Monday, May 13, 2019

Locking down the chat

I'm interested in getting the opinion of those here who are Darkstream viewers now that we are going to have the option of streaming directly from Unauthorized as well as from YouTube with the new update scheduled for today.

The Unauthorized stream does not have a chat function available yet, much less a Superchat function, but the broadcast software I'm using will allow me to stream simultaneously to both and display either YouTube superchats or the entire YouTube chat. Given what appear to be the inevitable problems with the YouTube stream after the last three days of significant stream interruptions there, as well as the indisciplined way even non-trolls can't seem to stop filling up the chat there with obvious and redundant comments - how many times do they think I need to be "informed" that the stream was interrupted when I get a message right on my screen that frames are dropping? - I'm leaning towards just turning on the Superchat alerts so I don't miss any of them while ignoring the regular chatbox.

Once the Darkstream channel reaches 30k subscribers, it's possible to turn on the YouTube memberships, I might be able to turn on the regular chats, but at present, it just seems counterproductive to pay any attention to it. But that's just my perspective. The best option is to do everything through Unauthorized, of course, but that's not an option yet.

What do you think? Locking down the comments here appears to have worked very well, to the extent that even some of the old timers are surfacing to share their thoughts from time to time.

UPDATE: a Darkstream viewer shares his thoughts.
As a viewer only and because you asked, it would be marvelous to listen to you and learn without the distracting chat. You have a lot of knowledge and when you are focused on a subject its very absorbing. 
To put the situation into context for non-viewers, this is the sort of thing that consistently pops up in the Darkstream chat due to the sheer number of people attempting to discredit Owen Benjamin.
Instead of acting like children and calling those you disagree with rude names, why not address some of their important questions?  One thing I would like to know is why Vox would want to be a business associate with a someone who falsely accused an innocent person of attempting to poison his child?  Not only that, right after Owen admitted his cult members "might do some shit" in retaliation Owen actually read the man's real name on stream. This is okay with you, Vox? 
Doxxing critics and attackers is absolutely fine with me. I deal with the likes of the New York Times and Wikipedia going out of their way to doxx me - "real name, Theodore Beale" - almost every single time they write about me, so I have zero regard for the anonymity of people who attack public figures in any way. As the Dread Ilk know, I am a firm believer in making vigorous use of every single tactic that is ever used against me and mine.

Labels: ,


Blogger Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 May 13, 2019 6:42 AM  

Lock it down

Blogger artensoll May 13, 2019 6:45 AM  

I've found the distraction of the chat to be frustrating since the Periscope days. I do not and never will care what they say. I stay up till 1am to hear and learn from YOU. Perhaps turn them on occasionally for a 'Stupid Question Day'? Superchats and memberships are fine with me.

Blogger Gregory the Great May 13, 2019 6:53 AM  

Lock it down, I do not watch live, but I can do without the steady stream of
"stop asking me what I would do to improve Owen's attitude!" or
"stop asking the same question over and over again."
On the other hand I must admit there is something deeply satisfying about hearing the very very insensitive words "OK, you're banned."

Blogger JC May 13, 2019 6:53 AM  

I watch or listen to the Darkstream almost every day. I think I have commented once when I thought I had something important to add. Granted I only catch it live every now and then but I honestly wouldn't miss the regular chat if it was gone. The Super Chats also tend to be more interesting to hear an answer to than, "what deodorant do you use?" The regular chat often sends you off on tangents. While it is always entertaining to hear you smacking someone down, it is also often just tiresome.

Blogger Mile High Honey Bear May 13, 2019 6:57 AM  

I vote for locking it down. It's worked well so far, so let's give it a try! :-)

Blogger Bobiojimbo May 13, 2019 7:00 AM  

Lock them down.

Blogger TheKman May 13, 2019 7:06 AM  

Ignore the regular chatbox:
- a lot less of "Did you know Owen did X"
- a lot more time to make fun of Ben Shapiro
- a lot more detail on the decent questions that are asked.
The people who aren't watching it live don't pay attention to the chat anyways and although it adds a nice "clubhouse" effect to the stream, the more popularity rises the worse the chat will get.

Blogger Stacey May 13, 2019 7:11 AM  

While I love hearing you tell someone they're banned for life, then hearing the click of you actually doing it (it puts me in mind of A Christmas Carol when the elves throw the kids down the slide) I would much rather hear what you were saying before being interrupted.

Blogger The Cooler May 13, 2019 7:14 AM  

I am distracted by your being distracted by the chats. It's like watching someone stop mid-thought cycle to swat flies for an aggregate 20 minutes out of every hour... which I suppose could be funny. Maybe get a gong? Don't get a gong.

Blogger Doktor Jeep May 13, 2019 7:15 AM  

The best and worst thing you can do to a troll is make them pay to troll you. So lock it down in any such means that if you get trolled, the joke is already on them, they paid money to troll you and get banned.

On unauthorized, if possible, I would make the ability to comment something that only "premium" or whatever kind of higher tier membership there is later, capable of commenting. It's the same old story when all is said and done: what the rabble have to say is not worth seeing. Equalism has been weaponized, so it's fair to weaponize against it.

Blogger Curlytop May 13, 2019 7:16 AM  

Lock it down. It's very distracting and tends to knock you off your train of thought regarding your chosen topic.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz May 13, 2019 7:20 AM  

I turn off the chat during viewing.
It is too distracting to follow when listening in the foregin (English) language.

Blogger linesy May 13, 2019 7:22 AM  

Total agreement. Occasional Stupid question days are a perfect time for stupid questions. Otherwise zfg about chat. I always watch when I wake up anyway. Chat only really makes sense on something like a Mr Metokur stream that are far more anarchic by their nature

Blogger Luke May May 13, 2019 7:24 AM  


Blogger xevious2030 May 13, 2019 7:31 AM  

Yours is going to be a good presentation either way. People primarily watch for you. But I think the chats bring an additional connection that is going to be important in the future. Maybe part of some signature familiar intro, the things not to do "Or you're be banned," some signature like "you're fired." I don't know, how many Voxiversities do you do, and how many interactive streams do you do? And would there be duplicate methods? What direction do you want to take the streams? That last one is biggest question, the dundee heads are just dunderheads.

