live stream on YouTube to discuss the shooting that claimed 11 lives. Soon, some viewers began paying to have their comments featured on the live chat scrolling alongside the streaming video, through a feature YouTube launched last year called Super Chat.

During the live stream, which YouTube said Mr. Ralph has since deleted, one user paid two British pounds to write, “How u get a Jewish girls number? Roll up her sleeve.” Another viewer paid $5 and wrote: “If you want to know if the Synagogue shooting was a false flag then check out the lucky Larry life insurance policies on those dead Jews.”


YouTube said late on Friday that it had permanently removed Mr. Ralph’s channel, “Ralph Retort,” from its platform for policy violations and for going against its terms of service.

Mr. Ralph, whose channel had 22,500 subscribers, is one of several far-right YouTube celebrities who have used the Super Chat function to make money. Topics among such users can be wide-ranging, from events like the tragedy in Pittsburgh and the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to critiques of the media and internal debates among members of the far-right online communities.

Most Super Chats generate a few hundred dollars in revenue, according to an analysis conducted for The Wall Street Journal, with YouTube typically collecting 30%, people familiar with the matter said.

A spokeswoman for YouTube, owned by Alphabet Inc.’s Google, said the company donates to charity the proceeds from any Super Chats that violate its hate-speech policy.

“Hate speech and content that promotes violence is prohibited on YouTube,” the spokeswoman said. “We have also been working over the last several months to refine our policies on who has access to monetization features, and while this work is ongoing, we are dedicated to continuing to improve in the fight against hate online.”

Like other popular social-media platforms, YouTube has struggled to draw the line between cracking down on hate speech and allowing freedom of expression. The company relies on a sprawling ecosystem of “creators” to supply a steady flow of content to the world’s most popular video site, where they get access to special benefits and resources on the platform.

Super Chat was launched last year to further encourage those creators to produce more content and attract more viewers. Paid comments receive special treatment: The video host often reads the comment out loud on air, and it gets pinned to the top of the fast-moving chat thread. The more someone pays, the longer the comment stays featured at the top of the chat box.

While the Super Chat function is available to YouTube’s vast cast of video celebrities, and was made primarily to appeal to gamers, it hasn’t gained the same traction or scale among those groups as it has with the far-right crowd, according to an analysis by Storyful, a social-media intelligence firm that is owned by News Corp, the Journal’s parent company.

Racist comments are not uncommon. Just as troubling, according to researchers, are the comments that stay within YouTube’s guidelines to avoid getting taken down through the use of coded language in place of hot-button topics and slurs. For instance, some commenters use the term “basketball Americans” rather than a slur against African-Americans and “population replacement” when referring to conspiracies about white genocide. Some users spell certain words with numbers to avoid detection by YouTube software.


Many payments, for example, are made in the amount of $14.88—the number 1488 is often used as shorthand among white supremacists to signify their ideology, and related merchandise is often sold for $14.88.

“What they’re doing is transmitting these ideas in other ways,” said one researcher. The researcher has been targeted in the past by white supremacists and other members of the far-right fringes.

After a BuzzFeed article in May detailed the popularity of Super Chats among white nationalists and other far-right personalities, YouTube said it had started using machine-learning technology that can detect hateful comments and put them on hold for further review. The company doesn’t disclose how much it makes from Super Chats overall.

When YouTube temporarily suspends a channel for a violation, that creator often appears as a guest on a like-minded person’s channel until the ban is lifted. The problem for YouTube, said this researcher, is that “YouTube is going to be continuously trying to apply a technological fix to what is a social problem.”

Mr. Ralph didn’t respond to a request for comment. On Thursday evening, after the Journal approached YouTube with questions for this article, Mr. Ralph opened a new live stream by reading what he said was a Super Chat submitted earlier in the day, in which the viewer wrote “Abort Hebrew babies.” The stream continued for more than 20 minutes before it was shut down for violating YouTube’s policy on hate speech, according to a notice posted on his Twitter account. Mr. Ralph then shifted to another channel and continued for several minutes before that also was shut down.

