|
On March 16 2015 22:47 Penev wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 22:24 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm kind of annoyed with this thread, I have trouble explaining why. It just feels like it's a showdown between Winter and avilo, even though it's officially not, and I can't help but be on Winter's side.
On a sidenote there's something to be said about avilo and "hate speech" and "general assholery" rules There has been very little of that imo, I personally don't care for either one of them. Strange also to first condemn the polarization you think is present by actively engaging in it? :-S I suggest you read the full content of the linked reddit post and try to objectively form your opinion. It seems pretty clear to me
I'm not really condemning the polarization, just saying that's how the thread felt to me, which I was annoyed with as that's not how a thread like this should feel. Anyway I don't really care too much about streaming in general so I probably shouldn't have posted in the first place.
|
I'm not sure what the point of the TL live stream feature is..
Everyone knows the only stream you need is the Rotti stream =D
|
On March 16 2015 22:32 InDLegacy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 21:52 felisconcolori wrote:
Lots of low-post count people involved in the discussion. Always makes me wonder in a discussion like this one which has the potential to summon dramathurges.
In any case, TL is not a court. TL is not bound by the law in deciding who they wish to list where. TL and TL policy is solely up to the discretion and decisions of TL Staff. Given the usual moderation policies in use by TL, this kind of post spelling out policy for featured streamers goes above and beyond any "requirement" a reasonable person who's been reading TL for longer than a year or two might expect. Bravo.
To add on to that specific reasoning for two different individual decisions is a step even further. TL is an important place to the SC2 community, and I see no issues with them trying to maintain some quality control in their streaming features. If it burns you that they're making policy and enforcing it, might I suggest you go... wait, every single possible alternative site on the internet does the exact same thing. And usually without this much thought and exposition.
Not every site casts a guilty verdict in this context. Even though a lot of Winter supporters are replying to this thread questioning or disagreeing with the decision to unfeature Winter, I personally don't. I'm saying this having clearly been in support of Winter, even passionate as I'm sure has been obvious.
I actually agree with you on this one. Personally I think it's dumb to use someone's post-count or their alliance to a particular player/person against them in a discussion such as this. The post-count thing in particular is one of the things that I don't like about TL.net, and it contributes to the elitism thing.
First, they make an assumption based on what they are considering common sense. How can anyone assume why someone would viewbot a channel maliciously or not? Saying that such a person would keep the viewbots up when there is attention, the malicious intent would make more sense? Yet what if their line of thinking is that after an accusation is made, and a stream is suddenly dropped 1000 average viewers, that it looks more incriminating to them? There certainly have been many people who have pointed out there are far fewer viewers on average now viewing the stream. Those people saying it is because 'Winter turned them off due to the allegations'.
Also, I do agree that the possibility of someone malicious using viewbots as a way to attack a streamer's reputation is concerning. In the case of winter, I think it's highly unlikely that it's that. But I do agree that the precedent it sets is somewhat concerning. At the moment I guess all we can do is hope twitch figures out a way to detect these bots. Also, in the near future hopefully teamliquid will develop a policy for dealing with the situation where a streamer is being botted maliciously.
Ultimately, I think it would be nice if twitch would give streamers the option of IP-banning users from being able to watch their stream. Could potentially help out against malicious viewbotting and stream-cheating, which would be simply grand.
|
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start?
|
On March 16 2015 22:46 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 22:32 InDLegacy wrote:On March 16 2015 21:52 felisconcolori wrote:
Lots of low-post count people involved in the discussion. Always makes me wonder in a discussion like this one which has the potential to summon dramathurges.
In any case, TL is not a court. TL is not bound by the law in deciding who they wish to list where. TL and TL policy is solely up to the discretion and decisions of TL Staff. Given the usual moderation policies in use by TL, this kind of post spelling out policy for featured streamers goes above and beyond any "requirement" a reasonable person who's been reading TL for longer than a year or two might expect. Bravo.
