Algorithm Bias Theory | Further Evidence that you can blow up with just a few videos | Grind uploading isn't "working smart", It's a waste of time

[YoutubeScientist]

The reality isn't static. Science is describing the reality of people / humans, not the reality itself. It only tells you that the only constant thing is change and to figure that out, you don't need science, but observation which science is using, but "science people" might think they invented observation. No, science is derived from observation and experiment. Science is too narrow. It's limited framework.

What science does is usually very narrow and most science doesn't deal with big image. It's quite lost in its own paradigms. Most science has nothing to do with science. And so on. It's very young and normal people will get more from doing alchemy.

Science is using "human language" as it's tools, overuses symbols and is basically not leading to anywhere other than maybe feeding more capitalism because business takes all that "science", pumps that into industries and then people think it's some progress.

Then science about those industries is created and then mixed with previous science. And so on, and so on. What is this? It's a cycle of something. But what? Suffering. That's what this is.

Science is solving its own problems and does nothing in the end other than playing with itself as most scientists claim "we're not here to prove anything or answer questions like why and how".

This is trying to present itself as the absolute truth about the absolute truth.

It's not working. You can't get to the absolute truth from human perspective. The only way to do that is practice some non-western techniques.

The absolute truth isn't something created by words and it's not a statement.
Truth in relation to words is something like "the reality is infinite". But that's a statement and not absolute truth. It's relative truth to words.
Truth is beyond daily comprehension.

Today people mix philosophy with science with business of ads and making bills. That's nonsense.

This is a fantasy of science that doesn't exist because all science is interpret by human minds which are inherently full of errors due to how humans process all that information and data.

As a human you're not practicing science. The only science can be practiced by the reality itself. The reality is the ultimate experiment.

Objectivity doesn't exist in human's experience as humans cannot possess infinite perspectives as the reality itself can. So humans are just writing stories about all that stuff. It's just their entertainment.

Ask a professor why he's a professor. He'll answer "because I like it". Not because it has some ultimate truth inside.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

Paradigm changes, all changes. Yet nothing changes. It's just the reality flowing and changing.

Yeah, and live in clustered, narrow perspectives because "wisdom is not trendy anymore". But wise people don't have to have much and create 10000 threads to explain a simple change / shift in the reality.

Cause for a wise person all this stuff is obvious due to their high understanding of changes, flows and processes.

Today "intelligence" is trendy. But intelligence is so... makes people so unhappy because it leads to insane number of unnecessary thoughts.
Then if they apply the lessons, they might become wise.

Wisdom is appliance of knowledge, but other people might have different interpretations of wisdom.
Because we're operating at the level of words, all that stuff doesn't make much sense. As the whole text model on the internet.

I don't continue because it's 2 dimensional space where nobody can make any reasonable conclusions, ultimately leading to flame and misery.

If you want to turn this into a debate, let’s go. but first remember that all of the claims in your previous reply were already debunked by the sources I sent you. From that it is evident that your understanding of the basics of how science and philosophy works is fundamentally flawed.

From now on, whenever you reply to my counter arguments, make sure you provide sources to back up your claims or the default position is “you lost”.
I don't care about your opinions, I only care about the facts and if you can't provide them, rambling with a bunch of word games won't help make your case any more valid.
Provide sources OR admit “you just made shit up”.

And i also don't care if your source is: Trust me bro

===============================================

“Science is describing the reality of people / humans, not the reality itself.”

False, science literally describes reality. If you want to keep asserting this, provide evidence or stop blabbering.
Your entire reply contains so many claims that aren’t supported by any evidence, which you just made up.

===============================================

“but "science people" might think they invented observation”

I never said that and neither does anybody in science “think” that lol. It’s you who seems to be thinking that which none of them think anyway. Experience and observation is direct and there is no need to assume or “invent” it. So nobody in science said they “invented” observation.

===============================================

“Science is too narrow. It's limited framework.”

Doesn't matter and I already debunked you on this. You don’t need absolute certainty for knowledge, and you can still know things even with limited information and frameworks.

I bet the framework of science is a hell of a lot better than your philosophical nonsense framework (which is even more limited), and which can’t even demonstrate itself to provide accurate conclusions. So with your limited brain you are assuming you can draw a lot of accurate conclusions about reality and that it is “somehow” better than science, when we’ve literally demonstrated throughout history that people who made “guesses” like you often arrived at false conclusions due to biases and not using the scientific method.

