So what? Let them curate whatever they want. There are other platforms to post my video to. Hell, I can create another one. I can create 50 others. I can create a mailing list and send to everyone on it. Are we going to argue wether spam filtering is censorship too?
I've long said, Flickr's solution works pretty well. They have groups, you can form any group you want and set your own group rules. You can set filters and you can opt to view "adult" content or not (take me back to kittens").
It's all about opting-in.
You have certain taste, go find that group or found your own.
You don't like certain groups, don't become a member of such group.
You want to have your own private invite only group, go ahead, create your own invite only group.
Flickr never achieved the prominence of FB or IG, or flash in the pan like Tumblr, but I think they built it from the ground up to provide a decent service for everyone with a light touch. For illegal stuff, yeah, you get kicked out, that's legit. Need to escalate to site admins, that's possible too but only if the group admins are acting in bad faith.
If spam filtering didn't let recipients opt out, and permanently deleted emails instead of putting them in a spam folder, then it would be censorship too.
> Are we going to argue wether spam filtering is censorship too?
It certainly is censorship, but users opt in.
> There are other platforms to post my video to. Hell, I can create another one. I can create 50 others.
Its not just YouTube. Its their platform, and your hosting provider, and your DNS provider, and your payment processor, and your bank. Consider what happened to Parler.
Lets not cheer on the loss of a public good because we could theoretically replace it some day.
So, I presume you would be totally okay if Youtube one day decided they just wanted to deplatform anything such as "tax the rich" or "defund the police" or "no child left behind" or any talk about Mark Zuckerberg, just because they can?
What if one day FB is under investigation and FB decides it will only carry FB propaganda and not let any dissenting voices, would that be totally cool?
Yes, I'd be okay, and I would stop using them, as I have done with FB, and start looking elsewhere. Like I said before, I don't agree with Youtube taking anti-vaxx videos down, but I do think they, as a private company, should be allowed to. If they take enough content down, they'll end up losing users.
So what? Let them curate whatever they want. There are other platforms to post my video to. Hell, I can create another one. I can create 50 others. I can create a mailing list and send to everyone on it. Are we going to argue wether spam filtering is censorship too?