Elite Dangerous Livestreams - 28.04.2022

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Last edited:
Great to hear!


Actually I mentioned that I have no major issues with you using it as it is your business to monetize after all. Be my guest.


And yet you do indeed use clickbait that results in higher view videos for your Elite content thanks to the related drama.

Here is another quick view at your Elite videos tagged under 1 year by YouTube. As you will see the click bait videos generate on average double the views per video than the rest of your Elite content published in the same period. And click bait related views have risen to amount around 20% of all your Elite related views for videos created less than a year ago. Granted your click bait trend is relatively recent, as was my decision to watch other content.

Views in thousands
bxB7AKn.jpg


As mentioned I don’t have any major issues with you using click bait to enhance your viewership and monetization. It is a fair tool and it is your business to manage after all. I just opted to watch other Elite content when you started doing that.

The fact you insist in down playing it is not helping too much to change my mind, although that is just probably me. Happy to hear you welcome all feedback though.
Scraping OA's YouTube channel for "dirt" is creepy no matter who does it. For a Moderator it's unconscionable. At least use a non-moderator account.
 
Oh well, no great surprise: Views of the new livestream format are pathetic, they have a resident "no news" vibe, and whatever 'exciting stuff' that is in the pipeline appears to have been blocked by a large turd.

So we'll have U12 in the 2nd half of May (all of the bank holidays in April / May in the UK are no fun for businesses) and 'some news about ED' at the end of May, probably following the current negative trend.

Happy days! 🥳
 
Scraping OA's YouTube channel for "dirt" is creepy no matter who does it. For a Moderator it's unconscionable. At least use a non-moderator account.
I'd agree if they were rummaging through the rubbish bins at the back of his house or his underwear drawer, but no, it's his publicly available videos. I don't think looking through someone's past content to justify criticism is creepy.
 
I don't think looking through someone's past content to justify criticism is creepy.
It may be (in my most humble opinion) off-topic and discussing a poster rather than the post itself, both of which are against forum rules (link at bottom of page).

It's also a pretty lame ad hominem attempt to discredit what OA originally posted on this thread, which had nothing to do with his videos IIRC.

Disclaimer - I AM NOT A MODERATOR, NOR AM I PRETENDING TO BE ONE.
 
I think (i might be mistaken) the 7 year period refers not to the precise lifetime of the franchise, but to the amortization period for the LEP money
(the 7 years mark happened last year btw)

That would also mean if they would actually to release another payed DLC, the LEP-ers will incur them costs.
Slim chances tho 😂

nah, you can't redefine things that they are specifically talking about in a legal document. The expected lifetime of the franchise refers to just that. If they wanted to talk about the amortization period, they would have referred to that, rather than the expected lifetime of the franchise.

those are two very...very different things and they talk about periods of amortization in that spot and others. They dont use the term "lifetime of the franchise" to do so when it's not in reference to exactly what it sounds like.


They wont release another paid dlc. They never planned to. What we have thru to odyssey has been part of the original plan of paid content. This was never a "it'll keep going and we'll keep making dlc's until it's no longer making us money" thing. Though i'm sure if popularity was entirely above expectations, they would revise their outlooks in these annual reports. But they dont have to worry about that.
 
I'd agree if they were rummaging through the rubbish bins at the back of his house or his underwear drawer, but no, it's his publicly available videos. I don't think looking through someone's past content to justify criticism is creepy.
Your examples would be illegal, as well as creepy.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom