Are reactive, valuable, i know they say very popular car video watch directly. I'm gon na react to this even murder, but thanks to one man, my third eye has truly been opened to a very hard to swallow. Truth that there's one sin so unforgivable that it sends the person straight to hell. It's react content.

There is no forgiveness for react, streamers, those vile vermin that watch youtube; videos on twitch they're, all bad people downright evil, with no exception. I remember in star wars. They said only a sith deals in absolutes. Well, not this time.

Yesterday, a youtuber and streamer named darkviper au posted a 14-page document, which is the script for a video he's working on all about how evil react. Content is, and it really heats up. This gets wild and wacky for the touchdown real, quick, there's a whole section in here, where he basically compares reactors to sexual abuse, criminals and insinuates that they'd be likely to spike your drink at a party. Take silence for consent, basically, is comparing react.

Content creators to rapists completely unironically, it's not some edgy joke or anything. It's posting cringe on main that he truly believes and defends in the comments when someone called him out for it. He really doubles down, puts his nuts on the table and says yeah reactors are likely to commit sexual abuse. He says it's hyperbole, but only slightly so the difference between actively ignoring consent for fighting, i'm just going to say guys guys guys if you're playing a game.

You're react andy. I said it same concept. Um game companies could dmca you at any given time for playing their game literally on streaming, you're literally playing a game that somebody else made it's literally their game and you're playing it. I i don't know what you're gon na say react gun is, is bad, it's not like not great right, but nothing is pure, except for just complete one percent creative and that's what he's not so far removed from ignoring consent for sexual gratification in his own.

That's not only a good take it's it's. The law documentary admits that he himself was a reactor. He is engaged in a lot of react content. So at one point, were you a rapist, dark viper? Were you likely to commit sexual abuse? In fact, i'd argue.

You were on the upper echelon of react content because you were doing media share nights where your community donated money for you to watch videos as opposed to just watching videos that you wanted to share with people and reacting to those you had. People pay you to. I'm an indie game deva and you are right. I would give you the that i didn't play my game.

Man, it's twitch bait. You want to get my half of streamer's band, okay, you're, you're, you're, demonstrating you do it, and then you made money on top of that from the videos you'd post from it. So you were a super reactor. Of course you don't do that anymore and you deleted all the videos, but at one point you did engage in the exact same content that you're coming out so heavily against right now and then tried to make your own justifications for for why you weren't the bad Guy, it's an outrageous claim.

Obviously, however, he does make legitimate points in the document it's overshadowed by this unhinged rant that he goes on. I am familiar with dark, viper's content. In fact i was a fan of dark viper. I'd seen his runs.

I didn't really see too many of like his rant videos, but i did see his content from time to time and he always struck me as someone pretty level-headed. In fact, recently, he made a video correcting something i talked about, which was how much money youtubers make from short content. I got some of it wrong and not on purpose, but i just didn't know what he knew. He was very knowledgeable in short content and made a whole video going over some very insightful stuff.

That was a learning experience for me and his audience. I thought it was a great video very well done and it was super disappointing to read something like this from him now i'm called out by name multiple times throughout this document, because obviously i do react content from time to time. Nah. That's not! Why? Because he's a react, andy react, andy react, andy, everybody, it is what it is.

I didn't or try and justify it, because i'm not embarrassed of it. Look i understand the stigma around react, content and i've always understood it. When i react to something i'm constantly trying to either pause it and add something to it or interject comedy into it, i treat react content like mystery science, theater, where it is a transformative piece around the content. Now, of course, not every time is going to be a hit, which is why you'll find plenty of videos where i'm reacting to something like the downfall of quiddy, which comes from a great channel that i really like to watch.

And i just got too engrossed in their storytelling and the way they presented it presented it that i didn't add anything to it. So i ended up just kind of watching it with my community sure, and you know what i didn't turn that into a video. I didn't do anything else with that ended up just really enjoying the video as it was presented, without really being able to add too much to it and yeah. I always feel guilty when something like that happens, but that's never.

The goal dark viper's entire document yeah. This is this is something you'll get caught up in a lot in your in your arguments. In your analysis, uh uh with the media meet a gun. Are you saying, 40 months? Guess that's cool if a streamer needs other people, videos provide content, they're not entertaining him.

