On July 13, 2020, YouTube deleted my main channel with nearly 60,000 subscribers. Fourteen years of labor and love that I spent building up a channel were gone in an instant. Since then, I’ve realized the folly of using any kind of Silicon Valley platform in order to present my work to the public.

The two biggest draws of the platform are the convenience and the user base. By the time you encounter a platform that could be useful, it already has tens of thousands—if not millions—of users. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could start sharing work that reaches those people, without having to set up your own website and painstakingly market to your intended audience?

It’s helpful that the platform exaggerates its own usefulness by implementing an algorithm to give followers and views to new users even if their content doesn’t warrant it. The honeymoon won’t last for long: soon the platform holds your followers hostage. Instead of showing followers your content, a platform like Facebook demands money from you to help “boost” your post—to those who already opted in to your work. Or how about YouTube, which refuses to notify your subscribers of a new video upload. Once the platform gets big enough, the algorithm is tweaked to maximize benefits for them, not exposure for you.

When using a platform, you’re essentially making a deal with the devil. You grant a perpetual license for your content to a corporation and submit to arbitrary and stifling rules in exchange for eyeballs, status, or fame. As long as you serve the will of the platform, the deal seems like it will have no cost, but as soon as you begin to think for yourself, or wish to create content that does not serve the prevailing agenda of the Jewish owner of the platform, you will be swiftly throttled or banned.

It’s no big deal if you get banned, because you can just take your subscribers elsewhere, right? Wrong, the platform has access to your subscriber list and will not let you contact them. When I was banned from YouTube, I had no way of contacting my 60,000 subscribers to let them know where they could find my future videos. While many of them were already familiar with my blog, half weren’t, because my videos since then have suffered a 50-60% drop in views. Perhaps they are still clicking reload on YouTube, wondering why I stopped making videos.

Jewish CEO of YouTube with cross-dressing YouTuber who is heavily promoted on the platform

The platform owns your subscribers while you own content which may not even be suitable anywhere else (e.g. TikTok videos, Twitter tweets). As they say in marketing, “The money is in the list.” If you don’t have the list of people who follow you that you can contact yourself, you have nothing. Compare that to using a service instead of a platform. If my hosting company shuts me down, I will simply find another host. If my newsletter email service shuts me down (which it did in January), I will import the email list that I regularly backup onto another service. They do not take my subscribers. But Twitter? DLive? Instagram? If they ban me, I lose access to my subscribers while the platform gets to keep the users that I brought to the service. They experience all upside from me using their platforms, and yet I have to withstand all the downside. I have skin in the game, they have none.

There are several platforms I’m still on, mostly independent in nature like Gab and Telegram, but I don’t plan on signing up for any new ones. Unless the platform gives me a subscriber list of email addresses—and the only one that I know that does that is Substack—it’s not worth it, because on a long enough timeline, everyone on a platform gets suspended, censored, or banned. I must admit that my influence will progressively decline. I will never have over 40,000 people watching my video live streams again, but that also means I will not be helping a homosexual-friendly company build their business on the backs of me and my followers.

I fell for the platform scam. I made a deal with the devil to receive more attention to my work, and at the peak of my ability to spread the truth during a critical juncture of American history, I had the rug pulled out from under me. I won’t make that deal again. From this point on, I will maintain a humble blog for a ragtag group of a few thousand people and not much more.

Read Next: The Influence Curve

Loading new replies...

I must admit that my influence will progressively decline.

I don't know a lot about your personality type, @Roosh but I'd appreciate hearing how you feel about attaining your ambitions as a man after everything that's happened to you. You strike me as someone who likes to make a mark even if you might be somewhat introverted. What's a man supposed to do in clownworld when the most mundane opinions get him banned and shunned?

Edit: and where most people are idiot NPCs.

Reply Like

I only just recently discovered Roosh, so I feel bad that I missed out on the tour/meet ups. Hopefully once all this SJW nonsense is over, we can have fun get-togethers like that again.

Reply 2 Likes

It amazes me that I found Roosh's work due to YouTube suggestions.

YouTube: "Would you like to watch a bearded man in a bumblebee shirt talk about stuffed animals and the Jews?"

Me: "Well, now that you mention it..."

