Patreon CEO on Content Policy, Lauren Southern, and IGD

I totally get where you're coming from. Though our conclusions differ, I think our reasoning is very similar. I doubt these bans are purely mercenary. The CEO of Patreon seems to be doing this because he believes it's the right thing. If you watch his video responding to the ban of Lauren Southern last year[1] (a decision I agree with, BTW), he seems totally sincere. He also understands the magnitude of his responsibility to patrons. I think Patreon is being penny wise and pound foolish. Their social signalling helps them grab a larger chunk of a smaller pie. Every high profile ban alienates a small fraction of users, but it's a different fraction every time. It doesn't take many before Patreon's reputation is bad enough to dissuade new creators from using it. It might already be too late for them to turn around. 1. [this video]

Manifest observable behavior is just an evidence-based way to determine breach of policy[0]. It's literally the most rational way to go about enforcing policy. Insofar as suspensions seem "random" because they're done by fast and loose algorithms (which are the only enforcement mechanism that scales), I agree though: that shit sucks, and it affects many sides. Many sides. When Zuckerberg was in front of Congress, he was repeatedly scolded by Congresspeople for not doing enough to remove bad stuff. He responded by saying that there's too much bad stuff for humans to keep track of, and that Facebook is working really hard on AI capable of handling it. Yay. 0: [this video]