Okay, it's not always about need it's about want, sometimes something other than i like a lot. I want to share with chat. I want to do that. I don't need it.

My channel is not going to die, yet i'm not going to i'm not going to be obscured in favor. I could get more viewers into other things by playing another game or something, but i said i want to watch that. I watch that with chat. I want to share my passion that i have for this, but chat has nothing to do with it.

Never done anything, sometimes that's even more entertaining than the video itself, because i'm more passionate about the thing that it is that's how it is here is about this belief that every reactor is doing it for financial gain and to small channels and the logic he uses To make these points is deeply flawed and isn't substantiated by any real evidence. It just feels like he pulls it out of his ass and it's source trust me bro is he has an understanding of capitalism in the free market and that's what he's using to base all of these claims on, even though it's not directly applicable to youtube itself. So i just wanted to go over everything here right now, so even right away his initial tweet going for the most extreme approach possible. All reactors are bad.

People exploit others to benefit no one, but themselves collectively stolen millions of dollars from actual creators and have stopped countless thousands from having a career. I wonder how many small, no no some video game devs have had these exact same take about their video games being played on streaming, the exact same award for award rant before stolen millions of dollars from actual creators and countless thousands from having a career. I wonder how many small channels are out there shaking their fist right now, like damn you pokey mane, my channel died because you watched my video on your stream and said nice things about me. I had such a promising career as a youtuber till you said nice things about my video on stream to your audience of 30 000 concurrent viewers.

Now i'm trashed i'm ruined and to be fair, that's not the exact point he's making his point of how they're killing small channels is because they're taking eyes away from small channels to their own channel. So i guess a more apt comparison would be why a small channel flipping over you jubilee is good content. If you still think it's good, then poll it with chat, you won't cause. You know, i know you act like people consume, only things that they, like you, people people consume sometimes more things that they don't like things that makes them upset, think things that make them uneasy.

People watch sometimes things that are controversial way, more things that they actually are passionate for. That's that's how this is how it is so. Do i give a of your opinion of what your opinion is on some of these videos? I don't give a why? Because you watch it and that's why i watch it in a story their table like i would have had 10 million views on this video. If pokeman didn't react to jubilee six atheists versus one christian five days ago now, my channel's, because she reacted and all the people wouldn't watch that instead of watching my video essay on dying lights, butthole physics now to show his point in the actual document, he goes On to describe how effortless it is to make react, content which he is absolutely in the right on this is an inarguable truth.

It takes significantly less time and effort to react to content than it does to create the content. That's being reacted to that's just blasting. Your ass with facts and logic: 100, even when you're transforming the content like you know, for example, if i'm adding an extra 10 minutes worth of dialogue or even 20 minutes worth of like extra commentary on top of it, that's still significantly less work than actually went Into that video that creates it and he's totally right there. He then goes on to say how easy it is to pump out that content, since it obviously takes less time and effort, they can make more of it, which means more react.

Videos are being pumped into the youtube atmosphere and he's right there again look at someone like sniper, wolf, she's able to do one a day and she's making. I think 700 million views a month or something she is the biggest react channel online like anywhere on the other chat from this comparison chat. We should go ahead and shame every movie director right that went on a piece of land and films on a street. They didn't build, then own didn't create them, then put the cement and the grass and grew like right in the plants which, because they didn't make it in their studio and and and built it themselves, shame them.

How dare they bother? You she's, not yeah. Yeah get mad basin taken listed here by name, he only goes with twitch streamers, even though dark sniper wolf does the same thing. So i found that to be weird, because that would have been another great point here, but regardless her absence, isn't that big of a deal it just serves to highlight that he is right. You can pump this out a lot quicker than fully original products, but the next part is where him - and i differ greatly in our opinion here, and it is an opinion, no matter how much dark viper wants to present it.

As a fact. He argues that this flood of react content takes from the finite pool of impressions, so it takes those eyeballs and puts it towards the react content as opposed to going towards the original island. Saying um i was uh represented as a fact. He argues that this flood of react content takes from the finite pool of impressions, so it takes those eyeballs.

