> If you can't see downvotes on content, there is no way of determining how misleading the content may be.
There are many ways of doing so, with their own pros, cons, and time requirements. At best you're losing a relatively low quality way of quickly filtering out some videos.
> It also disguises cases where a creator may be getting harassed or bullied by others.
You seem to want it both ways. It is judging videos by this ratio that allows the harassment to have an effect.
There may also be an emotional component to it; a private downvote likely stings a lot less than a public one. It prevents people from piling on or joining in the harassment. And it can allow YouTube to shadowban harassing accounts.
For the people who could actually affect change, it hides nothing. YouTube and the creator both get to see the numbers, and in extreme cases, they'd be available for law enforcement.
> The beginning of the end of being able to trust YouTube stats (as if that wasn't already an issue).
There are many ways of doing so, with their own pros, cons, and time requirements. At best you're losing a relatively low quality way of quickly filtering out some videos.
> It also disguises cases where a creator may be getting harassed or bullied by others.
You seem to want it both ways. It is judging videos by this ratio that allows the harassment to have an effect.
There may also be an emotional component to it; a private downvote likely stings a lot less than a public one. It prevents people from piling on or joining in the harassment. And it can allow YouTube to shadowban harassing accounts.
For the people who could actually affect change, it hides nothing. YouTube and the creator both get to see the numbers, and in extreme cases, they'd be available for law enforcement.
> The beginning of the end of being able to trust YouTube stats (as if that wasn't already an issue).
These stats were never trustworthy for viewers.