To add on to that specific reasoning for two different individual decisions is a step even further. TL is an important place to the SC2 community, and I see no issues with them trying to maintain some quality control in their streaming features. If it burns you that they're making policy and enforcing it, might I suggest you go... wait, every single possible alternative site on the internet does the exact same thing. And usually without this much thought and exposition.
+ Show Spoiler +Not every site casts a guilty verdict in this context. Even though a lot of Winter supporters are replying to this thread questioning or disagreeing with the decision to unfeature Winter, I personally don't. I'm saying this having clearly been in support of Winter, even passionate as I'm sure has been obvious.
You say TL is not a court. But I ask you to reread the statement given by TL in regards to their decision to unfeature him.
"Similarly, the situation right now is another instance when someone with malicious intent would attempt to amplify the strength of the accusations against Winter. As such we conclude that the extensive history of Winter viewbotting is inconsistent with a third party doing this with malicious intent."
First, they make an assumption based on what they are considering common sense. How can anyone assume why someone would viewbot a channel maliciously or not? Saying that such a person would keep the viewbots up when there is attention, the malicious intent would make more sense? Yet what if their line of thinking is that after an accusation is made, and a stream is suddenly dropped 1000 average viewers, that it looks more incriminating to them? There certainly have been many people who have pointed out there are far fewer viewers on average now viewing the stream. Those people saying it is because 'Winter turned them off due to the allegations'.
Honestly? The version I just presented sounds silly. Just as silly as TL's assumption. Relating your value of money to the context is wrong as well. People have blown millions of dollars for far more trivial reasons.
Then they make the claim that in the 'scenario' where a viewer paid for the viewbots with or without Winter's knowledge still makes him a benefactor should make more sense.
TL isn't a court. Yet here it is reviewing evidence and judging a stronger possibility based on personal interpretation of evidence.
Telling your community "WE'RE PRETTY SURE HE KNEW WHAT WAS UP" is judgement. The kind that sticks to a person forever when it comes from a website so central to the community. This IS a verdict. One that will forever be cited by anyone with an aim to troll or disrupt. It is ammunition.
TL should have taken a back seat. They should remove Winter from the featured list. Even if they decided to remove him forever, simply due to how any possible factor of viewbots could always interfere with the conditions for being featured. It just should have stopped with the decision to remove Winter from the list, without this evidence review and interpretation. The fact that they are giving him a chance for review in six months is... nice? Anyone who supports Winter will consider it fair or be happy with it. Others will find it odd that you chose to damn someone then put them up for review.
At the end of the day. When Winter found out he was removed, he only had one thing to say about it before starting his next game on stream. "I'm no longer featured on teamliquid? That's ok, I can understand their decision." Dude, I think you forgot something. The fact that the OP looks like a judgement is irrelevant. You should probably consider it good enough that they give such a lenghty justification for removing Winter.
So you would fault me for even trying? Certainly that is not the impression this community aims to give. Is it? TL pulls weight. I believe a voice in support of Winter is needed. I shouldn't have to explain this any further.
|
On March 16 2015 23:02 InDLegacy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 22:46 OtherWorld wrote:On March 16 2015 22:32 InDLegacy wrote:On March 16 2015 21:52 felisconcolori wrote:
Lots of low-post count people involved in the discussion. Always makes me wonder in a discussion like this one which has the potential to summon dramathurges.
In any case, TL is not a court. TL is not bound by the law in deciding who they wish to list where. TL and TL policy is solely up to the discretion and decisions of TL Staff. Given the usual moderation policies in use by TL, this kind of post spelling out policy for featured streamers goes above and beyond any "requirement" a reasonable person who's been reading TL for longer than a year or two might expect. Bravo.
To add on to that specific reasoning for two different individual decisions is a step even further. TL is an important place to the SC2 community, and I see no issues with them trying to maintain some quality control in their streaming features. If it burns you that they're making policy and enforcing it, might I suggest you go... wait, every single possible alternative site on the internet does the exact same thing. And usually without this much thought and exposition.