This is a boomer okay. This is a classic. We call a classic old school uh uh um cannibalist, pretty ironic argument dog to a channel called the whole chat is full with react. Undies, since we think people think that react to the videos is cannibalistic in nature, which means that it eats them right and what they eat is taken.

Okay, it's like oh guys, you're gon na get ten. Okay, i'm five! Now i'm gon na join, i cannibalize right. I get three plus and you get minus three right, but that is just simply not true. It's been proven, it's been said it's been done.

I can give you guys hundreds of examples of how react is rarely very, very rarely and if not, barely can have a sticker, but on the other side it is most of the time beneficial both ways and puts it towards the react content, as opposed to going Towards the original content that they would have found elsewhere, if the react content didn't exist, i'm skipping ahead just a bit because this part is also still part of the same umbrella claim he says: if your content is good, then it will get exposure naturally, and so You don't need reactors he's absolutely right. Of course you don't need reactors, but he says if your content is good, it will naturally get exposure. Okay, based on what where's your evidence to support that claim. There are millions upon millions of channels, literally millions that have made high quality productions over the last decade that went nowhere fell flat on their face have less than hundreds of views.

I know that because we've watched them on my stream before i usually like to find more obscure content and i've seen some great videos huge production, less than a hundred views like five years old. The channel's dead i'll give an example i'll use level. Bing bong your life, hey we've been watching that what are 100 views, we were watching ten thousand views and was there now everything bing? You wait hey. We were there at the very beginning of this okay, oh my god guys they only get.

They only get two kvs now, because you you you, you want them right boys, people watching this, don't watching my mom picks my next boyfriend for me or anything. It just has to do with the sheer volume of content on youtube in general, where not all great productions are gon na find eyeballs, and it's just a lie. Him saying that it's gon na naturally get exposure. You have no way of proving that, and if you do i'd love to see it, how can you guarantee that by making high quality productions you're, naturally going to blow up on youtube? How can you say that? Can you prove it? The pillar of his whole point is there's so much react content that now all those eyeballs are on the reactors and not on the original content.

They have taken away from this finite pool of impressions, but you have no way of proving. If that react content wasn't there, those eyeballs would go to that original content. Because it's the internet, it's youtube, there's other places they could go to get entertainment. Let's say he could use.

The argument he could have made here very very simply is is instead using the example of someone who didn't make it somebody who is making it and who has made it, and you use the stats behind it to show that one benefit the other and if it Did it was a positive light and a story? All of a sudden all of react content is gone. The people that watch the react, content might just go. Watch netflix might just go on twitch and watch some gaming streams or something there's no guarantee that now that the react content's gone, let me give you an example of internet. Is that a join when a video comes out? Do they lose yours? No, absolutely not, and what and then, whenever it was, i think the big was whatever he was a growing channel.

Did we join his? No, it helped both ways andrew watching it people enjoy watching it. They watch it on their own. Now, what about it? Those eyeballs turn towards the small youtubers. You can't prove that, so the claim is completely baseless.

I know you drew this diagram, but there's no source here: five hours, android labor video 50 hours later video stolen. What the is that? A hundred labor video 50 labor impressions exposure always 100 disturbed what what you're just pulling this out of your ass? I would love to know where you got this data from if you have that available, because in this graph, if the react content that controls the 30 here pulls out, that 30 percent doesn't automatically get distributed to the rest of the graph. Those eyeballs could just be gone. They could go to a different platform.

Take, for example, when mixer acquired, ninja and shroud. They came with absolutely massive audiences, guys, guys you're, assuming okay you're, assuming it that if i, if i this, is literally assuming that, if i watch a video right of some guy who has 100 viewer viewers, everybody makes a video right. Let's say we come in there with 50 000 live viewers right that every 50 000 were already subscribed. They were already gon na watch, the video they were.

They were uh. They were going to watch a video, but now they will not watch it because they watch it here. Instead, what that makes no sense, dude platform. What do you think, for example, when mixer acquired ninja and shroud they came with absolutely massive audiences and when they'd stream on mixer they'd have that full audience there they were tuned in, but when they left those eyeballs left, they didn't get redistributed to the rest of Mixer they just went to a different platform because what they were there for was gone so so were they.

It could be the same on youtube, not saying it is there's no way for you to prove that if the react content wasn't there all of those eyeballs that they are occupying, how does that make sense, guys guys if i watch a video of a guy who Gets a hundred views every video has 10 subscribers, it's impossible that all of you all of you now are subscribed and we're gon na watch this. What is wrong with you? What is what is wrong with you of that finite pool of impressions? It's right actually before they were famous - oh, my god, dude you're, really playing in the argument, though, wait, no, that that is it because that literally it proves my point that proves it well, i don't usually normally get them, let's see before they were famous. Yes, don't worry, i'm i'm gon na get a blind guess. I'm gon na be right about this.

5K. 40K. 17K. 15K.

12K. Guys you, you got you guys. You guys act, guys! Ninja ninja got 18k ninja on youtube is like 100 times my size. What are you talking about you? You act.

You act like people watch it here, so they didn't watch it there. That is, that is just so incorrect, though it's nothing close to it. What does that do then? It proves that this person's argument literally would be redistributed to the smaller creators you have no way of proving it. Nobody really does, however, what is that pvc? What, yes, who is this your video who's video? Is this what what the what dude top of my head? I can think of multiple examples and times where react.

Content has genuinely helped smaller creators like blow up their channel. My channel i'm the perfect example of it. My channel literally got kickstarted because of ray william johnson reacting to my q op video in 2010. Without that happening, i probably wouldn't have this channel right now.

I wouldn't be anywhere near the position i'm in right now, if not for that reactor back then so i'm the perfect example of that. Now all the cards on the table, i don't believe in exposure dollars. I don't believe by watching content, there's a guaranteed value. I do believe chad.

I do believe that uh uh equals three guys. I don't know. Maybe i thought i had my ass ivy is probably one of the one of the biggest and the earliest to be bought out by somebody else. I feel like he got bought by facebook dude and that's why he swapped, i think so.

Another person's gon na be a superstar and you know pay people an exposure, it's all legitimate. Like hey. You know. I watched your video, so you can't be mad.

No, i can truly understand when somebody doesn't like when someone reacts to their content. I get it. It's not like i'm delusional, i understand it and i totally sympathize when it's someone that doesn't add anything to it and i'm guilty of it too. Like i mentioned, sometimes i just get lost in a great video and i end up just sharing that video to the stream, not on purpose.

I planned on adding more to it adding commentary adding jokes to it, but sometimes i just get engrossed in it and i failed to deliver on my part of transforming it. I completely understand that perspective and agree with it. I get it. Stop stop you're trying to look good to youtube norman's, i'm gon na him.

I don't give a. I don't even know if the video is good enough to watch is just watching. If we react relax we wake up. I don't have a bar that i said that we have to react this amount.

Otherwise i failed. I don't give a, but i can, however, prove that multiple times channels, i've reacted to have been very positive about it, and their channel has grown exponentially as a result of it. I never like talking about these things because i never really like it to seem, like i'm being you know so full of myself, like i'm a benevolent reactor and i save channels and blow them up, because i don't believe in that. I really truly don't, but i would like to give you a couple of examples of times where channels we've reacted to very small channels have been able to turn it into a full-time career and it has really helped them grow.

So a couple popped into my head immediately: the first one, the sausage god ordinary sausage. This man can turn anything into a sausage he could take. King tut's mummified remains and make a banger sausage out of it in 2020, during a youtube night, one person in stream, who was a fan of sausage, recommended his content and at the time, as you can see in this video, he had 3 000 subscribers and the Content was so good, so high quality was super fun and i felt i added quite a bit to it with comedy throughout it to transform it. So i turned it into a video and, through that video, his channel really started to grow because people really liked his content.

They really liked him, so they went to his channel. His channel got a lot of steam and fast forward to 2022. He is now at 655 000 subscribers. It's become like his full-time passion and we've become good friends.

We've collaborated quite a few times over the years, and here comes the guy's gon na, say you but him. If he has good content, he was gon na make it there, regardless brother dude years, and it's just always been a great time. Working together. He was going to make all stem reaction to his content and people that may not have otherwise found it found him, and then he was able to make a career out of it.