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital this week arranged to return donations raised in September during a live stream by Mr. Ralph dubbed a “Super Chat for Good,” even as the comments section became populated by anti-Semitic comments and the hosts talked about a Holocaust meme. The money totaled about $26,000. Many on Twitter complained Friday about having their donations returned to them. They also attacked the Journal and members of its staff, blaming the news organization for the return of the money.

When contacted earlier in the week, St. Jude said it was aware of the chats and was making arrangements to reverse any donations. On Friday, a spokesperson said: “We had no intention of receiving or accepting any of the funds associated with the live stream.”

Following the Journal’s questions, YouTube also took down a live stream by far-right personality Jean-François Gariépy that was broadcast after the Pittsburgh shooting and included a number of anti-Semitic and racist comments in the paid Super Chats.

Mr. Gariépy said his channel doesn’t allow hate speech and that he tries to delete Super Chats that “are either hateful or that constitute calls for violence.” He said his channel has banned thousands of viewers from his channel for repeatedly violating that policy.

Mr. Gariépy, who calls himself a white nationalist, said he doesn’t see a problem with people referencing 14/88 or Hitler, saying such comments “are aimed at encouraging people to gain a better historical understanding of Germany during the first half of the century.” He added that it would be easy for YouTube to prohibit donations made in that amount “if they differ from my interpretation.”

Mr. Gariépy’s live stream in the wake of Pittsburgh generated $244 in revenue, according to the Storyful analysis.

Write to Yoree Koh at yoree.koh@wsj.com

Corrections & Amplifications
YouTube said Ethan Ralph deleted a video he posted about a shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that YouTube deleted the video. (Nov. 2, 201

 

[DunrikNurd]

Uh what exactly has he lost though, he still has his audience he's still making money, if anything he's gained some more exposure. I think even he figured they wouldn't last long on YouTube.

We'll see in a couple of weeks or probably already at the end of next week. If I'm proven wrong, good for him.

 

[AltisticRight]

At least WSJ pwned those shitposters and evil right wingers. Thanks to an ugly Malaysian gook getting her feelz hurt

 

[Particle Bored]

I think that's only for the front-end.

You're probably right, that's probably why the stream was still viewable on VNC when they crashed the site.

 

[AltisticRight]

TRR have lost! No youtube, no fight, no fun. Just a bunch of boring nobodies with limited vocabulary taking about shit nobody cares about on a platform nobody knows. Mr Ralph wasn't smart enough to stay in the game. The stuttering foolski is soon to follow.

Don't kid yourself. Nobody really cares about the cancer kids. Not the MSM, not the nazi larpers.

You go around constantly stating no one cares in a forum thread that went from like 10 pages to 100 in a day, about 3 hosts that pulled in about 4000-5000 at peak on a website that's not YouTube. 5000 live viewers on YouTube is already extremely successful.

You're even in the thread constantly replying. So much for "no 1 cares". Totally, just like how Taylor Swift tells us she doesn't care about her exes and haters in the songs she produced specifically addressing the haters and exes. This nihilism is going no where.

 

[Super-Chevy454]

Uh what exactly has he lost though, he still has his audience he's still making money, if anything he's gained some more exposure. I think even he figured they wouldn't last long on YouTube.

Edit: ah perhaps you mean that since he's off YouTube he'll fall into irrelevance, maybe we'll just have to see.

I guess he might get a Bitchute account like Styxhexenhammer666 and others. The guys of Infowars interviewed Ralph https://www.bitchute.com/video/K0ZmWsp5Wt2w/

I also saw this vlog talking about the WSJ and Ethan Ralph.

 

[horsemeat69]

Hot damn this thread moves fast. Something like 30 pages in a day.
Was last nights stream uploaded anywhere? I normally rely on the archive channels to get up to speed, but they've all been nuked.

Ive only caught Ethans appearance on Andy's stream before he went live.

 

[Zilortha]

You go around constantly stating no one cares in a forum thread that went from like 10 pages to 100 in a day, about 3 hosts that pulled in about 4000-5000 at peak on a website that's not YouTube. 5000 live viewers on YouTube is already extremely successful.