Blogger Rick May 13, 2019 7:32 AM  

The chat stream is the little kids table. If they want to ask a question, they’ll have to get a lemonade stand and buy a question.

Blogger ScottC May 13, 2019 7:32 AM  

The chat is a big distraction. I wish you had analyzed Shapiro's behavior more in the recent stream than deal with agitators. If people want to add their own commentary to the Darkstream uploads, they can leave comments beneath the video.

Blogger peter blandings May 13, 2019 7:42 AM  

agree 100% with the sentiment here so far. lock it down. i'll often see the title of the dark stream and look forward to it because it's an interesting topic. but within 3 minutes it inevitably drifts into a 55 minute q and a with idiots and we don't hear a word about the title topic. i rarely go to the stream now because i know it's going to be a stupid fest and the topic won't be discussed at all.

Blogger Cataline Sergius May 13, 2019 7:45 AM  

Not being sarcastic at all when I ask, what is the business model for the comments?

Build a community?

Offer viewers outreach?

Gather meta-data?

Everyone else is doing it, so there must be something to it (not as bad an idea as everyone likes to pretend it is)?

I don't really know what they are supposed to bring to the party.

Blogger GAHCindy May 13, 2019 7:45 AM  

Lock it. I listen to every stream, but I lose patience and turn it off when you pay too much attention to the comments.

Blogger NP_see May 13, 2019 7:49 AM  

Lock it down. I usually just say good evening and good night anyways. It's frustrating when Vox has to address the superfluous drivel in chat.

Blogger Zaklog the Great May 13, 2019 7:52 AM  

I'll admit right up front this is purely out of self-interest. I'd prefer not because I simply don't have money to drop on superchats with any regularity and you have occasionally answered my regular chat questions on there.

I don't know how much that opinion counts, but there you are.

Blogger buzzardist May 13, 2019 7:52 AM  

I don't watch video streams often. I can read many times faster than I can watch a video. The few times I have watched, it's because something was happening on the stream that interested me and wasn't already discussed on this site. On those few occasions, I found the chat an annoying distraction. Maybe people feel more connected and involved because they are participating in the chat. That's the only reason I can imagine for keeping it. Mostly, people were playing as if their comments won points in a battle, and whenever Vox interrupted his train of thought to react to the comments, it was a disruption, not a benefit to what was being presented.

Blogger wreckage May 13, 2019 7:52 AM  

I really enjoyed the earlier streams, including the digressions. However just reading that one comment you quoted re: Owen Benjamin was enough to make me want to burn someone's house down. I don't know that it's safe for an SDL, ELoE, to be subject to that kind of temptation.

In short, I do enjoy listening to you field questions, but I wouldn't subject my worst enemy to the level of oh-so-clever wheedling some of these deadbeats engage in.

Blogger Gregory the Great May 13, 2019 7:53 AM  

The text you quote in your update is so disgusting and hurtful to the eyes that this one alone justifies locking the whole chat down. Or would you step out of your limousine to greet 500 of your ardent fans knowing that among all those nice people there are 10 who are preparing to throw human excrements at you?

Blogger wreckage May 13, 2019 7:58 AM  

I feel I should add that I find the bannings highly entertaining, and I feel the "welcome to..." and the chat scrolling by creates a sense of immediacy and inclusion that many people enjoy. Buuuuut... the people who've voluntarily reduced themselves to cheap chat-bots, who've deliberately become NPCs, those people are disruptive and somewhat disturbing.

I can imagine them queuing for a lobotomy. To willingly give up personhood like that is creepy.

Blogger Shimshon May 13, 2019 7:58 AM  

I never view live since it's way too late for me.

I did pay a bit of attention to the comments in the early Darkstreams, but the comment stream long ago became a torrent and ceased to be followable or interesting. Although, like others, there is something satisfying in hearing you ban another troll.

Blogger Z MAlfoy May 13, 2019 7:59 AM  

I rarely catch the streams live, and I think have only ever commented one or two times when I have caught them live. I would find it no great loss if comments were locked or otherwise done away with, and you'd be better able to focus on the subject matter scheduled for the evening. That would be an improvement, I think. If people want to ask questions, they can email, comment here, or best of all, shut up and pay attention.

Blogger Shimshon May 13, 2019 8:00 AM  

Maybe just have open comments for Stupid Question Saturdays? The rest of the time, closed or superchats only.

Blogger CM May 13, 2019 8:12 AM  

The superchat is why I don't watch darkstreams.

I tried watching one, but quit after 5 to 10 minutes because of the interruptions. I'd rather see questions asked during the DS organized and answered in a QA - either by you or an Ilk would suffice.

Blogger justthinkin May 13, 2019 8:13 AM  

Lock it down. While it's sometimes amusing to observe a middle school classroom in action, it's tiring for the viewer, and it's frustrating for the teacher. Besides, we've already been through middle school. I'd rather hear what the adults have to say. Lock it down.

Blogger Cloudbuster May 13, 2019 8:15 AM  

Lock it down. Note, though, that I am not a fan of livestreams in the first place. I'd rather just listen to an hour of you discussing a subject without the distraction of live listeners at all, and I'd prefer the same content in text rather than audio. But that would just be a blog post. ;)

Blogger Wishing Star May 13, 2019 8:15 AM  

Lock the chat down please.

Blogger Quicksilver May 13, 2019 8:22 AM  

I agree. You having to distract from your speech in order to ban a gamma or a troll makes the show much worse to follow.

Maybe only open the comments at q&a time?

Blogger Zaklog the Great May 13, 2019 8:23 AM  

I would add that it's been my theory for a while regarding the internet that the comments section is where all the fun is. Of course, part of the reason for that is that most of the media, even on the internet, is dominated by people who play strictly inside the rules of "acceptable discourse" and puncturing that is why it's fun. With your blog and YT channel that reason clearly does not apply.

Blogger D.J. May 13, 2019 8:29 AM  

I stopped watching Darkstreams because of chat interruptions. If the chat is locked down, I'll be coming back.

Blogger pdwalker May 13, 2019 8:33 AM  

Lock it down.

Open it up for stupid question day because the bannings can be funny.

Blogger Pierre May 13, 2019 8:35 AM  

I'm listening to the darkstream for Vox's ideas, not the constant annoying interruptions.

I vote for allowing only superchats. If what I'm gotta say isn't worth paying $1 to say it, then it's not worth saying.

Besides, this will annoy the gammas, which is always a plus.

Blogger thalios May 13, 2019 8:35 AM  

I almost always take in the Darkstream as an audio only experience. While I never see the regular chat, I can definitely tell it's changed just by the rate of interruption and divergence. I think some type of critical mass has been reached in the chats -- in general numbers or just numbers of trolls. I don't know. I can hear it now. It didn't used to be that way.

Aside from Stupid Question Day, shut em down.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash May 13, 2019 8:37 AM  

I'll miss the bannings, but not the stupidity that prompts the bannage.

Blogger Rek. May 13, 2019 8:41 AM  

Long time reader. Unauthorized subscriber. The chat clearly dilutes the quality of your streams.

Blogger Crave May 13, 2019 8:46 AM  

It is distracting, even for long time followers. Multiple unrelated conversations are going on, trolls forcing their faggotry upon everyone, gammas are outing themselves, and occasional substantive questions are being asked. I prefer to catch it live, but the replays are more chill as I listen to the topic and chuckle at the bans.

Lock it down. Changes can be made later if necessary.

If chat is still running, and you only read Superchats, then gammas and trolls will run rampant sans regulation. That's a vector of attack.

Blogger Teek-Lor May 13, 2019 8:51 AM  

It depends on the circumstances. If its a low substance stream, chat can be nice. If the topic is more informationally dense, then it rises above background noise to become a distraction. Although, insta-bans are always amusing- I would limit it to super. Oh, BTW do you know. . . .

Blogger Gareth May 13, 2019 8:51 AM  

As an alt hero backer and soon to be special project backer, I concur. We want to listen to you, not you reading out idiots.

Blogger VD May 13, 2019 8:51 AM  

If chat is still running, and you only read Superchats, then gammas and trolls will run rampant sans regulation. That's a vector of attack.

Agreed. So, which VFM watch the Darkstream regularly and want to moderate the chat? Email me with your VFM number.

Blogger Prionyx May 13, 2019 9:05 AM  

Having the ability to interact with you and ask for clarification on points you're making, while you're making them, is invaluable. A great use of modern tech to improve on the unidirectional "TV broadcast". The problem is that MPAI and it's more often distracting rather than meaningful to you and the audience.

Locking it down to Superchats and premium memberships would be one solution.
Alternatively, although it doesn't reduce the burden on your end, don't show the chats so the trolls don't get the satisfaction of seeing their witticisms attached to your stream. Then you can acknowledge, or not, the useful comments at your discretion.

Blogger Richard Rahl May 13, 2019 9:10 AM  

Locking it down is fine with me. I catch a live stream maybe once a week. Not sure how much effort you've taken to see from where these subversive, gamma, and woman-like attacks originate. If you care to know, a good chunk of them come from Revenge of the Cis, Daywave, and Nightwave (all the same guys) YouTube channels.

Blogger SemiSpook37 May 13, 2019 9:25 AM  

Don't catch the DS much, but tend to agree with others here on locking it down on the chat. It's pretty much your platform with your content, and giving the gammas and their ilk any sort of license to interact immediately derails whatever points you try to get across.

Personally, I've always felt any sort of live chat doesn't exactly work as the content provider intends. Too many issues from a security perspective, as well as the potential for losing a few IQ points from the GIGO that inevitably shows up.

Blogger Andy Evick May 13, 2019 9:28 AM  

Lock it down, but have stupid question day occasionally.
I find the wave of questions distracting, although there are occasionally really good questions asked. I come to listen to you. But questions can be really good to have some details clarified.

Blogger Andrew Brown May 13, 2019 9:35 AM  

I think the chat has its moments, for example the Deus Ex Vagina comment was brilliant. But there's always the trolls and retards who comment complete nonsense and ruin the overall experience.

Blogger Avalanche May 13, 2019 9:36 AM  

I'm of two minds about locking it down. On the one hand, the trolls and plain-idiots are truly annoying and them disrupting Vox in the midst of his talk is infuriating. On the other hand, there is a cadre of 'friendly regulars' who get to meet up each night / most nights with a "hey-how're yah?" But even they / we can get off on nonrelated tangents, which distracts. My spergy-gamma part thinks protectively of the newbies who ask "normal" questions; the answers to which are not easily found and I delude myself that I am "helping" them by providing answers (e.g., where's the chair from? why ELoE/SDL? where can I buy the book or comic?) and a few warnings e.g., "be advised, if you keep repeating that question, Vox may BAN you!"

But, that's me indulging myself and I, too, find the chat distracting. Since I listen to the Darkstreams later in MP3, I can get the full experience /pay attention only to what Vox has to say without the visual distraction of chat. So, I guess my vote would be: YT subscribers once allowed or UA.TV subscribers and Superchats only. I have not been able to convince YT to LET me Superchat, so that's frustrating but i live with it.

Blogger sammibandit May 13, 2019 9:38 AM  

Lock it down.

