Uploaded May 2007 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Comments by Blunty3000 on mask wearers can be found here:
youtube.com/watch?v=kwy91Srq6po
"If you're not afraid to stand up for what you believe in then why the disguise? A man in a mask hides more than his face, and that's not something to be trusted."
I didn't imply everyone MUST show their faces, merely stating that *I* don't think a "masked man", something inherently dishonest, should be a good choice for this so called "yourtube advocate"
And here:
youtube.com/watch?v=LN44Upl-Ji0
HEHE, Thanks for that TS. But this isn't about judging by appearance alone, I still believe hiding behind a mask is inherently dishonest and regardless of their intentions or track record, a person in a mask is more difficult to trust than a person with the same stated intentions and record who isn't afraid o show their face.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theestranger made a number of videos that makes him one of the most qualified candidates for Yourtube Advocate:
Youtube: It's time to cut the bullshit videos:
youtube.com/watch?v=-Jp3tqV3rSU
youtube.com/watch?v=aE4T_JrmLEw
One Step Forward and Three Steps Back:
youtube.com/watch?v=QtyNQ6hcDxI
youtube.com/watch?v=QdcaW30hd28
youtube.com/watch?v=1gW-Jk0dfus
Theestranger talks about Youtube's questionable interpretation of copyright law and their lack of protection of Fair Use:
youtube.com/watch?v=z9aD7YK45zs
Out Blogging Founding Fathers, by John Hood, president of the John Locke Foundation: Note the extensive use of pseudonyms by our Founding Fathers:
carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3573
Benjamin Franklin published under the names Silence Dogood, Alice Addertongue, Fanny Mournful, Obadiah Plainman, and Busy Body. John Adams used 25 different names, including "Vindex the Avenger".
James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay published the Federalist Papers anonymously using the pseudonym "Publius"
en.allexperts.com/q/U-S-History-672/Federalist-Papers-1.htm
The Electronic Frontier Foundation cites the 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission:
eff.org/Privacy/Anonymity
Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.
Comments by Blunty3000 on mask wearers can be found here:
youtube.com/watch?v=kwy91Srq6po
"If you're not afraid to stand up for what you believe in then why the disguise? A man in a mask hides more than his face, and that's not something to be trusted."
I didn't imply everyone MUST show their faces, merely stating that *I* don't think a "masked man", something inherently dishonest, should be a good choice for this so called "yourtube advocate"
And here:
youtube.com/watch?v=LN44Upl-Ji0
HEHE, Thanks for that TS. But this isn't about judging by appearance alone, I still believe hiding behind a mask is inherently dishonest and regardless of their intentions or track record, a person in a mask is more difficult to trust than a person with the same stated intentions and record who isn't afraid o show their face.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theestranger made a number of videos that makes him one of the most qualified candidates for Yourtube Advocate:
Youtube: It's time to cut the bullshit videos:
youtube.com/watch?v=-Jp3tqV3rSU
youtube.com/watch?v=aE4T_JrmLEw
One Step Forward and Three Steps Back:
youtube.com/watch?v=QtyNQ6hcDxI
youtube.com/watch?v=QdcaW30hd28
youtube.com/watch?v=1gW-Jk0dfus
Theestranger talks about Youtube's questionable interpretation of copyright law and their lack of protection of Fair Use:
youtube.com/watch?v=z9aD7YK45zs
Out Blogging Founding Fathers, by John Hood, president of the John Locke Foundation: Note the extensive use of pseudonyms by our Founding Fathers:
carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3573
Benjamin Franklin published under the names Silence Dogood, Alice Addertongue, Fanny Mournful, Obadiah Plainman, and Busy Body. John Adams used 25 different names, including "Vindex the Avenger".
James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay published the Federalist Papers anonymously using the pseudonym "Publius"
en.allexperts.com/q/U-S-History-672/Federalist-Papers-1.htm
The Electronic Frontier Foundation cites the 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission:
eff.org/Privacy/Anonymity
Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

![Blunty3000, Utubedrama, and Censorship: Part 1
This video provides a detailed response to Blunty3000 and his support of the censorship of haters. The issue is not as simple as Blunty suggests, and legitimate free speech could be the inadvertent casualty of an anti-hater campaign. Such a campaign could also backfire and severely hurt Youtube.
Here is a link to Blunty3000s video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWG-zgaXH40
Bluntys blog where he discusses haters in general and Trevor Rieger in specific:
http://www.bluntmation.com/content/
Utubedramaqueens video, where Trevor describes why he thinks Youtube censored him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEojLdCxDQo
Information about Richard Nixons enemies list:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nixon-s-enemies-list
Michelle Malkins First They Came video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOb6Vh3qaAY
New York Times v. Sullivan—The seminal libel law case.
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/nytvsullivan.html
The original passage from NYT v. Sullivan that I bent to fit this situation:
A rule compelling the critic of official conduct to guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions and to do so on pain of libel judgments virtually unlimited in amount leads to a comparable self-censorship. Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred. [note 19] Even courts accepting this defense as an adequate safeguard have recognized the difficulties of adducing legal proofs that the alleged libel was true in all its factual particulars. See, e.g., Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, 59 F. 530, 540 (C.A. 6th Cir. 1893); see also Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 892 (1949). Under such a rule, would-be critics of official conduct may be deterred from voicing their criticism, even though it is believed to be true and even though it is, in fact, true, because of doubt whether it can be proved in court or fear of the expense of having to do so. They tend to make only statements which steer far wider of the unlawful zone. Speiser v. Randall, supra, 357 U.S. at 526. The rule thus dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate. It is inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
My video discussing the Nick Gisburne affair. Nick was originally told by Youtube that he was being censored for inappropriate content. Youtube later told him that he was being banned forever because of copyright infringement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By6aqz_79Uc
Youtubes bungling of the Gisburne affair earned it some really bad press. Watch Michelle Malkins video and pay close attention to the comments underneath it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/21/banned-by-youtube-iii/
This video by Ron, the Washington, D.C. copyright lawyer, discusses the Tur v. Youtube lawsuit. It is absolutely essential to watch this video for people to understand why Youtube should be careful not to get a reputation for censorship.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr9SQ4qkMMk
Update: Trevors Utubedramaqueen account has been banished and he is now posting as Utubedramaking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUUEczUFCsg Blunty3000, Utubedrama, and Censorship: Part 1](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/eaB-boF_lMs/mqdefault.jpg)