Reply 18 Likes

Well done article.

At the end of the day, anyone who uses Big Tech platforms (Facebook, Insta, Twitter, Google, YouTube) is nothing more than a commodity to them. They use you for your data and keeping people engaged on their sites so their ads are more profitable.

As Roosh points out, it's not free. They own your data and if you cross the lines arbitrarily drawn by them, they will ban or demonetize you.

Meanwhile, the social media platforms are also used as a method of indoctrination for ideas and ideologies of certain groups and factions.

Reply 4 Likes

I know I'm probably not representative of the norm, but I found Roosh in the late 2000s, through manosphere blogs and that sort of thing. It wasn't until much later that I even realized he had YT or paid much attention to what was going on there.

Obviously deplatforming is a huge blow for growing an audience, but on the other hand... I'm old enough to remember a time when anybody with any sort of "following" spread through word-of-mouth and was primarily blog-based, because back then Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube didn't even exist yet. It seems that perhaps, in order to move forward, we have to go back to the way things were done on a more primitive Internet.

That is one reason why I think the persistence of this forum is important. Forums are considered by most to be a dead relic of an earlier Internet, but I've always found the format led to better discussion and substance than anything that followed. Although you won't have an audience in the multi-millions, it's still possible to succeed with your own blog and forum, and the people who show up are going to be higher quality than those coming from modern social media platforms.

What really surprises me is that Roosh hasn't been permabanned from Twitter yet. Especially considering it was his comments about the J___ws on Twitter that clearly led to the nuking of his YT channel a day or two later.

Reply 12 Likes

click to expand...

The priority of big tech is to promote the jewglobohomo agenda.

Reply Like

I've long been suspicious of any mainstream platform, and now I basically trust next to no information unless I find it in a relatively off-the-grid place. My entire life, I felt this innate suspicion toward anything too popular or mainstream. It's becoming more and more clear why. If we want to thrive, free people have to disconnect from the Matrix and create our own systems for supplying and sharing information, food, goods, medical care, everything.

Reply 8 Likes

M

I know I'm probably not representative of the norm, but I found Roosh in the late 2000s, through manosphere blogs and that sort of thing. It wasn't until much later that I even realized he had YT or paid much attention to what was going on there.

Obviously deplatforming is a huge blow for growing an audience, but on the other hand... I'm old enough to remember a time when anybody with any sort of "following" spread through word-of-mouth and was primarily blog-based, because back then Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube didn't even exist yet. It seems that perhaps, in order to move forward, we have to go back to the way things were done on a more primitive Internet.

That is one reason why I think the persistence of this forum is important. Forums are considered by most to be a dead relic of an earlier Internet, but I've always found the format led to better discussion and substance than anything that followed. Although you won't have an audience in the multi-millions, it's still possible to succeed with your own blog and forum, and the people who show up are going to be higher quality than those coming from modern social media platforms.

What really surprises me is that Roosh hasn't been permabanned from Twitter yet. Especially considering it was his comments about the J___ws on Twitter that clearly led to the nuking of his YT channel a day or two later.

indeed, blogs encourage higher quality discourse than say a YouTube comment section. Blogs may be preferred by people who grew up in the early days of the internet. Today, the money is made keeping young folks wading through infinity pools of content. Blogging for rag-tags is a noble cause, but it doesn’t put meals on the table. The early YouTube model was a wild west of sorts with a low bar of entry and high potential reward. It wasn’t going to stay that way forever. Happy to be a rat-tag follower either way.

Reply 2 Likes

click to expand...

I hope this a solution, and not controlled opposition. Rob Monstor of EPIK is a 'racist' Christian (according to wiki) and Gab is on his platform:

Reply 1 Like

click to expand...

Creators have to routinely ask their followers on any given platform for their contact information, 100% of everyone should be doing that. If the audience is belligerent creator can set a content release goal like a funding goal on patreon. For example: once creator has X amount of new email address from [insert pozzed service] creator will send out some exclusive content that caters to target niche and gives them a chance to interact with creator in a novel way. I guess it is sort of like a social media company's model of trading technical platform for user information, the creator is trading content/interaction for user information.

I would never shell out money for subscriptions or enter my contact information... except for all of the times I have ended up doing one or the other. I'm sure there are many things that Roosh could offer that would make me curious enough to shell out more than the cost of a single book, and if I'm willing to pay other people are willing to trade information. Billionaires are betting on fresh interaction methods (see a16z) because audience members love it.

Reply Like

click to expand...

Do you have a Bitchute channel? That seems to be a rapidly growing YewChube alternative.

Reply Like

Originally posted on RooshV.com


On July 13, 2020, YouTube deleted my main channel with nearly 60,000 subscribers. Fourteen years of labor and love that I spent building up a channel were gone in an instant. Since then, I’ve realized the folly of using any kind of Silicon Valley platform in order to present my work to the public.

The two biggest draws of the platform are the convenience and the user base. By the time you encounter a platform that could be useful, it already has tens of thousands—if not millions—of users. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could start sharing work that reaches those people, without having to set up your own website and painstakingly market to your intended audience?

It’s helpful that the platform exaggerates its own usefulness by implementing an algorithm to give followers and views to new users even if their content doesn’t warrant it. The honeymoon won’t last for long: soon the platform holds your followers hostage. Instead of showing followers your content, a platform like Facebook demands money from you to help “boost” your post—to those who already opted in to your work. Or how about YouTube, which refuses to notify your subscribers of a new video upload. Once the platform gets big enough, the algorithm is tweaked to maximize benefits for them, not exposure for you.

When using a platform, you’re essentially making a deal with the devil. You grant a perpetual license for your content to a corporation and submit to arbitrary and stifling rules in exchange for eyeballs, status, or fame. As long as you serve the will of the platform, the deal seems like it will have no cost, but as soon as you begin to think for yourself, or wish to create content that does not serve the prevailing agenda of the Jewish owner of the platform, you will be swiftly throttled or banned.

It’s no big deal if you get banned, because you can just take your subscribers elsewhere, right? Wrong, the platform has access to your subscriber list and will not let you contact them. When I was banned from YouTube, I had no way of contacting my 60,000 subscribers to let them know where they could find my future videos. While many of them were already familiar with my blog, half weren’t, because my videos since then have suffered a 50-60% drop in views. Perhaps they are still clicking reload on YouTube, wondering why I stopped making videos.


Jewish CEO of YouTube with cross-dressing YouTuber who is heavily promoted on the platform

The platform owns your subscribers while you own content which may not even be suitable anywhere else (e.g. TikTok videos, Twitter tweets). As they say in marketing, “The money is in the list.” If you don’t have the list of people who follow you that you can contact yourself, you have nothing. Compare that to using a service instead of a platform. If my hosting company shuts me down, I will simply find another host. If my newsletter email service shuts me down (which it did in January), I will import the email list that I regularly backup onto another service. They do not take my subscribers. But Twitter? DLive? Instagram? If they ban me, I lose access to my subscribers while the platform gets to keep the users that I brought to the service. They experience all upside from me using their platforms, and yet I have to withstand all the downside. I have skin in the game, they have none.

There are several platforms I’m still on, mostly independent in nature like Gab and Telegram, but I don’t plan on signing up for any new ones. Unless the platform gives me a subscriber list of email addresses—and the only one that I know that does that is Substack—it’s not worth it, because on a long enough timeline, everyone on a platform gets suspended, censored, or banned. I must admit that my influence will progressively decline. I will never have over 40,000 people watching my video live streams again, but that also means I will not be helping a homosexual-friendly company build their business on the backs of me and my followers.

I fell for the platform scam. I made a deal with the devil to receive more attention to my work, and at the peak of my ability to spread the truth during a critical juncture of American history, I had the rug pulled out from under me. I won’t make that deal again. From this point on, I will maintain a humble blog for a ragtag group of a few thousand people and not much more.

Read Next: The Influence Curve
Permalink

I've been following Roosh since 2012.
I'm pretty confident in his words of wisdom. I just wanted ROK back.

Reply Like

click to expand...

Do you have a Bitchute channel? That seems to be a rapidly growing YewChube alternative.

Bitchute is blocked in Russia and they also remove content albeit only to a small extent.

Reply Like

The best thing you can do if you have a large YT channel is to periodically promote a subscriber 'survey', from one of the free survey services which does not hide the survey emails.