+ Show Spoiler +Not every site casts a guilty verdict in this context. Even though a lot of Winter supporters are replying to this thread questioning or disagreeing with the decision to unfeature Winter, I personally don't. I'm saying this having clearly been in support of Winter, even passionate as I'm sure has been obvious.
You say TL is not a court. But I ask you to reread the statement given by TL in regards to their decision to unfeature him.
"Similarly, the situation right now is another instance when someone with malicious intent would attempt to amplify the strength of the accusations against Winter. As such we conclude that the extensive history of Winter viewbotting is inconsistent with a third party doing this with malicious intent."
First, they make an assumption based on what they are considering common sense. How can anyone assume why someone would viewbot a channel maliciously or not? Saying that such a person would keep the viewbots up when there is attention, the malicious intent would make more sense? Yet what if their line of thinking is that after an accusation is made, and a stream is suddenly dropped 1000 average viewers, that it looks more incriminating to them? There certainly have been many people who have pointed out there are far fewer viewers on average now viewing the stream. Those people saying it is because 'Winter turned them off due to the allegations'.
Honestly? The version I just presented sounds silly. Just as silly as TL's assumption. Relating your value of money to the context is wrong as well. People have blown millions of dollars for far more trivial reasons.
Then they make the claim that in the 'scenario' where a viewer paid for the viewbots with or without Winter's knowledge still makes him a benefactor should make more sense.
TL isn't a court. Yet here it is reviewing evidence and judging a stronger possibility based on personal interpretation of evidence.
Telling your community "WE'RE PRETTY SURE HE KNEW WHAT WAS UP" is judgement. The kind that sticks to a person forever when it comes from a website so central to the community. This IS a verdict. One that will forever be cited by anyone with an aim to troll or disrupt. It is ammunition.
TL should have taken a back seat. They should remove Winter from the featured list. Even if they decided to remove him forever, simply due to how any possible factor of viewbots could always interfere with the conditions for being featured. It just should have stopped with the decision to remove Winter from the list, without this evidence review and interpretation. The fact that they are giving him a chance for review in six months is... nice? Anyone who supports Winter will consider it fair or be happy with it. Others will find it odd that you chose to damn someone then put them up for review.
At the end of the day. When Winter found out he was removed, he only had one thing to say about it before starting his next game on stream. "I'm no longer featured on teamliquid? That's ok, I can understand their decision." Dude, I think you forgot something.
1. This is our house.
The fact that the OP looks like a judgement is irrelevant. You should probably consider it good enough that they give such a lenghty justification for removing Winter. So you would fault me for even trying? Certainly that is not the impression this community aims to give. Is it? TL pulls weight. I believe a voice in support of Winter is needed. I shouldn't have to explain this any further.
Well, if you are here to defend Winter and try to have him featured again, I think you would be better off discussing with mods or even creating a Website Feedback thread, because I clearly don't see how arguing with other forumers who, since this is the internet, won't change their opinion, and who have no power whatsoever about the featured streams, helps Winter in gaining back his featured status.
|
On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start?
I see this as a very good thing, because not getting featured on TL is not the death sentence for a stream. So the ROI for the one who wants to "hurt" the streamer is pretty low. An even so, there is a strange and twisted logic in blowing up someone's viewer numbers just to hurt him. Not to mention its costs.
One of my biggest fears in esports is some malevolent entity injecting cheats into the computers of people they don't like. It's harder to do than botting but I think we will see that sometime in the future.
|
On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start?
