>>I for one want to hear his expertise, even if it disagrees with the conclusions you've already made.
That's fine. YouTube doesn't want to host it, because in their view it's harmful. What's the problem?
That's fine. YouTube doesn't want to host it, because in their view it's harmful. What's the problem?
It is perfectly rationale to say that YouTube has the freedom to make editorial choices while also pointing out that they are making bad choices.
You aren't countering any criticism by stating that YouTube has the freedom to make those choices -- you're just changing the topic and ignoring the nature of the criticism.
They could be. Or do you just mean physical handicaps?
So; if YouTube said "we don't allow Christian white men" or whatever, absolutely, that's terrible and shouldn't be allowed. If they say "we don't allow people to say things that are actively harmful" that's quite different.
If you go into a restaurant and insult the servers, or start bothering other patrons, they'll ask you to leave. That's perfectly fine.
edit: typo