Blogger Troushers May 13, 2019 9:41 AM  

That Owen Benjamin discreditor is simply re-iterating the points made by a silly YouTube documentary by a chap called Porsalin.

The documentary presented as favourably as possible the views of a group of dedicated Owen trolls who would hilariously pay superchat money to Owen to criticise him for taking people's superchat money.

On topic though, I tried to think back to a darkstream where a normal comment had contributed usefully to the discourse. The only examples I could think of was where someone had asked you about another topic that warranted a brief comment - a piece of news, update on X, etc. So no, I don't think cutting them out would make a difference.

Blogger xevious2030 May 13, 2019 9:42 AM  

A solution might be along the lines of what are done for the comments of the blog. Pay to post in the chat. Pay extra for suerchats. And a 20 second delay in posting, with a moderator filtering out the nonsense so you don't have to have such interruptions. I don't read the chats, because I read too slow (part of the purpose of video is for those less inclined to text), and I can almost never get in to a livestream, much less post. I do see a feedback benefit in identifying where a portion of the listeners are, questions for clarification, and a demonstration of why some lines of reasoning listeners may have are demonstrated to have basic errors. Added to that, I have noticed, the main topic may last for a few minutes, to say what needs to be said, and quite a bit of content, 30-50 minutes, is chat related. But as with #19 (CS), the business model. I'll be listening either way.

Blogger Eincrou May 13, 2019 9:43 AM  

I have viewed many live streams over the years, and the impact of the chat depends on several factors: how fast the chat scrolls (number of chatters), the subject of the live stream (video gaming, political commentary, etc), and how the live streamer interacts with chat. That last factor is by far the most important one, and there are many different ways for the streamer to do it

Many big-time live streamers I've viewed on Twitch dot television, who can have tens of thousands of viewers and hundreds or thousands of chatters, will let people say whatever they want. Even though they have mods in the chat, moderation is very light. And understandably so, because it's almost impossible to moderate that many chat messages for content when the velocity of new messages is so high. Automated bots will delete spam, ALL CAPS messages, and other low quality messages. The streamers still read the chat constantly, but only respond to messages that are amusing or interesting to them. The speed of the chat scrolling probably makes it psychologically easier to ignore annoying comments, since they know that even nasty messages will go off screen very quickly and vanish into an impotent oblivion.

I've also watched live streamers who try to closely moderate their chat for message content, but I've always thought this was a futile effort. I've never seen a case where the quality of the chat finally reached a point where the live streamer was satisfied. People inclined to closely and heavily moderate their chat inevitably build a resentment towards their live chatters, sometimes even insulting the chat as a whole. These streamers also tend to give bad messages much more attention, effort and time than the good messages. Some of my favorite live streamers do this, so I'm not opposed to it as a viewer who can find their earnest complaining about bad chat messages funny, but it has its downsides.

It's my opinion that the most important factor is how the live stream host handles the chat. That mostly comes down to the streamer's personality and experience with Internet live chats. Some traditions of internet chat rooms will definitely annoy an inexperienced streamer, even as they delight much of the audience. If a streamer has the kind of personality that fixates on a displeasing comment for longer than it takes for that comment to scroll off the screen, it's entirely possible that the quality of the live stream would be improved by him not looking at the chat at all. Some people can keep a show running without inspiration from the chat, and that is great. On the other hand, a streamer with a different kind of personality can address bad comments in an interesting or humorous way that adds to the quality of the live stream. That's also something many viewers can enjoy!

As with many things that come with performance art (and hosting a live stream is a performance), it depends heavily on the performer. He has to conduct the live stream in a way that can allow him to give his best performance.

Blogger Lazarus May 13, 2019 9:47 AM  

Is there anyway to lock the chat until the meat of the presentation is finished and then open it to questions?

That is how wetware programs are presented.

Blogger binks webelf May 13, 2019 9:49 AM  

As a sick-at-home guy, I've recently met some new & interesting like-minded folks, looked at their channels, and chatted with them via the Darkstream. Regulars & actually interested folk are more important than the ankle-biters & trolls. Any group or movement needs some good form of 2-way interaction, regular encouragement, engagement, and communication.

The signal-to-noise ration can be vexing from time to time (like the Shapiroids last night), but the signal itself is still important & primary, I believe. What would be lost? In my case, community, a chance to chat with & pray for folks, and the chat often continues for up to half an hour after (and before) the actual Darkstream. This is valuable.

Is there a way to sign-in to a stream, after reading some basic rules?

Anyhow, free advice is worth every penny.

Blogger Alphaeus May 13, 2019 9:49 AM  

Most of the time I do not watch the videos, I only listen like it was a podcast. I play them in the background at work instead of the radio. So I would not miss the chats. I've commented in the chat box before, but rarely. I also made a Superchat contribution once or twice.
Seems like limiting to Superchats might be a way to get more money out of the activity, though. If someone's willing to pay to make their stupid comment, at least you're getting something out of it.

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 9:55 AM  

Facebook deplatforming its perceived enemies and annoyances isnt wrong just because Facebook is.
It works

Blogger MightyKevster May 13, 2019 9:56 AM  

Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 wrote:Lock it down


Blogger Cetera May 13, 2019 10:02 AM  

Lock it down and shut up the idiots. I specifically DON'T watch the Darkstreams (or, when I try to I give up after 10 minutes) because I can't take all the stupidity and inanity from the peanut gallery.

I'd be much more inclined to pay attention when you are able to pay attention to what you want to talk about. There are simply too many folks who are unable to think or read but can fill a chat with crap and make you respond to them to be worthwhile. No one cares what the youtube commenters have to say anywhere. They are especially worthless on a high-intellect stream like yours.

Blogger Crave May 13, 2019 10:04 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Xayveir May 13, 2019 10:09 AM  

I've lost track of how many times you were discussing an interesting point when some Gamma or other type of sperg-out has derailed your train of thought.