Not when you consider the monetary investment necessary to maintain the botting. Beyond that Naniwa and Stephano are existing personalities, Winter came completely out of left field with 2k viewers. It isn't like he was around in WoL.
|
On March 16 2015 23:04 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 23:02 InDLegacy wrote:On March 16 2015 22:46 OtherWorld wrote:On March 16 2015 22:32 InDLegacy wrote:On March 16 2015 21:52 felisconcolori wrote:
Lots of low-post count people involved in the discussion. Always makes me wonder in a discussion like this one which has the potential to summon dramathurges.
In any case, TL is not a court. TL is not bound by the law in deciding who they wish to list where. TL and TL policy is solely up to the discretion and decisions of TL Staff. Given the usual moderation policies in use by TL, this kind of post spelling out policy for featured streamers goes above and beyond any "requirement" a reasonable person who's been reading TL for longer than a year or two might expect. Bravo.
To add on to that specific reasoning for two different individual decisions is a step even further. TL is an important place to the SC2 community, and I see no issues with them trying to maintain some quality control in their streaming features. If it burns you that they're making policy and enforcing it, might I suggest you go... wait, every single possible alternative site on the internet does the exact same thing. And usually without this much thought and exposition.
+ Show Spoiler +Not every site casts a guilty verdict in this context. Even though a lot of Winter supporters are replying to this thread questioning or disagreeing with the decision to unfeature Winter, I personally don't. I'm saying this having clearly been in support of Winter, even passionate as I'm sure has been obvious.
You say TL is not a court. But I ask you to reread the statement given by TL in regards to their decision to unfeature him.
"Similarly, the situation right now is another instance when someone with malicious intent would attempt to amplify the strength of the accusations against Winter. As such we conclude that the extensive history of Winter viewbotting is inconsistent with a third party doing this with malicious intent."
First, they make an assumption based on what they are considering common sense. How can anyone assume why someone would viewbot a channel maliciously or not? Saying that such a person would keep the viewbots up when there is attention, the malicious intent would make more sense? Yet what if their line of thinking is that after an accusation is made, and a stream is suddenly dropped 1000 average viewers, that it looks more incriminating to them? There certainly have been many people who have pointed out there are far fewer viewers on average now viewing the stream. Those people saying it is because 'Winter turned them off due to the allegations'.
Honestly? The version I just presented sounds silly. Just as silly as TL's assumption. Relating your value of money to the context is wrong as well. People have blown millions of dollars for far more trivial reasons.
Then they make the claim that in the 'scenario' where a viewer paid for the viewbots with or without Winter's knowledge still makes him a benefactor should make more sense.
TL isn't a court. Yet here it is reviewing evidence and judging a stronger possibility based on personal interpretation of evidence.
Telling your community "WE'RE PRETTY SURE HE KNEW WHAT WAS UP" is judgement. The kind that sticks to a person forever when it comes from a website so central to the community. This IS a verdict. One that will forever be cited by anyone with an aim to troll or disrupt. It is ammunition.
TL should have taken a back seat. They should remove Winter from the featured list. Even if they decided to remove him forever, simply due to how any possible factor of viewbots could always interfere with the conditions for being featured. It just should have stopped with the decision to remove Winter from the list, without this evidence review and interpretation. The fact that they are giving him a chance for review in six months is... nice? Anyone who supports Winter will consider it fair or be happy with it. Others will find it odd that you chose to damn someone then put them up for review.
At the end of the day. When Winter found out he was removed, he only had one thing to say about it before starting his next game on stream. "I'm no longer featured on teamliquid? That's ok, I can understand their decision." Dude, I think you forgot something.
1. This is our house.
The fact that the OP looks like a judgement is irrelevant. You should probably consider it good enough that they give such a lenghty justification for removing Winter. So you would fault me for even trying? Certainly that is not the impression this community aims to give. Is it? TL pulls weight. I believe a voice in support of Winter is needed. I shouldn't have to explain this any further. Well, if you are here to defend Winter and try to have him featured again, I think you would be better off discussing with mods or even creating a Website Feedback thread, because I clearly don't see how arguing with other forumers who, since this is the internet, won't change their opinion, and who have no power whatsoever about the featured streams, helps Winter in gaining back his featured status.