There's a chance that maybe the algorithm would have picked up sausage making. For some reason, sure you could make that argument. Maybe the channel would have been successful without the reaction, but it's inarguable that it did help, because you know what you say. I said that about twitch streamers, there's, no there's! No! Nobody.

Nobody reacts all day to somebody else's stream and joins their oh dude. That is that nobody does that. It's not it's not a thing, not a problem. It is a non-factor.

His channel was soaring, absolutely exploding. He got like a hundred thousand subs in a month or something i don't watch somebody's assuming i stream it the whole day yeah. Who am i, who am i from 3 000 on the ground? So there was a real benefit there and, of course this isn't the norm, but there is real positive impacts that do happen as a result of reactions right. This is just a quick example: another one that always pops into my head is slapping slap fight championship.

In particular, there were a small organization doing fun, slapping content really trying to take it to the next level, and i found them randomly during a youtube night and i loved it thought it was great. The creator of slap fight championship jt, reached out to me, was appreciative about it. We became great friends and partners working together to grow slap fight championship into something fantastic and fast forward. To today, it's become the premiere recognized as like a legitimate sport.

I don't know how much i can talk about, but i'm gon na, maybe you know, spoil the surprise a little bit. Maybe a full-blown documentary coming out about slap fight championship and all the incredible things going on over there, all stemming from just reacting to the content, which runs counter to what dark. Viper is saying in his document where the reactors don't watch tiny content creators who can't catch a break. They find videos that are already doing well in the algorithm that are already successful, thus do not need their exposure reactors are not seeking out content to give it any sort of boost seeking out content to bring themselves the maximum amount of profit for the least effort.

So i just think this immediately runs against that, since the majority of content, i watch and react to is small content like ordinary sausage, like slap fight championship, of course, sprinkled throughout there are some bigger content creators as well. Not always is that, like reacting going to help them, in fact, i would argue that it's pretty rare for it too, but it is still against his point. I'm not reacting to things that are just going to bring the maximum amount of profit. That's not what i care about.

I've never been a money-driven person, yeah yeah, but nobody does that. Nobody does this either, though, because most of these things are niche or niche right, it's like, if you were to watch every video that would make a max amount of profit. Usually you you wouldn't do! Well, you wouldn't do because nobody cares that much about all these interests person right and to be put in this document, where i'm compared to people like it, because the guy likes it. I watched it or the community that likes it or whatever right, and then it's just it's just fun, because everybody's having a good time, anything to do with that, though sexual abuse criminal, as well as just a money-hungry exploiter.

He calls me an exploiter class is outright disgusting, i'm watching these things and reacting to it, because i think it's fun content that i can add to and have fun with and transform. So that way, both the people who make the content would find it enjoyable, laugh with it and have a good time as well as the community that watched it with me. That is the drive for when i'm reacting to. He says that people only react to content.

That's doing well in the algorithm they're going to be successful. Is he is that here, hey where the is this guy did no shot this huh? Can you prove that to me dark viper? Can you tell me that ordinary sausage, before my reaction, was going to be a 655 000 subscriber channel closing in on a million dude's gon na absolutely crush it? Can you tell me that was 100 going to happen without me, reacting to it? No, you can't. He wasn't in the algorithm at the time there was just a fan who found him through. I think it was the deep into youtube subreddit, if i remember correctly and just thought it was fun, content and shared it with me.

It wasn't popping off in the algorithm. Neither was slapping in fact, slap fight championship has a huge problem with the monetization and it never even makes it to the algorithm in the first place. I found it because i was already deep into the slapping rabbit hole and found it through that, not because it was going well in the algorithm. It's just viper has a point that he can't possibly prove there is no way he could accurately with real evidence.

Show me that these channels were going to do extremely well without react. Content, though any channel for that matter is guaranteed exposure. If they're making good con, it's not survivorship bias. Dude dude, if you're gon na run with the argument that if somebody's somebody's content was gon na make it right, then, if the content dies, if the comment dies, then you could argue the exact name that the client was gon na die regardless because the kind of Sucks literally, the this argument works both ways.

