The falacious inaccuracies of YouTube's censorship algorithms are obvious and widely observed.
It is exampled by outright removal of content that breaks no terms:
It is exampled by {second reason/example}
It is exampled by {third reason/example
Difficulty in imagining how the flaws could be more clear ever grows.
There is arising evidence that mannerisms, infelctions, tone of video format, etc. may have more to do with censorship than content specifically conflicting with "YouTube's Values".
Take these channels:
Well, Frank Tufano is to Ice Age Farmer what LtCorbis is to The Alternative Hypothesis.
The tone of both Frank Tufano and LtCorbis is more confrontational, conversive, and brash than that of Ice Age Farmer or The Alternative Hypothesis. Frank Tufano and LtCorbis make their content more visually personal in showing their face as they're talking in most of their videos. Conversely, Ice Age Farmer and The Alternative Hypothesis possess more formal tones and seldom show their face.
So, what am I getting at?
LtCorbis and Frank Tufano initiate, while The Alternative Hypothesis and Ice Age Farmer engage with the initiated.
Take Alt-Hype. How many noobies are going to click on []? Beyond that, how many will continue to listen to him and talk about [] without much of any context?
Compare this to LtCorbis. Her videos will have titles such as []- something depthy, yet easily digested contextually.