The survey would be under the auspice that you are trying to capture what your followers would "like to see more of", as you make more videos. YT will let you communicate with your followers using this 'survey' tactic, whereas they frown upon outright asking for user's emails.

If you are banned from YT, you have these email lists to fall back on.

Reply Like

Originally posted on RooshV.com


On July 13, 2020, YouTube deleted my main channel with nearly 60,000 subscribers. Fourteen years of labor and love that I spent building up a channel were gone in an instant. Since then, I’ve realized the folly of using any kind of Silicon Valley platform in order to present my work to the public.

The two biggest draws of the platform are the convenience and the user base. By the time you encounter a platform that could be useful, it already has tens of thousands—if not millions—of users. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could start sharing work that reaches those people, without having to set up your own website and painstakingly market to your intended audience?

It’s helpful that the platform exaggerates its own usefulness by implementing an algorithm to give followers and views to new users even if their content doesn’t warrant it. The honeymoon won’t last for long: soon the platform holds your followers hostage. Instead of showing followers your content, a platform like Facebook demands money from you to help “boost” your post—to those who already opted in to your work. Or how about YouTube, which refuses to notify your subscribers of a new video upload. Once the platform gets big enough, the algorithm is tweaked to maximize benefits for them, not exposure for you.

When using a platform, you’re essentially making a deal with the devil. You grant a perpetual license for your content to a corporation and submit to arbitrary and stifling rules in exchange for eyeballs, status, or fame. As long as you serve the will of the platform, the deal seems like it will have no cost, but as soon as you begin to think for yourself, or wish to create content that does not serve the prevailing agenda of the Jewish owner of the platform, you will be swiftly throttled or banned.

It’s no big deal if you get banned, because you can just take your subscribers elsewhere, right? Wrong, the platform has access to your subscriber list and will not let you contact them. When I was banned from YouTube, I had no way of contacting my 60,000 subscribers to let them know where they could find my future videos. While many of them were already familiar with my blog, half weren’t, because my videos since then have suffered a 50-60% drop in views. Perhaps they are still clicking reload on YouTube, wondering why I stopped making videos.


Jewish CEO of YouTube with cross-dressing YouTuber who is heavily promoted on the platform

The platform owns your subscribers while you own content which may not even be suitable anywhere else (e.g. TikTok videos, Twitter tweets). As they say in marketing, “The money is in the list.” If you don’t have the list of people who follow you that you can contact yourself, you have nothing. Compare that to using a service instead of a platform. If my hosting company shuts me down, I will simply find another host. If my newsletter email service shuts me down (which it did in January), I will import the email list that I regularly backup onto another service. They do not take my subscribers. But Twitter? DLive? Instagram? If they ban me, I lose access to my subscribers while the platform gets to keep the users that I brought to the service. They experience all upside from me using their platforms, and yet I have to withstand all the downside. I have skin in the game, they have none.

There are several platforms I’m still on, mostly independent in nature like Gab and Telegram, but I don’t plan on signing up for any new ones. Unless the platform gives me a subscriber list of email addresses—and the only one that I know that does that is Substack—it’s not worth it, because on a long enough timeline, everyone on a platform gets suspended, censored, or banned. I must admit that my influence will progressively decline. I will never have over 40,000 people watching my video live streams again, but that also means I will not be helping a homosexual-friendly company build their business on the backs of me and my followers.

I fell for the platform scam. I made a deal with the devil to receive more attention to my work, and at the peak of my ability to spread the truth during a critical juncture of American history, I had the rug pulled out from under me. I won’t make that deal again. From this point on, I will maintain a humble blog for a ragtag group of a few thousand people and not much more.

Read Next: The Influence Curve
Permalink

Vox Day is fond of saying that conservatives would rather complain about cancel culture than to build their own platforms. I am glad to see that you have done just that.

Colin Flaherty, who has been suspended from multiple platforms, like you, emphasizes to his listeners that they must get on his email list to keep in touch, because you never know when that will happen. I miss good ol' Colin and pray for him - he's been out for almost a year, I think with stomach or colon cancer.

These demons will not keep us apart. They are a minor inconvenience.

Take care! -OG

Reply Like

click to expand...