It has to otherwise you're being a hypocrite and a story content like he insinuates in his document. There's no way of proving that. However, i can show you examples, and this is only two of them. Where react content? Wasn't dog and didn't hurt the channel that was being reacted to now, as i mentioned, i do fail sometimes where i just get too lost in the content, where i didn't add anything to it, and i'm always embarrassed when that happens.

I have a great example. There was a channel that i really enjoyed and i watched their video on a dilapidated building that was for sale. It was a house and it was one of the most confusing house tours of all time. It was this labyrinth, the house of nightmares, and they had a great video going through all of it, and i watched it on stream.

I'd already seen it before. I watched it on stream as well, because i just wanted to show people and talk about it and like get really goofy with it and figure out what was going on with this house. But i ended up just getting too lost in the video because they presented it so well. It was just such a great video and the creator saw my reaction to it and was really disappointed.

They didn't appreciate it and i totally understood where they're coming from, because i didn't really add anything to it. I didn't really react to it so to them it felt like i was just re-uploading their content on my stream and i get that perspective. I really do, but that's never the goal. It's never supposed to be piggybacking off of someone else's hard work in order to do nothing for it and make money off it.

I've never had that mentality, guys guys. You forgot to react harder guys. This is why i do like when i watch a video chat. I just want myself dude react, dude react react and then i i did react harder harder.

The then i go holy harder holy and then you got ta scale it up. Dude. You got ta scale. I really hate yeah, but this whole document paints me in that light.

It's just so disingenuous and dark viper. I know you watched my content for a long time. I, like i said i know your channel. I used to see you talk about my i i remember you were critiquing my audio at one point, because i used to have that low hum on my audio settings, and i remember you pointed it out in a video a long time ago you used to watch My and i have always reacted to content even since 2016., so you knew i was doing all of that and you still enjoyed the content now all of a sudden you're coming in here and putting me on the same level as a rap.

That's absolutely outrageous! There's still so many things i could point out in this document that are just blatantly wrong, such as this claim a content takes time every day. Do it yourself, you will get tired burn out right, the x name at the bottom. They will of course, then upload. This stolen content to their youtube channels, as well as further maximize profits that would otherwise again go to actual content creators.

Hey. Can i get a source on that? Can i get a approve that buddy please? Each of these creators earns on average, 20 million dollars a year on the back of unpaid writers and content creators. Hey. Can i get a source on that one as well, where the is my toy where's, my 20 mail dude wait: hey where's my 20 mil.

What are you on about? My stats were leaked. I don't make that much money 30 mil a year. What an outrageous number to pull right from your dick hole there, 20 million a year! Is that really what you think i make on youtube? Dark viper holy your cpm must be crazy. To think that i would make 20 mil in a year.

Bro half of my content has a giant dildo in it. That's three feet long. You really think i'm somehow making 20 million a year. I can't speak for hassan pokemane or xqc or anyone there, but i can tell you that this just making this claim on average 20 million years is so blatantly yeah.

You guys we're gon na, say exploiter, weird guys. Yes, it's exploiter class chad because explorer class is good chad wrong. It's laughable and again, can i please get a source on the uh maximize profits that would otherwise again go to actual content creators. Can you prove that man that'd be glorious that average of 20 mil a year somehow going to the smaller content creators that would be unassociated with the react content all of a sudden, somehow that 20 mil is making it to them? I'd love to see the osmosis process there.

Somehow so you're telling me if that react content is gone. All that 20 mil is now in a limbo, just waiting for small content created, even if there's no yeah, because if those, if the videos are good, then we're going to make it so chad, if they had 300 of you, is that 200 viewers every time and When you watched it, you gave it a hundred thousand nah dude. On that day it was going to be 100 000, but you stole it. You exploiter exploiters what the f ew no question.

I cannot believe the exploitation that's being done here. I'd love to just see the data here. Outrageous undoubtedly have to back up these claims, and especially on the 20 mil a year, because if that's true man i'm getting ripped off, i'm not even close. I'm gon na need to talk to somebody at youtube because you've probably got the numbers right and youtube's wrong man.