I understand that not everyone can afford to pay for superchats, myself included, and there has been numerous comments that you have answered that were interesting, or at least led to interesting points. However, I don't think it is worth the hassle of the constant derailing by gammas and spergs that leaving them as they are would entail. Also, I think there is only so many times that you should have to answer the story behind your chair, or how many Rogan's tall Shaqueero is.

With this in mind, I would have to vote for locking the chat down. Perhaps opening the chat back up for the last five minutes of the stream if that is a possibility, or on stupid question day, could be an option instead.

Blogger KG May 13, 2019 10:10 AM  

Chats are worthless. As you explained, it’s like a college lecture, you don’t interrupt until there’s a point where the lecturer volunteers to field questions. Suggestion: either get rid of chat entirely, or ignore it and only field superchats or member chat once you’ve finished your lecture.

Blogger Patrick Kelly May 13, 2019 10:11 AM  

Vox usually covers material in streams that have been presented here on the blog one way or another, so I don't go there necessarily for new info or content. Sometimes I'm pleasantly surprises. I prefer to read serious content rather than listen to audio or watch videos. If there were transcripts I would read them before watching video.

I watch video streams for casual, passive consumption, the entertainment value and enjoy the chat banter and Vox's response, but I'm probably not the target audience. Vox is very funny in a unique cruelty artist way.

Blogger binks webelf May 13, 2019 10:23 AM  

As far as the recent video-issues (which just makes the trolling all the more noticeable), it looks like lots of people are currently getting the Special-Throttling Treatment (STT) from GoogTube.

Blogger artensoll May 13, 2019 10:26 AM  

I am unable to superchat for less than £5 a go, for some reason. In the beginning it was minimum £2. I don't know why that changed, does anyone else? For me it would be more worthwhile paying a £5 monthly membership when that option becomes available.

Blogger fiendeJ May 13, 2019 10:28 AM  

Seconding @56 Lazarus' point, keeping chat off your screen - then opening for questions / reading at some later point. The chat has been instructive in the past - even though the annoyance is also there.

Blogger Boxty May 13, 2019 10:33 AM  

I pay zero attention to the chat but enjoy your interaction with the viewers. I really appreciate that you read off the comments before responding as I usually listen to the Darkstream in the background while working. I hope you will at least keep the superchats.

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 10:42 AM  

Hello! I'm a lurker who comments from time to time. I would love to send a super chat to hear Vox uninterrupted by trolls and idiots. A funny tid-bit I remembered was in school I dreaded when the children caused the teachers to repeat points multiple times through multiple lessons. I am ecstatic at the prospect of not having them in the Darkstream any longer.

Blogger Joan T. May 13, 2019 10:42 AM  

I'd love to just listen to you without the often annoying distraction of the chats.

Blogger Tars Tarkas May 13, 2019 10:43 AM  

I'm for leaving it open. There are some good questions and comments from the regular chat. The S/N ratio is pretty good on your streams.

Blogger rcocean May 13, 2019 10:46 AM  

I've found reading the Chat box a waste of time. People say idiotic stuff, troll, write non-sequiturs and worst of all - go off topic. I don't need to see someone writing about Guns when Vox is talking about SF.

Blogger Philip May 13, 2019 10:51 AM  

I started watching back in the Periscope days and have watched about 90% of the Darkstreams-- in that time I've only made a handful of comments, none of which were that earth shattering. Frankly I don't follow the chats or pay serious attention to them as I find them annoying and distracting.

Nuke the chats.

Blogger rcocean May 13, 2019 10:52 AM  

Maybe at the end, take questions from the superchats. Is that possible?

Blogger rekrapt May 13, 2019 10:54 AM  

I don't get to watch live stream as often as I like. But, I find the regular chat distracting and mostly asinine. Especially the incessant blather from the "Jew-haters."

Blogger Panzerdude May 13, 2019 11:01 AM  

I am a DarkStream viewer only; no chat. Overall, I find any chat to be a useless distraction as it makes Twitter look encyclopedic by comparison. However, there are occasional questions asked in chat that Vox responds to, that make for good discussion.

It is these occasional "rabbit trails" that I find enjoyable. Still, those are rare.

If you take away the time Vox spends reading/responding to chat, will the DarkStream become a 30 minute presentation? That may make them better.

Therefore, given the very limited value of chat and the prospect of shorter, more focused videos - eliminating the chat is the logical choice.

Blogger Borsabil May 13, 2019 11:01 AM  

I watch your streams but don't read chat, let alone use it, because it's gay. YT comments have always been a cesspool, likely because they've never been moderated and there's so many that the only way to get noticed is either by making a wisecrack or being a shitlord.

Definitely ignore it and answer the super berries only. Every YT streamer with an audience over a thousand does the same.

Blogger justaguy May 13, 2019 11:13 AM  

Because of other factors, I only watch darkstream as a recording. So the chats are an annoying distraction. The funds from the superchats make them understandable distractions, but the other ones especially the gamma detract from the ideas being expressed.

Blogger Shadowfax May 13, 2019 11:14 AM  

I watch every darkstream, but rarely live.

My favourite solution would be for you to ignore the morons and just pick out interesting or funny comments and questions. But maybe that's just not in your combative nature?

So, for a realistic solution, I second what many others say:
- superchat questions on normal days, addressed towards the end (I think a few serious questions enrich the stream).
- open chat on stupid question days (it can be funny now and then).

OT (slightly): The dropped frames issue turns watching on youtube into a bad option from now on. Living in the digitally developing country named Germany, I have connection performance problems with unauthorized, so I would really appreciate the download function.

Blogger Borsabil May 13, 2019 11:16 AM  

"Nuke the chats."