I'm not trying to change your opinion. As some have pointed out that there seem to be more than a few fresh accounts posting on this topic. This is because this thread is getting a lot of traffic from people who don't normally visit the website. I'm sure this thread has been linked in Reddit and on Twatter. I saw it when it was linked in Winter's channel. If every post here was just people saying "Finally, he is getting what he deserved" etc. That is all the traffic will see. It does help my position just to have people see that Winter does still have support. And no I'm not saying I don't care about the topic. I've made my position clear and I've sought to debate people on their points, so I am contributing to the discussion.
|
"assholery"
I learned a new word today 
|
On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start?
I think winter was an extreme case. I mean he's been using over a thousand bots for over a year. And NickHotS did a very thorough investigation. So as long as they only unfeature streamers in extream 98% sure cases like this, I think we'll be fine.
Also, I'm hopeful that twitch might create some tools that would help broadcasters who are being maliciously viewbotted. One idea I just had that would be very simple to implement would be to give streamers a "viewer-cap setting", in other words, a streamer who knows about how many viewers they expect to get can set a cap wherein the viewer count will not go over the cap no matter how many viewers the server actually registered. That would make it much easier for honest streamers to help fight back against viewbotting. And if a streamer is honest and is cooperating and doing their best to solve the problem, then I would hope that TL would consider them for being featured.
|
On March 16 2015 23:09 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start? Not when you consider the monetary investment necessary to maintain the botting. Beyond that Naniwa and Stephano are existing personalities, Winter came completely out of left field with 2k viewers. It isn't like he was around in WoL.
I guess a lot of people don't realise that Winter was the rebranding of zlFreebird, who was around in wol, and stream from his garage for years/months with a handful of viewers, taking long time to build up to the 2k figures.
Don't get me wrong, I'm as much a fan of banning 'cheaters' as anyone, but asking someone to provide proof against an accusation, when you know full well there is zero way that proof can be given, even in an innocent case, does not seem like reasoned normal behaviour, it seems a bit pitchforky.
|
On March 16 2015 23:15 hZCube wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 23:09 ThomasjServo wrote:On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start? Not when you consider the monetary investment necessary to maintain the botting. Beyond that Naniwa and Stephano are existing personalities, Winter came completely out of left field with 2k viewers. It isn't like he was around in WoL. I guess a lot of people don't realise that Winter was the rebranding of zlFreebird, who was around in wol, and stream from his garage for years/months with a handful of viewers, taking long time to build up to the 2k figures. Don't get me wrong, I'm as much a fan of banning 'cheaters' as anyone, but asking someone to provide proof against an accusation, when you know full well there is zero way that proof can be given, even in an innocent case, does not seem like reasoned normal behaviour, it seems a bit pitchforky.
I actually didn't know about the rebranding till recently. (wintergaming's Channel Subscription (zlfreebird)) He has been around a lot longer than I had originally thought. He has said on occasion that he started playing early in WOL but I didn't know he had streamed back then.
|
What were the requirements for stuff outside of SC2 then? i see random streams featured for "other games" and "organizations". Shouldn't there be a set rule set for that stuff as well?
|
On March 16 2015 23:15 hZCube wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 23:09 ThomasjServo wrote:On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start? Not when you consider the monetary investment necessary to maintain the botting. Beyond that Naniwa and Stephano are existing personalities, Winter came completely out of left field with 2k viewers. It isn't like he was around in WoL. I guess a lot of people don't realise that Winter was the rebranding of zlFreebird, who was around in wol, and stream from his garage for years/months with a handful of viewers, taking long time to build up to the 2k figures. Don't get me wrong, I'm as much a fan of banning 'cheaters' as anyone, but asking someone to provide proof against an accusation, when you know full well there is zero way that proof can be given, even in an innocent case, does not seem like reasoned normal behaviour, it seems a bit pitchforky.