Another thing i'd like to point out is every time this whole react. Content debate comes up. The people that take the most offense to it make the biggest stink about it are the people that aren't having a problem with people reacting to their content. I don't think, there's this huge epidemic of people.

You know dressing in a black tank top and trying to steal, dark viper, au's content by reacting to it minimally on stream or something he's not really battling a bunch of reactors, at least not that i know of maybe i'm wrong, but the people that do have Their content reacted to like the smaller channels and even some of the bigger channels usually have a really pop, also big point chad. This is a big point. Is a big point? Okay, if you watch the video once right and it was bad for the channel and you watched more of their content right - they can absolutely 100 say yo dude, don't do this, and people would stop immediately because we i've had i've had problems with with people from Youtube two of them said it hey man that they didn't like it. I didn't argue, i didn't say yo dude uh, because you're stuck, i didn't bring up stats.

I just stopped watching it then all together, i just started it. What i don't care that much it! I i think it's mutually good if they know or they think it's not, then they are right. Why? Because it's their content and a story. I have no say dude.

If there's a problem i'll make you do it because i enjoy it response to it. They'll reach out and say: thank you we're, like hey glad you enjoyed the video we'd love to talk about it, maybe a little bit more. A lot of the friends i've made online have actually just come from me appreciating their content and reacting to it and talking about their content afterwards, as a result of it like it's. It's always a weird dichotomy where the people that are the maddest are the ones that aren't even directly involved in the problems that they're talking about, if they're, not being not okay with it later on, that's also, okay, guys.

I have a problem with with kurz kazart. Okay, these guys didn't like me, reposting their video okay uh, because because my edit, my guess it - i don't remember my editors miners - do whatever they want, okay youtube and they would upload the reaction to youtube, and i didn't even know, but even if i knew i Probably have stopped them because i i didn't give a that time. They were uploading and then kurt said they didn't like that for whatever reason - and i didn't fight them on it - nobody, i just stopped before playing that right, but at the beginning they were like it's fine but then they're like it's not fine. I just listened it and that's the same for all of them, who ask who who say: hey that that's a problem? That's fine! That's that's! Fine! Nobody! Nobody! In my experience and the experience of a lot of friends that i know that have also reacted the content.

The majority of it's always been a really positive relationship between the creator that was reacted to and the person that was reacting to it. Because for me, what happens is it shows i like this person's content? I like what they're doing and then now they know hey. We have something in common, maybe we could be friends, maybe we could talk more and it usually just leads to collaborations and getting to know each other all through just being appreciative of their content and being so happy about it to share it with others. Not everyone is in youtube or online content creation for the maximum amount.

Maybe it's different with dark vibrancy. That's why he's always so fixated on the money aspect of it, but for some content creators, even the small ones, they just like to see people enjoying their content from time to time and to be exposed to a bigger audience like a xqc watching your fan animation. They get excited even if it's like hey, that's 70 000 people watching your content on xqc stream instead of yours. Well, those 70 000 people may never have found that small channel in the first place, and now maybe some of them do go over there and he mentions that as like trickle down react dynamics or some like that.

But for a lot of people that isn't a net positive thing where there could have been no one that ever found it in the first place, i don't think it's a really strong argument or anything, but it is still something worth noting it's a real thing that Does happen as opposed to dark vipers claims of average of 20 million a year with these money hungry sexual abusers, like at least with some of these things that yeah, maybe i don't agree with all of them, and they're pretty weak points. Like the you know, exposure dollar thing helping every channel. I don't always agree with that, but you can prove on a case-by-case basis. It does, whereas in viper's case he doesn't present any real evidence for these claims, at least not that i saw in this document.

Maybe he has some in the back burner, but nothing. He proves shows that the reaction, like the reactors and their content are taking eyeballs away from other content creators online that have guys. I remember you guys you guys merchant, when aw made the made the video of the of the nose right and that had like dude. I don't even think it was on youtube, but it was like on the reddit and it had like 20 views.

Dude, okay, okay and the video was dog dude and then and then the video blew up. And then the next video came across and then ellen blew up and he made the making of the video down blew up bing bang. Now what it trickled down, nomiks, whatever he said. What would it have got that react not makes trick or trickle bound? What the is that, like there's nothing that shows me that he is correct, that if these reactors are gone, small channels would be flourishing right now, him saying, with a straight face that if you make good content, you will naturally get exposure is just silly.

That's so naive, it's just not the reality of it. You can make the best content in the world and it could go nowhere if the algorithm doesn't pick it up or if you just don't get lucky you're in at the bad time. Like there's so many factors, you are not guaranteed exposure just for making good content and that's what dark viper seems to want you to believe in his document again. There was nothing in there that showed me that those eyeballs that are occupying react content would then switch to non-react content if it was gone.

Yes, there is a finite amount of impressions that can go around. Oh, he doesn't watch summoning salt. Oh, i don't watch other people on my stream says you dude every time i tune into your stream you're, always just watching buddha and uh. What do you think you're watching buddha or someone else crack a code while you're just sitting here the entire time? Picking your toenails shut, the hell up, cracking a code.

Give me air cracking a what dude dude crack on this nut. What the is he talking about? Man? Nothing is infinite and yes, some of those are on the react content. But if it wasn't there, that's not saying that they are all of a sudden going to the other content elsewhere. There is nothing that he has presented in this document.

That shows that, but on the other side of this coin you can show that there are the cases where react, content help channels blow up, maintain an audience. You know, even with his trickle trickle-down reactonomics, that he seems to hate so much. You can at least prove that that exists, because some of the channels that xqc has reacted to and if it doesn't send me an email, send me a message. Tap in a chat, say: stop watch my video, oh stop watching it.

I don't care that much. I could watch some guy clean the dude. I could watch some guy clean the toe of his pet horse. Okay, i don't give a we watch, whatever his channels have maintained like an audience from xqc, it's not, of course, the full 70 thousand, maybe only a fraction of that, but it's still more than they had pre that reaction.

So it's given them some kind of extra steam, even if it's not great that they might not have had. Otherwise, maybe they would have again. You can't prove that dark, viper and no one can, but it is inarguable that they did get a little extra audience. That has now stuck around.

They now have a juicer fan base that is stuck around because they enjoyed what they saw when they watched it with xqc, and some of those channels do have more of an audience. Now you can prove it so yeah. This document was really upsetting to read, especially someone that does know dark, viper's content and again he bases every single one of his claims off no real evidence, just his understanding of the market and capitalism, but it doesn't apply to youtube. Wait.

Is it if his graph is right? Let's just assume he got everything right react. Content has thirty percent of the eyes, while everything else is getting scraps well, is he actually uh uh communism? If that 30 is gone, there is no guarantee that that 30, that is now gone from the iraq channels, goes to the other creators, because they could just go somewhere else or turn off the computer and go do something else. It's not exactly like the market when it comes just watching videos, they might be there for pokeman and reacts and when pokeman stops reacting, they don't go watch anything else. They just go.

Do something else off of youtube. It just doesn't apply. Maybe dark! Viper. Has this incredible data that just throws everything for a loop that just wasn't in this document and i would love to see it, but regardless of whatever data he has, this is a truly disgusting thing to do the end of it where he claims that reactors are On the same level as a sexual abuse, criminal who would spike someone's drink and whatever other disgusting he said and all reactors that was awful silly, that's about it, see ya.

Well, that was silly that that very much was silly. Some people are bitter off of not ranting and ruining their own rep like dark. Is this appalling document never is generalizing him comparing to oh jesus nah again as a whole, i'm against lazy content right, sit down in front of the webcam and suddenly watch someone else's work while they eat lunch. That is adding nothing.

It's not transformative. In a way. This is stealing you, okay, a true. This is true-ish.

I think i think the big problem is that live content is a lot of volume and i feel, like the streams, would actually kind of suck in my opinion, and if you were to do that, all the time in a very uh at forced way. It would just be kind of dog guys guys today chat, ready, uh. I prefer this guys we're gon na watch, yellow and camera. Okay, wow, that's water.

Coral reef come on reef, okay, wow! That's a lot of water! That's blue! Oh my god. What is that? A volcano that's nuts, island trees and grasses and whatnot. Thank you. Lotion, garlic for millions of years sister, crabs yo.

Is that a crab dude, hmm tonight.