Chat can be useful for a streamer. It can be a great source of feedback as to how the show is going. Does chat want me to cover this or that? What does chat think about this thing? Vote 1 for yes and 2 for no etc. It also lets the audience chat to each other in real time, which doesn't happen anywhere else on YT. I'd advise leaving it on and using it for occasional audience response but otherwise totally ignoring it. Honestly I'm constantly amazed that Owen and Vox actually read their chat, no one reads their chat!

Blogger Steve Samson May 13, 2019 11:28 AM  

I think a moderated chat that Vox doesn't read unless he needs to is probably optimal, there is something special about a livestream with chat that sets it apart from a broadcast. I would still watch the Vox Day show if it was on the television obviously but I enjoy the community of a chat, even if I rarely participate myself.
Long term, I'd bet that a members-only chat on populated entirely by people who have paid money and submitted their real names and credit card numbers would be a lot more civilised.

Blogger Unofficial Bear May 13, 2019 11:34 AM  

I watch your streams everyday and am doing my best to get into your blog. Been watching for 6-8 months now. When it comes to chat, I'll be really happy when unauthorized has member-only chat, but until then I don't plan on using chat during the stream very much. Personally, I wouldn't sign up for a youtube membership when you hit 30k for 2 reasons; I don't want to give youtube any of my money that I intend on going to you, and I already support with an unauthorized subscription and would rather not sign up for another somewhere else. I think you handle trolls well on stream, and understand why you have to address most of the comments, because if you did not they would just keep going and going - but I will admit it gets tiring sometimes when you are mid-thought and are interrupted by a troll and then go on a tangent for a few mins responding to them. Don't get me wrong, I'm laughing out loud a lot of the time you lay into someone stupid, but it does break the continuity of the discussion. Looking forward to watching you guys on!

Blogger Beardy Bear May 13, 2019 11:53 AM  

They are just a bunch of two Rogan tall sodomites who don't get it. This isn't for them.

Take any steps you feel the need to for now. Once unauthorized can take comments, I'd love to have the option to interact with you there.

The Darkstream was higher quality over all when I started watching it, as opposed to now. Getting back to that standard is worth some sacrifice.

Blogger Phelps May 13, 2019 11:54 AM  

Lock it down.

It's all non-monetary economics. Barriers to Entry are useful. The paltry amount of cash it takes to make a superchat makes people think about whether or not it is really worth interrupting the stream with their observation. The fact that the barrier to entry is so low and yet STILL manages to filter out 99%+ of the chat tells you how worthless most of the chat it. People won't put their money where their mouth is.

Avoid the tragedy of the commons, which is what open chat it. Spergs with nothing useful to say are taking up the attention of better people because it costs them nothing to shit up the chat. As soon as there is the SLIGHTEST cost, they all bail for other chats to leech off of.

Owen's chat was 1000 times better when it was members only. I generally turn off any non-members only chat when a stream has more than a few hundred people watching.

Blogger Avalanche May 13, 2019 12:00 PM  

@57 "Any group or movement needs some good form of 2-way interaction, regular encouragement, engagement, and communication."

Binks has a good idea... A separate 'forum' with separate moderators, in a separate window, where the group of good chatters could comment and chat -- WITHOUT it interfering with Vox's talk? Some moderators who could pull GOOD questions out and fling them over to the closed DarkStream chat where the SuperChats (only) would also appear? I don't know if YT has an option to close its chat entirely except for SuperChats and 'moderator submitted' chats. That might be a good compromise -- a 'community' that is not interfering with the DarkStream -- while still being able to 'add' to the stream? Maybe, to ease the load unless you have a surfeit of mod-volunteers: the troll and ankle-biter patrol, and the sift-for-grain to offer to the Dark Lord?

(Binks -- just FYI: I'm 1950Archangel over at the DarkStream...)

Blogger Tars Tarkas May 13, 2019 12:02 PM  

Steve Samson wrote:think a moderated chat that Vox doesn't read unless he needs to is probably optimal, there is something special about a livestream with chat that sets it apart from a broadcast.

This is a good point. I close the chat box if I manage to catch it live, but it won't be the Dark Stream with it.
But, the DS could probably benefit from a mod.

Blogger FUBARwest May 13, 2019 12:03 PM  

As a listener/viewer, shut it down. Good questions will come from the superchats.

Blogger Starboard May 13, 2019 12:10 PM  

I'm for locking down the chats until Q&A or stupid question day. I also like having the comments open before and after the stream for those who enjoy the community. Like people attending a lecture, when the speaker speaks, the audience shuts up.

Superchats are good for those with serious questions. I love the idea of making anklebiters pay for your withering attention.

I've been a subscriber since the early periscope streams. Audience interaction is great in moderation but has become a distraction as your base has grown.

Stupid question for the tech guys: what's causing the drop frames and stream interuptions?

Blogger KG May 13, 2019 12:10 PM  

Ah, the periscope days. YT chat doesn’t have those hearts

Blogger sammibandit May 13, 2019 12:21 PM  

Binks has a good point. There's value added in the pre and post chat. In addition to that Leif has mentioned several times that he's interested in fielding manosphere discussion in the chat following your programme since your stream attracts young men interested in self improvement. I don't want to speak for Leif but I think he has a great idea for post chat. I don't want to see that chat go by the wayside.

Blogger Balam May 13, 2019 12:44 PM  

I like the chat. However, I think closing the free-chat is practical if it's getting raided all the time. Seeing people get banned is useful to me as it demonstrates how not to act, and if my gut reaction was similar to the guy who got banned it causes me to reevaluate my feelings. It also is interesting when common misconceptions are pointed out and addressed - normally it's not new information to anyone who reads the blog but it does give more context to how the greater media thinks.

Once it gets to 3+ people banned for inanity it feels like a waste of time for everyone involved.