===============================================

“Most science has nothing to do with science”

BS claim, Zero evidence to support this. Provide evidence or admit you made shit up.
I'm sorry that’s not how science works.

What do you mean “science has nothing to do with science” lol?
Do you realize how dumb your statement sounds?

===============================================

“Science is using "human language" as it's tools, overuses symbols and is basically not leading to anywhere”

It uses symbols to describe reality. The words we use to describe things in science correspond to some pattern in reality.
This is not the same as humans just simply making up words and talking about some imaginary concept in their head which has no correspondence to reality. I’m not sure how you’re failing to see this.

===============================================

“pumps that into industries and then people think it's some progress.”

BS claim, Zero evidence to support this. Provide evidence or admit you made shit up.
provide evidence to show that there is no progress being made when science is used. We literally make progress. Do you think planes don’t fly? What do you think the flying of a plane is based on?
It's called “physics” and “the scientific method”. if we didn't make progress, planes wouldn’t fly. I'm not sure what school you went to.

===============================================

“we're not here to prove anything or answer questions like why and how"

Science neither proves or disproves anyway, so i'm not sure where you got that from. Science only shows what position is supported by the evidence or less supported or refuted by the evidence.

source:
The core of science: Relating evidence and ideas:
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/for-educators/prepare-and-plan/correcting-misconceptions/
highlights:
“Misconception: Science can only disprove ideas. Correction: Science neither proves nor disproves. It accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, but may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives.”

===============================================

“questions like why and how"

Yes, genius science only explains “how” things work. It is not the job of science to explain “why” things work or “why” things are the way they are. That is a question to be dealt with in philosophy, not science.

===============================================

“This is trying to present itself as the absolute truth about the absolute truth.”

No it isn’t, You are pretending that it does and there is no evidence to support that. All of the evidence we have indicates that science only expresses statements probabilistically.

===============================================

“The absolute truth isn't something created by words and it's not a statement.”

I didn't say that and no one said that. stop putting words in my mouth. The absolute truth is something that exists, and statements can only be used to “express” it. No one thinks that statements are what “creates” absolute truth.

===============================================

“Today people mix philosophy with science with business of ads and making bills. That's nonsense.”

Philosophy is literally a part of science so I'm not sure what you're rambling about. And yes businesses will not function without the physical laws that govern the universe, so yes we can literally use physics to explain how everything works including businesses.
Any action that happens in a business is nothing more than particles in motion, which can be described using math and physics. Physics is the foundational framework that explains everything around you.

===============================================

“This is a fantasy of science that doesn't exist because all science is interpret by human minds which are inherently full of errors due to how humans process all that information and data.”


Here you replied to scientific objectivity. This is false and not a fantasy, I literally gave you the textbook definition of scientific objectivity and how it works, so your counter is immediately invalid.

So this is a fantasy because “you said so”? What's your source: trust me bro? lol? good luck.

===============================================

“interpret by human minds which are inherently full of errors due to how humans process all that information and data.”


Another bogus claim with no evidence. You said human minds are “full of errors”. Please provide evidence to support that claim.
The irony of this claim is that, if we were to apply your logic “human minds are full of errors”, then all of your replies to me, here, are wrong and so is your understanding of science.

Now if you meant “lots of errors”, then cool, but that’s why we use the scientific method to reduce errors. If we try to calculate using our mind, we can make lots of errors with big numbers, which is why we use calculators to increase accuracy and get precise results. So just because human minds make mistakes or have errors, does not mean that we can't reduce those errors by using science or the tools available in science.

===============================================

“But wise people don't have to have much and create 10000 threads to explain a simple change / shift in the reality.”

Does not change the fact that wise people can still have false beliefs and can often be led to false beliefs. And when wise people make use of only their common sense by assuming that it is somehow “magical”, it is simply not a reliable or sufficient enough tool to arrive at accurate conclusions. You need science, period!

 

[OccultKingdoms]

BS claim

you lost

you provide sources to back up your claims

Sounds like an immature way of

debate

You're not a real scientist and you did cite "simple.wikipedia".
I know (as in knowledge) why one would use that version of wikipedia.
A real scientist knows this is just temporary and useful stuff, but it's not the top thing and praising that leads to these "debates".

your philosophical nonsense framework

The classic error. Cutting out the big image in order to favor a narrow perspective.

I'm speaking about views on science and the world, not about science as whole as flawed and useless. It's not flawed and useless. It's misused and it's done by the wrong people.

There's no such thing as real science. It mostly only favors the current moment. It's not objective as it's constantly reworked and it sacrifices animals to feed humans and their nasty agendas.

Science doesn't predict own consequences of its own findings. For example, WWII - a major conflict - a science that is ignored many times is psychology which ignorance authors of narrow perspectives might present.

Science and philosophy and psychology overlap. These three domains when are combined produce gold and stuff, but most people pick one to use it for means of survival.

Complexities and limitations within scientific fields aren't simple. So saying we understand science is like saying we understand what society and the reality is. Some limited views may present thing a or b as the ultimate solution, but practice has shown otherwise.

IBM has built computers to modify WWII nazi camps. Was it scientific? Of course it was so calculated like the best mathematics.

You need strong psychological background to do experiments well.

 

[BLGProductions]

This was a great read, very valuable points have been discussed

Thank you for the insights on the yt algo

 

[YoutubeScientist]

Sounds like an immature way of


You're not a real scientist and you did cite "simple.wikipedia".
I know (as in knowledge) why one would use that version of wikipedia.
A real scientist knows this is just temporary and useful stuff, but it's not the top thing and praising that leads to these "debates".

The classic error. Cutting out the big image in order to favor a narrow perspective.

I'm speaking about views on science and the world, not about science as whole as flawed and useless. It's not flawed and useless. It's misused and it's done by the wrong people.

There's no such thing as real science. It mostly only favors the current moment. It's not objective as it's constantly reworked and it sacrifices animals to feed humans and their nasty agendas.

Science doesn't predict own consequences of its own findings. For example, WWII - a major conflict - a science that is ignored many times is psychology which ignorance authors of narrow perspectives might present.

Science and philosophy and psychology overlap. These three domains when are combined produce gold and stuff, but most people pick one to use it for means of survival.

Complexities and limitations within scientific fields aren't simple. So saying we understand science is like saying we understand what society and the reality is. Some limited views may present thing a or b as the ultimate solution, but practice has shown otherwise.

IBM has built computers to modify WWII nazi camps. Was it scientific? Of course it was so calculated like the best mathematics.

You need strong psychological background to do experiments well.

Earlier i stated “provide sources to back up your claims” and to that you replied:
“Sounds like an immature way of”

Your reply just sounds like an excuse. You legit made shit up and know you can’t provide sources so you just made an excuse to evade answering the question. So Why should anyone take your claims seriously? Why must we believe you? Because you said so?

I'll consider all your further replies invalid unless you provide sources to back up your claims. So, fairy tales until proven otherwise.
Rambling with big paragraphs won't be relevant anymore unless you provide evidence.

===============================================

“You're not a real scientist and you did cite "simple.wikipedia".”

Did you not know that wikipedia is generally considered a reliable source? Wikipedia literally provides citations to academic sources at the bottom of their articles.
Academic sources are reliable, and so is wikipedia because they give references to those sources.

And besides wikipedia, I mostly sent you direct links to several academic sources to support my claims. (in my previous replies to you)

===============================================

“The classic error. Cutting out the big image in order to favor a narrow perspective.”

I’m sorry the one in error here is you. You’re favoring your personal nonsense philosophical framework and your biased subjective beliefs over a highly accurate methodology like science. It is your perspective that is way more limited and narrower than science.

===============================================

“There's no such thing as real science”

Again a bogus claim you keep making which is not backed by evidence. When science provides evidence that something works and we can test it, are you claiming that this is somehow not “real science”? makes zero sense buddy.

===============================================

“It's not objective as it's constantly reworked”

It is objective, and I've debunked what you said already. “Constantly reworked” does not mean it is not objective. The definition of objectivity in science states that it must be free of personal biases and opinions.

quote from the academic article:
“scientific claims, methods, results—and scientists themselves—are not, or should not be, influenced by particular perspectives, value judgments, community bias or personal interests”

===============================================

“it sacrifices animals to feed humans and their nasty agendas.”

Sacrificing animals or killing people has nothing to do with science. Science is simply a tool for investigating the truth.
People can use tools in whatever way they want, they can either use it for good or bad, but them using tools in good or bad ways is not a problem of the tool but of the people. People can use a knife to kill other people or they can use it to cut butter. What people do is completely up to them and their agendas are also up to them. It has nothing to do with the tool itself. So killing animals has nothing to do with science.

===============================================

This was a great read, very valuable points have been discussed

Thank you for the insights on the yt algo

Thanks!

 

[Tribulations]

This is a common issue and some channels get stable views forever.

Your experiment does not prove that the problem is the channel itself. The main point to answer here is:

Does a channel that never had any content, have different settings compared to another channel that had also no content? An argument for this for instance is, "older accounts perform better than newer accounts" which has never been clearly proven.

Other than that (age of account) since both channels are empty, what else would be variables to decide how uploaded videos would perform?

What you are doing is most likely just rolling the dice, and sometimes the videos are uploaded at the right moment, at the right time, shown at a % high enough of the right audience, and you get that one video that gets constant traffic. This boosts the overall ranking of the channel, helping further videos by some margin. If you don't get that one lucky video, then the videos seem stuck. So the channel had nothing to do with it, it was always the content that created this ranking on the channel. Without content then there is most likely no pre-defined setting on a channel since it wouldn't even make sense that this is the case. The content defines everything. And in order to get that one video that boosts the channel, you need both a good video and luck (the right amount of retention + CTR, which has a big % of luck involved, since there are too many variables that decide these numbers)

So it may make sense to reupload in other channels, to not waste good videos due bad luck, and keep trying until you get good performance, but this would only be a good idea if the channel has no AdSense attached to it, otherwise they may find out you are doing this, which means this is only viable for brand new channels that have no AdSense attached.

YT also keeps backups of copies even if you delete the videos, so it is also worth considering this, if they may find out even if you delete videos, that you are doing that. Since you are reuploading the same video, and now with AI they may find out it's the same video even if you do some small changes to change the checksum of the file. While AI is a disaster and they are demonetizing and striking a lot of people that did nothing wrong, they may use it for this to find reuploads.

So a lot of things to consider here in this experiment. Like I said, my thesis is this:

You are rolling the dice by reuploading the videos, the channel themselves are irrelevant, the videos set the ranking of the channel.

 

[YoutubeScientist]

Your experiment does not prove that the problem is the channel itself. The main point to answer here is:

Does a channel that never had any content, have different settings compared to another channel that had also no content? An argument for this for instance is, "older accounts perform better than newer accounts" which has never been clearly proven.

Other than that (age of account) since both channels are empty, what else would be variables to decide how uploaded videos would perform?

What you are doing is most likely just rolling the dice, and sometimes the videos are uploaded at the right moment, at the right time, shown at a % high enough of the right audience, and you get that one video that gets constant traffic. This boosts the overall ranking of the channel, helping further videos by some margin. If you don't get that one lucky video, then the videos seem stuck. So the channel had nothing to do with it, it was always the content that created this ranking on the channel. Without content then there is most likely no pre-defined setting on a channel since it wouldn't even make sense that this is the case. The content defines everything. And in order to get that one video that boosts the channel, you need both a good video and luck (the right amount of retention + CTR, which has a big % of luck involved, since there are too many variables that decide these numbers)

So it may make sense to reupload in other channels, to not waste good videos due bad luck, and keep trying until you get good performance, but this would only be a good idea if the channel has no AdSense attached to it, otherwise they may find out you are doing this, which means this is only viable for brand new channels that have no AdSense attached.

YT also keeps backups of copies even if you delete the videos, so it is also worth considering this, if they may find out even if you delete videos, that you are doing that. Since you are reuploading the same video, and now with AI they may find out it's the same video even if you do some small changes to change the checksum of the file. While AI is a disaster and they are demonetizing and striking a lot of people that did nothing wrong, they may use it for this to find reuploads.

So a lot of things to consider here in this experiment. Like I said, my thesis is this:

You are rolling the dice by reuploading the videos, the channel themselves are irrelevant, the videos set the ranking of the channel.

the point that I'm making is, if you test 10 channels, some will get good performance and others won't, even with the exact same content. so, while the videos have to be good "generally", in order to get suggested, it's still never the case that it will always get pushed. there are luck factors involved too, and you can get different performance levels on different channels.

this is like rolling the dice or like a lottery.
the algorithm cannot give equal views to everyone no matter how good your content is, because global views are limited and available audience is limited.
views are not unlimited.

If the number of creators keep on rising (as they are now), it will only keep reducing the amount of available views and revenue for everyone.

now with the adsense thing I've tested both scenarios (same and different accounts):

1. even with the same adsense you can get different performance levels on different channels, like when you make new channels or have new channels connected with the same adsense.

2. in the case of different adsense accounts per channel, it's still a similar story. different performance across different accounts with the exact same content.

===========================

"YT also keeps backups of copies even if you delete the videos, so it is also worth considering this, if they may find out even if you delete videos, that you are doing that "

I've tested this, and so far there weren't any problems, so let me explain why.
for instance, take the example where you go to some random channel, start downloading their videos and re uploading those exact same copies to your channel.
here you do it without editing the videos and you upload exact duplicates.
you will see that after a few days or so that channel will get terminated for spam.

so while yt can keep backup copies, this really isn't a problem in the instance where I'm uploading content to Channel A > channel A fails > i delete videos from channel A > re-upload exact same copies to channel B.
in this scenario you won't get terminated for spam, or have any spam flag, etc, because you deleted or got rid of the content from the previous channel first.
So, if this was as problematic as you said, since yt is potentially keeping a copy of the content, then these channels where i re-uploaded duplicate content should also have gotten terminated for spam (which it didn't), just like in the case of the first scenario I described. but in this case they won't terminate or penalize you, because you are first deleting the content from the previous channel before re uploading to any new one.

so in several tests I've done, I've seen cases where channels could get anywhere from a few hundred to a few k views on certain videos.
but if i upload this exact same content to different channel, it suddenly gains a few million views.

 

[Chibita]

100% agree with your theory. I know people who run multiple successful Shorts channels, and whenever they start a new channel, they will drop it if it doesn’t perform well after about a week. They then reupload the content on a different channel because they know the issue isn't their content but rather the algorithm not favoring the channel for whatever reason.

 

[metalgear01]

100% agree with your theory. I know people who run multiple successful Shorts channels, and whenever they start a new channel, they will drop it if it doesn’t perform well after about a week. They then reupload the content on a different channel because they know the issue isn't their content but rather the algorithm not favoring the channel for whatever reason.

Does those people create those new channel every time with a new email, new device etc... ? or just a new email or even just delete the channel from the email and recreate it from the same email ?

thanks !

 

[Tribulations]

the point that I'm making is, if you test 10 channels, some will get good performance and others won't, even with the exact same content. so, while the videos have to be good "generally", in order to get suggested, it's still never the case that it will always get pushed. there are luck factors involved too, and you can get different performance levels on different channels.

this is like rolling the dice or like a lottery.
the algorithm cannot give equal views to everyone no matter how good your content is, because global views are limited and available audience is limited.
views are not unlimited.

If the number of creators keep on rising (as they are now), it will only keep reducing the amount of available views and revenue for everyone.

now with the adsense thing I've tested both scenarios (same and different accounts):

1. even with the same adsense you can get different performance levels on different channels, like when you make new channels or have new channels connected with the same adsense.

2. in the case of different adsense accounts per channel, it's still a similar story. different performance across different accounts with the exact same content.

===========================

"YT also keeps backups of copies even if you delete the videos, so it is also worth considering this, if they may find out even if you delete videos, that you are doing that "

I've tested this, and so far there weren't any problems, so let me explain why.
for instance, take the example where you go to some random channel, start downloading their videos and re uploading those exact same copies to your channel.
here you do it without editing the videos and you upload exact duplicates.
you will see that after a few days or so that channel will get terminated for spam.

so while yt can keep backup copies, this really isn't a problem in the instance where I'm uploading content to Channel A > channel A fails > i delete videos from channel A > re-upload exact same copies to channel B.
in this scenario you won't get terminated for spam, or have any spam flag, etc, because you deleted or got rid of the content from the previous channel first.
So, if this was as problematic as you said, since yt is potentially keeping a copy of the content, then these channels where i re-uploaded duplicate content should also have gotten terminated for spam (which it didn't), just like in the case of the first scenario I described. but in this case they won't terminate or penalize you, because you are first deleting the content from the previous channel before re uploading to any new one.

so in several tests I've done, I've seen cases where channels could get anywhere from a few hundred to a few k views on certain videos.
but if i upload this exact same content to different channel, it suddenly gains a few million views.

Yes, I agree with the general idea. But like I said, my point was, the channel itself, is nothing. All channels are created equal. Unless, you can point to evidence, that an older channel (for example), even if empty, was performing better than a brand new channel. But again, we can't know this, since even if you upload the same videos, the same videos get uploaded at different times. Im not sure im being clear.

For example, you have a package of good 10 videos. I don't know with what schelude you upload the 10 videos (do you upload once a week, every day, once a month??)

But let's say, you have this pack, with 10 videos, and you have 2 channels:

1) Channel A: Created in 2012
2) Channel B: Created this month, brand new

Both channels, never had any prior content uploaded, so they have no reference of anything.

You upload the 10 videos, one a week, on Channel A

You observe the results, and then delete the videos, and then delete the actual entire channel, just to be clear

You repeat this process on Channel B and observe results for the same time.

Now you compare results.

The big question here is: Did the difference in age (Channel A was created in 2012, channel B now) had any impact on the performance of the videos?

I would argue there are 2 options:

1) It didn't, since they are both empty, it's all the same. Video performance create how the channel is eventually ranked
2) It did, but we will never know, since even if you uploaded the same videos, at the same rate, at the same hours of upload, there will always be a percentage of randomness (the videos get shown to different people) so you can never know if the channel itself had anything to do.

In my opinion, I would like to think that channels by themselves are all the same, and only the video performance end up giving them a ranking. There is not a pre-set lucky setting as it were, even with 0 videos. It would be kind of fucked up for YouTube to do such thing.

Nontheless, the strategy is still valid: Create new channels and try again, seems like a good idea, if the videos do not perform. It would be a huge waste of time and resources, to create 10 high quality videos, and have them not perform because of bad luck.

But again I insist in case im not clear: This good luck is achieved by simply reuploading the videos (necessarily, in another channel to not have the algorithm see that they are reuploads, as if you deleted the videos and reupload them on the same channel, I guess this is higher risk than if you upload them in another channel). So basically, you roll the dice, if it works, you keep working on that channel, which has a good ranking because you had luck with the 10 videos. If it doesn't work, try in another channel.

Now in the more practical terms. I would like to discuss, what is the best setup.

You said, that in your experiment, it is not evident that having 2 different AdSense accounts had any impact on the performance. This is good to know because I don't know how to get additional AdSense accounts. In my case, I only want to run 3 channels at the same time, with one AdSense account. Currently have one, I want to open another in a subniche, and another in another different niche (same broad niche, but different enough)

Anyway, my question is, what is the best way to separate the channels?

Let's say

Phone number, email, upload from a different IP, get a different Firefox profile, or ideally a different device per channel.

Even if they share the same AdSense, you should be good to go?

How did you observe this? considering that you have to wait until you reach 1000 subs and the required watchtime, you will spend some time without the channel being linked to an AdSense account. So during this period, sharing an AdSense account is not a factor, only after it's added.

About different IP/devices:

In my experience, I just cycle the IP (I have dynamic IP from my ISP) and I have tried liking my own comments, I have found success. Sometimes the comment get ghosted, but with like 60% of accounts, the likes get registered. Im not sure what it is. But it seems to be a per-account thing. I don't think they can limit IP's because they are very white, legit IP's, even if they start with the same numbers. They are legit ISP addresses, that different people get attached, the lowest risk IPs. Proxies and other "sold IP" solutions, increase this risk, ask for captchas all the time etc. So I think this would be a free way to do this. Just type on a txt file, everytime you log in to an account, what IP you are using, and save it next to the gmail account, and just be sure to not mix them just in case.

And then I just use different Firefox profiles, and log in from desktop, or laptop, or phone. That's 3 devices. And im going to buy a new phone soon, so that's 4 devices.

Now as far as deciding when a channel is not going to deliver the traffic you consider that these 10 videos deserve. How do you judge this?

Do you upload the videos (again, respecting the same time, let's say, 1 a week) then wait for X total number of views? or you need them to hit X views consistently? how do you judge success before you delete to reupload in another channel?

Im asking because some niches, you may expect a lot more views to decide it was success than others. Do you just judge it in terms of what % of traffic comes from recommendation? For example. In my view, this is the most important metric. I have videos that still get good traffic after many years. Recommendation traffic is king. And I never used SMM panels or anything blackhat, because im paranoid they just permathrottle the videos if you use such methods, so I try to be legit. What we are doing is not even blackhat imo, we are just maximizing our effort (creating videos) and not have some stupid bad luck lottery ruin this effort. But we must consider, what is the most optimal way to:

1) separate channels
2) keep channels safe from viewthrottling, shadowbannings or whatnot

Any further comments welcome.

 

[Chibita]

Does those people create those new channel every time with a new email, new device etc... ? or just a new email or even just delete the channel from the email and recreate it from the same email ?

thanks !

Yeah they use a new email to create a new channel.

 

[DestinyCalls]

This is a great read. I was working on a Youtube channel once for a livestreamer and i made sure the Title & Thumbnail was perfect & engaging. Really helped with views.

 

[MarioBrosFan]

Yeah they use a new email to create a new channel.

But @YoutubeScientist you use a different phone number too everytime you create a new channel? how do you not run out of phone numbers?

 

[YoutubeScientist]

But @YoutubeScientist you use a different phone number too everytime you create a new channel? how do you not run out of phone numbers?

I keep buying new ones.

 

[blogmen]

Test with “channel A” > upload 10 trending HQ videos > wait for 1 to 2 months > if no results or poor results > delete “channel A” and it’s videos > create a new channel “channel B”

Isn't it better to upload the same content on multiple channels at the same time so you don't have to wait 2 months between each upload?

If the theory works, you should blow up faster this way and then you can delete the duplicate channels and keep the viral one.

 

[YoutubeScientist]

Isn't it better to upload the same content on multiple channels at the same time so you don't have to wait 2 months between each upload?

If the theory works, you should blow up faster this way and then you can delete the duplicate channels and keep the viral one.

you can't do that lol. if you upload duplicate content to multiple channels, you will get terminated for spam.

try downloading multiple videos from a random channel and re upload them on a test channel.
after some hours or perhaps a few days, you will get terminated for spam.

the only way to do this correctly is, to delete the videos from the other channel first, before re uploading them to a new channel.

 

[blogmen]

after some hours or perhaps a few days, you will get terminated for spam.

Afaik that only happens if you reupload popular videos that are automatically filtered by yt, or if you get reported (or if you reupload a previously suspended video), but in this case it's all your content and you upload it at the same time, maybe there's a limit to how many channels you can upload to, but I'm pretty sure I uploaded at least on 2 channels my identical videos with no issue in the past.

Check this out:

"the only thing that happened is that on my channel where the video was already posted I got a notification that there was another video that was a 100% match and that I could request to have it removed or something".

So this means you can do this successfully as long as it's your own content and nobody else can remove it.

 

[YoutubeScientist]

Afaik that only happens if you reupload popular videos that are automatically filtered by yt, or if you get reported (or if you reupload a previously suspended video), but in this case it's all your content and you upload it at the same time, maybe there's a limit to how many channels you can upload to, but I'm pretty sure I uploaded at least on 2 channels my identical videos with no issue in the past.

Check this out:

"the only thing that happened is that on my channel where the video was already posted I got a notification that there was another video that was a 100% match and that I could request to have it removed or something".

So this means you can do this successfully as long as it's your own content and nobody else can remove it.

show me the channels. i need to analyze to conclude.

I'm pretty sure if you upload more than a few videos that are duplicate, you will get terminated for spam unless the content is edited to have some differences, even if the channels belongs to you.
youtube wouldn't want you to flood the platform with duplicate copies of videos.
I've got terminated even in the case where I uploaded 10 videos that i owned, to 2 different channels of mine.

 

[blogmen]

show me the channels. i need to analyze to conclude.

I'm pretty sure if you upload more than a few videos that are duplicate, you will get terminated for spam unless the content is edited to have some differences, even if the channels belongs to you.
youtube wouldn't want you to flood the platform with duplicate copies of videos.
I've got terminated even in the case where I uploaded 10 videos that i owned, to 2 different channels of mine.

I guess it's worth testing. Maybe 10 is too much, so maybe split them between more channels.

 

[MarioBrosFan]

I keep buying new ones.

Yeah but how? I have 3 sim cards. I like to have control of the phone number, so I don't trust these virtual number services that are there today but not tomorrow. You may need your phone eventually again for something and then you are locked out. So how do you get legit trusted long term phones?

show me the channels. i need to analyze to conclude.

I'm pretty sure if you upload more than a few videos that are duplicate, you will get terminated for spam unless the content is edited to have some differences, even if the channels belongs to you.
youtube wouldn't want you to flood the platform with duplicate copies of videos.
I've got terminated even in the case where I uploaded 10 videos that i owned, to 2 different channels of mine.

Something not considered, what if someone steals your video before you delete it, then reuploads it? technically if you reupload it, you would be copying this video, since it would be the oldest reference video.

 

[Hi I am Mitu]

If you have nothing to lose, you can try it. I'll do it too. The only thing I'm curious about is whether using the same email address again will change the result.