You're even in the thread constantly replying. So much for "no 1 cares". Totally, just like how Taylor Swift tells us she doesn't care about her exes and haters in the songs she produced specifically addressing the haters and exes. This nihilism is going no where.

Yeah, I mean tonight he had over 6000 viewers on a generally unknown platform that was rapidly breaking down.

Even if he does lose some of his audience, he'd still be fine. If he lost half his audience right now (though I wouldn't see why he would. I can see them failing to grow at the same rate as before, but I see no reason a large swath of his audience would abandon him because of a platform change) he'd still have thousands of people watching him. The stream would still be out-competing many Youtube streams lol.

Add in someone like Warski (and potentially others) moving to the site, and it really could become a hub for "alternative" content (for a while at least). They'd likely come after DLive at that point, but it's hard to say how that would play out.

Honestly, I'm about all of this.

 

[DunrikNurd]

You go around constantly stating no one cares in a forum thread that went from like 10 pages to 100 in a day, about 3 hosts that pulled in about 4000-5000 at peak on a website that's not YouTube. 5000 live viewers on YouTube is already extremely successful.

You're even in the thread constantly replying. So much for "no 1 cares". Totally, just like how Taylor Swift tells us she doesn't care about her exes and haters in the songs she produced specifically addressing the haters and exes. This nihilism is going no where.

Who is Taylor Swift? Wait, don't answer, don't care.

I didn't mean "no one" literally, but I guess I have to be more precise in the future since some of you obviously are on the spectrum.

I'm glad you are impressed with 4000-5000, thats about the same amount that follows the 24/7 stream of the subscriber battle between pewdiepie and those indians.

I hope you all honour Mr Ralphs memory and still will donate to the cancer kids without the help of youtube

 

[broilerrx]

I got my refund. Took a while for the email to show up, especially for the time it listed. As Keem said on Twitter, even the non-offensive chats are being refunded, for anyone still asking. My Superchat was merely stating my support for the show.

 

[JustStopDude]

As Keem said on Twitter, even the non-offensive chats are being refunded, for anyone still asking. My Superchat was merely stating my support for the show.

Because the issue that St Jude has isn't the content of the individual super chats. Its the content of the stream. They can't have anything to do with it from a PR standpoint.

 

[Sonork]

Because the issue that St Jude has isn't the content of the individual super chats. Its the content of the stream. They can't have anything to do with it from a PR standpoint.

No, the issue St Judes has is being approached by a reporter and pushed for comment because a bunch of autists on the internet raised almost $30,000 for charity

 

[BoingBoingBoi]

it would be sad but i think this is gonna happen

jim has the benefit of hindsight here so he might be able to keep himself live at least even if he cant get superchats.

the video content he puts out isnt even that problematic, it's basically just exposing and throwing profanity at autists, but his live streams are always full of segments like this:


like, random people writing shit like this in your chat is one thing, you can't control that, but when you actually repeat it on camera you are basically screaming "hey google look at me! fuck niggers and jews, heil hitler! what are you gonna do, ban me?" which is obviously not gonna go well forever

the thing is though that there's a difference between honestly "combating right wing neonazi white supremacist ideology" by moderating your platform and just plain old joke policing. they're actually doing the second thing, and i honestly can't tell if they're doing it self-consciously or are too stupid to realize that it's what they're doing.

that is to say, for every 1 person unironically supporting the idea of an ethnostate, sincerely buying into a legit antisemitic conspiracy, supporting hitler, etc, there are 10 people laughing about it, joking about it, and shitposting about it. furthermore, often, they're laughing at that 1 person who takes it too seriously.

i'll begrudgingly accept the reality that YT and other huge tech companies want to "clean up" their platforms and purge right wing wrongthink. but that's not at all what they're doing by nuking a channel with edgy superchats.

 

[Slimy Time]

So lads, what are the odds that this WSJ reporter will have a career left after this? Will internet autism be enough to get her sacked?

I find it funny that Youtubes solution to racist or derogatory Superchats was to donate them to charity as opposed to the content creator, but when the content creator does a charitable stream, only then will they not take money.