Blogger lowercaseb May 13, 2019 12:54 PM  

Kill the chat. It might be an interesting from time to time, but I watch the darkstream to learn...not to interact.

Blogger szook May 13, 2019 1:01 PM  

Take the key and lock it up...lock it up.....lock it up
Take the key and lock it fair......

Blogger Jester May 13, 2019 1:02 PM  

Hey Vox,

Suggest leaving Chat functional and handled specifically in the following manner. There are many chats on Channels with 1-3k viewers per livestream that function smoothly this way. It is a nice added bonus for your mature viewers and you will be personally unaffected/distracted as you don't need to address the general chat, only superchats. The general chat is a great place for viewers to interact with one another. They can share info based on what you are speaking about, and get to know each other along the way. You can select one volunteer per episode or per week to monitor/moderate, enforce simple guidelines, and to ban trolls. The other channels that do this have a vibrant chat community network. Win-Win.

Blogger Coyotewise May 13, 2019 1:16 PM  

I'm probably a bit more on the fence than some of my fellow Ilk, because I sometimes find it adorable when new, young disciples throw out their fresh, insightful convictions ("PC is just anti-whiteness!"). But depending on my mood, it can also be tiresome when even the well-intended comments are basically just paraphrases of the exact point Vox just made. What I don't know is if chat culture is part and parcel of what keeps the innocent-but-naive around. But since we really just want Gideon's 300 anyway, I say lock it down generally. But maybe find ways people can scratch the chat itch periodically, like Stupid Question days. Those have been a mixed bag but have had some very interesting moments.

Blogger Wolfman May 13, 2019 1:22 PM  

I'll miss being able to make snarky comments and trade autistic barbs with the other reprehensibles but the stream is the main thing and anything that weakens the Dark Lord's focus needs to be cut out for the good of the mission.

Blogger John Bradley May 13, 2019 1:28 PM  

I listen ('dead') to the Darkstream every single day. The chat is an annoying distraction. I've got no problem with a Superchat-only Q&A after you've said what you have to say, even if the 'presentation' segment is only 10 minutes and the Q&A is the majority of the show, but it's irritating to hear you about to make a really good point, only to be sidelined by a random comment and never return to what you were saying.


Blogger Garuna May 13, 2019 1:50 PM  

I usually watch live and post in the chat from time to time. It won't be a loss to see it gone. It's definitely annoying when the gammas derail the discussion. And honestly, even the non-gammas can push the stream into off-topic territory. I prefer the streams where you stay on topic and address it thoroughly.

Blogger Garuna May 13, 2019 1:53 PM  

The documentary presented as favourably as possible the views of a group of dedicated Owen trolls who would hilariously pay superchat money to Owen to criticise him for taking people's superchat money.

Owen Derangement Syndrome is real.

Blogger James Pyrich May 13, 2019 2:03 PM  

Yeah, you're under no obligation to provide a platform to anons with no skin in the game. Chat should at minimum only be open to people who are actually putting up some cash, either in the form of a subscription or a one-off. The signal to noise ratio might still be low, but if you want to up the quality of the stream, having a cash gate is a pretty good first step.

I don't think there's much value in allowing just anyone to comment. Trolling and ankle-biting aside, people ask the same questions over and over again. At least dealing with trolls and ankle-biters can occasionally be amusing to watch, but I personally have a low tolerance for that kind of repetition.

Blogger Stan_qaz May 13, 2019 2:38 PM  

Have someone else moderate the chats and only pass you ones worth responding to. Take the chats from being (to me) a frustrating interruption to being valuable contributions.

Lets you concentrate on the subject and useful comments, lets folks that like comments natter away, lets the VFM have great fun with the trolls and idiots.

Blogger Silent Draco May 13, 2019 3:02 PM  

Turn off the regular chat, superchat only. If I have a question worth posing, I'll buy it in.

Learning the gruesome details of the Ilk, and an important one is when to be quiet. The stream of anklebiters gets the fangs ... never mind. The newbies or learners can search on their own. I'd rather have more details, or exposition and good Q&A interplay.

Blogger Bultz May 13, 2019 3:07 PM  

Honestly, I haven't really been watching the streams much since the superchat took over - obviously you feel you have to respond to them but I watch to listen to your thoughts rather than take requests

Blogger 🐻Drew🐻 May 13, 2019 3:53 PM  

As a viewer, I used to hate the chat because it made the topic Vox was covering drag on with tons of interruptions. However, I have grown to enjoy some of the questions asked, and the Ban hammer dropping on Gammas. So I actually do not have a preference, if chat is gone it will be good because the topics will get covered without as many interruptions. If chat stays open Ill enjoy gamma casualties and some relevant questions. Im just here to learn and either way will still watch!

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 4:11 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Jake May 13, 2019 4:15 PM  

I think the chat is too distracting at this point. Between the people trying to be "helpful" and the gamma trolls I think it isn't worth it anymore.

Blogger SirHamster May 13, 2019 4:20 PM  

binks webelf wrote:

The signal-to-noise ration can be vexing from time to time (like the Shapiroids last night), but the signal itself is still important & primary, I believe. What would be lost? In my case, community, a chance to chat with & pray for folks, and the chat often continues for up to half an hour after (and before) the actual Darkstream. This is valuable.

I enjoy that aspect of the Darkstream chat as well. The return of SocialGalactic would help cover some of the unintended eu-social side effect.

Avalanche wrote:Binks has a good idea... A separate 'forum' with separate moderators, in a separate window, where the group of good chatters could comment and chat -- WITHOUT it interfering with Vox's talk?

Sounds like a fan-run IRC chatroom where we can peanut gallery the Darkstream without feeding back and distracting Vox.

Not being a part of the Youtube stream, the membership would end up smaller, but that also filters noise and reduces moderator load. Would serve as a tavern for the regulars.