I had forgotten about the Freebird bit, you are right there, I guess the difference is that personally I think the evidence provided is convincing enough. It isn't like we're going to get a charge from a bank statement indicating Winter paid for the service,
If there are two options, that someone(s) is paying to fuck with Winter and viewbotting him, and poor him he gets bumped numbers and a lot of attention, or Winter is paying for the viewbots himself, it is really a question of Cui Bono. Even if I had a lot of money, I'm not pissing it away on some petty vendetta with a kid online. Winter stands to gain and has gained far more from the viewbots than the wishy washy, plan to soil Winter's reputation by viewbotting him ad infinitum.
|
On March 16 2015 21:07 danteafk wrote:
What's the deal here? Tasteless and Artosis scammed the community too, but no one did anything about it?
tasteless basically MADE the foreigner broodwar scene during his gom casts.. he could do whatever he wants and his legacy would still carry him, he's a baller. Artosis is also a legacy baller.. So is day9 with his broodwar dailies lol.
that being said, i don't agree with people like combatex being banned, he might have been a troll but he was still a B level protoss back in the day. However it doesn't really matter now that TL isn't the broodwar hub that it used to be, but back in the day bans were seriously damning community wise.
|
Remember, it would only cost like £20 a month to viewbot someone, and that would give them 1k+ viewers, which is the range Winter is being accused of? (order of magnitude).
Yeah, I can only imagine how hard it would be for, say, another streamer, to pay £20 a month... My understanding was that other semi-prominent twitch streamers earn significantly more than that. So, you're saying why would someone maliciously do it to Winter.
Are we forgetting that it's in other streamers interest to discredit and bring down viewership for their rivals, and to me, £20 a month seems a low cost for what in the real world would just be industrial sabotage.
Can nobody really let themselves entertain the *idea* that another streamer, who maybe wants to see Winter removed, could afford £20 a month to ruin him?
Just a thought...
Still, as all other conjectures in here, it'll be one that can never be proved...
|
On March 16 2015 23:15 hZCube wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 23:09 ThomasjServo wrote:On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start? Not when you consider the monetary investment necessary to maintain the botting. Beyond that Naniwa and Stephano are existing personalities, Winter came completely out of left field with 2k viewers. It isn't like he was around in WoL. I guess a lot of people don't realise that Winter was the rebranding of zlFreebird, who was around in wol, and stream from his garage for years/months with a handful of viewers, taking long time to build up to the 2k figures. Don't get me wrong, I'm as much a fan of banning 'cheaters' as anyone, but asking someone to provide proof against an accusation, when you know full well there is zero way that proof can be given, even in an innocent case, does not seem like reasoned normal behaviour, it seems a bit pitchforky.
There's no question his stream is inflated by viewbots
Evidence has recently surfaced that indicates that Winter's stream has been the target of viewbots for at least the past year. Winter's public explanation for this is that other users have been paying for the service against his wishes.
Just if he himself is responsible for it or not.
|
did I miss it? I didn't see any info on how to request streams to be added (that obviously meet one of those requirements mentioned).
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On March 16 2015 23:01 hZCube wrote:
Does this mean if I pay to have someone like Stephano or Naniwa viewbotted, I can have them removed from featured streams list - as I don't believe they'd be able to provide sufficient 'proof' (loose term here..) that it wasn't them?
Seems a very dangerous precedent to start?
I covered this in the HTOMario statement. We agree that it sets a dangerous precedent. However, we believe that not acting is a greater folly. Not de-featuring viewbotted streams punishes other streams that do their work legally, and shows aspiring streamers that it will be tolerated as long as they are sneaky about it. People are hurt either way, but we think this is best in the long run. In the case of HTOMario, he wasn't defeatured because of viewbotting. He was de-featured because his viewcount prior to being viewbotted was below the requirement. If you read the statement it covers a little bit about what happened with him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
