Dec. 13, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
07:46
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| In my email to Sydney three days previously, I pointed out that I have not broken the terms of service. | |
| My behaviour did not occur on Patreon's website as stipulated in their terms of service, nor was it on my YouTube channel, nor was it funded by my patrons. | |
| Instead of addressing this in any way, Sydney replied with this, Hi Carl, thanks for getting back to me. | |
| I appreciate your concerns over how we go about account removals. | |
| While we don't comment on the removals of other creators, please know that your account isn't the first my team have removed for a content violation that did not occur on our site. | |
| Well, I have no doubts about that, but I am glad that they appreciate my concerns. | |
| I find that kind of corporate speak very reassuring and totally believable, and it really puts my mind at rest. | |
| Don't worry, person who has just been purged, we purge people all the time. | |
| It's nice to see Sydney admit that Patreon have indeed been engaging in an active purge. | |
| So instead of acknowledging or engaging with my sensible objection, Sydney goes on to say, Because we process payments, we take creators' entire brand into account during our review. | |
| Your brand is funded through Patreon, and your YouTube channel and the types of discussions you host on it contribute to this brand. | |
| This is also what makes your appearance on the other site relevant to the project you fund on Patreon. | |
| This Jack Conte is not in your terms of use or community guidelines. | |
| There is one reference in them to the word brand, and that is in the community guidelines to prevent fraud by impersonating another content creator. | |
| Otherwise, there is absolutely nothing in the community guidelines that references this at all. | |
| The terms of use also state nothing that would imply that Patreon's trust and safety team are monitoring one's entire brand, or that one is going to be judged on one's brand. | |
| As Jack Conte said, manifest observable behaviour. | |
| The terms of service and community guidelines are not being followed in my case, and apparently the case of other people, and there is simply no way that Jack could defend what is happening here, which is why he isn't. | |
| He is not saying anything about this publicly, and I think we can all see why. | |
| I suppose that Patreon are not the transparent, responsible, or ethical company Jack Conte wanted to create. | |
| And why this happens to be connected to the fact that they process payments is also a mystery not explained in their material, but I suppose transparency is something that Patreon have simply decided to abandon, along with consistency or concern for their own users. | |
| My brand has been politically incorrect for years. | |
| But I guess that didn't matter when Patreon was a small platform and needed to grow. | |
| I believe I joined in 2014. | |
| Now in 2018, when Patreon's competitors like Hatreon and Makra Support are being actively deplatformed, the great purge of the offensive centrists can begin. | |
| Now, the rules as presented to the creators don't matter, and the trust and safety team is ever watching to make sure that you are on what they believe to be good behaviour all the time, everywhere, which is what they are employing when they say, Because of this, your use of racial and homophobic slurs taking place on somebody else's YouTube video factored into our decision to remove your page. | |
| This is a strange interpretation of events given that I, a white person, was talking to other white people, in this case white nationalists. | |
| I'm confident enough that the very clip itself demonstrated that I'm not attacking non-white people or gays, and I am so confident of that that I included it in my previous video. | |
| There is a demonstrable context that disproves this allegation, but the trust and safety team are simply ignoring that, which makes their final statement all the more worrisome. | |
| To begin the appeal process, please respond with any evidence you feel helps explain why the language you used in conversation with Michelle Caitlin doesn't constitute hate speech. | |
| This is insane. | |
| What evidence could I prove of my own intent? | |
| Surely, I am the only person who knows what my intentions were, and I think the context in which I was acting demonstrates that. | |
| But the context doesn't matter, which means the last five years of my YouTube channels don't matter either, where I debate against racism from the far left and the far right. | |
| There is obviously no evidence I can provide because we are not talking about evidence. | |
| We are talking about interpretation. | |
| Hate speech is not a forbidden set of words that must never be said in any context. | |
| They are a set of terms when used in conjunction with malicious intent towards a group of people that makes them offensive. | |
| I was not insulting black people or gay people, I was insulting Nazis, and it was clear to everyone who watched that clip. | |
| But even worse than this, I am obviously unable to prove a negative. | |
| Asking me to demonstrate how it doesn't constitute hate speech means that either those words are expressly forbidden, which means a lot of content creators are in a lot of trouble right now, or that this is a witch trial, and I'm being asked to prove that I'm not a racist. | |
| I did not reply to their email. | |
| I will not be a party to a social media witch trial. | |
| And I have moved to Subscribestar and will open a Gab crowdfunding account when it comes online. | |
| I have spoken to the CEO of Subscribestar several times by email now, and I have found him responsive and transparent so far. | |
| I have no idea what that means for the future of the service, but so far I do not get any impression that I should not be able to trust them. | |
| I'd like to thank everyone who has moved across to that platform. | |
| You have saved me from many a sleepless night and guaranteed that the next big project will go forward. | |
| I paid for the art in full for the Good Christians yesterday, so it now is officially in production. | |
| I'd like to say that I am sorry to any other content creators who have found their patrons leaving Patreon. | |
| This seems to have become quite a large concern for Patreon themselves as well, as Matt Christiansen posted an email he received from Patreon unsolicited, trying to soothe him about their arbitrary removal of my page from their site and reassure him that they won't be removing his as well, at least not yet. | |
| But again, they use the term, our experience with each creator is individual, to reinforce to him that he cannot expect to have a consistent set of rules apply to him, or even know what those rules are. | |
| He can expect to be at the whim of the trust and safety team and isolated if ever they decide to turn on him. | |
| Patreon is being run like a dictatorship. | |
| There is no consistent set of rules, no apparent boundaries within which the trust and safety team are obliged to remain, and no fair process of appeal. | |
| I naturally have the distinct impression that this entire process is essentially malicious, and the actions that are being taken against me are punitive. | |
| I did not break the terms of service, and Patreon are not even accusing me of breaking their terms of service. | |
| They don't even reference their own terms of service. | |
| They are doing it because they don't like my brand, as they have admitted. | |
| And the thing is, I could have probably argued the case with them, and maybe because of the public pressure and the high-profile nature of this case, they would have reversed their decision, but I really don't think I can do that now. | |
| Even if Patreon were to restore my page tomorrow, I would close it down manually. |
Export Selection