Blogger matveidaniilovich May 13, 2019 5:09 PM  

I like chat functions for community building, but that becomes impossible when you start reaching Big Bear numbers of viewership. Then it becomes a fast-scrolling mess— pointless.

Blogger anorganicbear May 13, 2019 5:20 PM  

Teek-Lor wrote:It depends on the circumstances. If its a low substance stream, chat can be nice. If the topic is more informationally dense, then it rises above background noise to become a distraction. Although, insta-bans are always amusing- I would limit it to super. Oh, BTW do you know. . . .

I agree with this take. Sometimes you finish talking about the topic 10 minutes into the stream, and unless there are enough superchats to keep things going it probably makes sense to leave chat on, or turn it back on when you run out of steam.

Lazarus wrote:Is there anyway to lock the chat until the meat of the presentation is finished and then open it to questions?

I also agree that a temporary lockdown while the main topic is discussed would be preferable (to me) to a blanket lock. Most of the chat I enjoy is pre- and post-stream, so I wouldn't really mind having it locked down during the stream. It also gives me something to do while waiting for the SDL to show up if I can chat.

Although I recognize that it's only a matter of time before a totally unmoderated chat becomes a complete cesspool, so maybe it would just be better to nuke it now.

Beardy Bear wrote:The Darkstream was higher quality over all when I started watching it, as opposed to now. Getting back to that standard is worth some sacrifice.

Blogger Jill in StL May 13, 2019 6:20 PM  

I will be content with however you choose to stream Darkstream and while I've enjoyed both your chat and Owen's as well, I will be happy just to listen to both of you. Whatever is decided is fine by me and I look forward to future Unauthorized.TV live-streams. This is the beginning of a fantastic new programming!

Blogger Avalanche May 13, 2019 7:01 PM  

@89 "I also like having the comments open before and after the stream for those who enjoy the community. Like people attending a lecture, when the speaker speaks, the audience shuts up."

Ooh, I like this idea too.

Blogger The Greay Man May 13, 2019 7:03 PM  


The Owen haters started up on the Reddit OwenBenjamin back in January and I subscribed thinking it was a few trolls

It's grown into the biggest freaking freakshow ever

Blogger James Pyrich May 13, 2019 7:54 PM  

"Slow mode" on tonight's Darkstream has concentrated and focused Gammas making it much easier to capture and block them.


Blogger Rhys May 13, 2019 8:12 PM  

Calling someone by their name isn't doxing.

Blogger sammibandit May 13, 2019 8:41 PM  

Great success tonight. I really liked having the 5 minute delay. It's like newb training wheels for me. Appreciate forcing the gammas out as well. Have to make the chats I make count and that means poking gammas goes down the priority list. Sorry it had to come to this but whatever best suits the oldschool needs is best.

Blogger Scott May 13, 2019 9:42 PM  

Today was the best stream in months. The 5 minute delay is a great success.

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 10:29 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger damaris.tighe May 13, 2019 11:12 PM  

To describe a parent that puts a child on hormones as a prelude to castration as "poisoning" is an understatement.

Blogger Vulgar_Display May 13, 2019 11:42 PM  

As others have said if you just ignored the chat or had it off during the presentation portion of the stream we could get a mixture of pertinent info and hilarious gamma bannings.

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 11:44 PM  

We show up to hear you. I’d love it if 3 out of say 5 days at least where locked down with maybe 10 super chats read at the end.

Blogger braq May 14, 2019 1:10 AM  

I'm with everyone else: your streams that I've watched are significantly and negatively impacted by your responding to idiots and trolls. Maybe respond in intervals, every 15 minutes? Or save them til the end? Randomly responding whenever one catches your eye is (for me) the worst option.

Owen's streams are different: 4x+ longer, totally scattered, and typically far less concisely focused - more entertainment than edification. I do think his streams could be improved by less chat-interaction, but yours would benefit more significantly given the substance and presentation style.

Blogger damaris.tighe May 14, 2019 6:44 AM  

I remember the good old streams where Vox had banned 50% of the audience by the end of the stream.

Blogger Steve Samson May 14, 2019 9:00 AM  

That's a great idea.

Blogger xevious2030 May 14, 2019 10:14 AM  

I know this is about stream comments, but after listening to the Podbean “Uber: the best IPO…” podcast (and like in kind recent YouTube casts/post live streams), which has been like the last number of podcasts, here goes. And I realize it is so redundant to what you are aware of or likely considerations thereof. Anyway. Might try listening to the recorded podcast from start to finish, it’s considerable. The drops are frequent and large. However many live stream listeners there may be, the effect on post live listeners is probably worse than comment annoyance. An obvious (meaning no great recognition on my part) suggestion would be to have some sort of secondary recording (second camera or voice recorder recording locally) to upload as the primary after the fact cast stream. Even crappy secondary equipment would be preferable to the level of content loss of the streamed recording. It will lose the comments, but better than the loss of excellent content. Darkstreams had been going well since much of the inception, frame wise, with a notable early occurrence of triggered frame butchery in the “Darkstream 342: Why Ben Shapiro lies all the time.” Looking forward to my impending Unauthorized membership, but the Podbean (would guess made from the YouTube recording) and YouTube situation, it is that bad.

Blogger Beerhead Mustache May 14, 2019 8:00 PM  

Finally was able to catch a stream live tonight to get a feel for what we are dealing with. First impression is we need more moderators. The chat timer seemed a bit long, but if it helps the progression of the stream I can deal with it and be more efficient with my comments. I think you can be far too merciful.

Blogger Maria Angela Grow May 15, 2019 7:45 AM  

I wish there were some way for honest questions to be asked and answered for those who can not afford to pay, while being rid of those who say unacceptable things. Sometimes I have a question. I have been trying to figure out your comment regarding meerkats, who only seem to be a problem to other meerkats, but, that is not that important. But with the books, someone might need clarification, but be on a budget....

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts