Codenamesuper

god first
800k+ on YT I do commentary on
anime,marvel,dc etc you name it

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@TierlistMan39 @TeamYouTube @TeamYouTube REVIEW THIS NOW

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@TierlistMan39 @TeamYouTube @TeamYouTube

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

There’s no way in HELL Naruto is beating gear 5 luffy bro. That shit is too OP

[Animetrends @AnimetrendsLA]

El próximo enfrentamiento en Death Battle será NARUTO vs LUFFY.

Claramente hay un ganador. 💀

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@TierlistMan39 @manoyaps @TeamYouTube @TeamYouTube

[TierlistMan39 @TierlistMan39]

@TeamYouTube
, since I've still been able to get a human response through email, I would like to present my case more formally through here.

I am a college junior and the creator of Tierlistman39--a YouTube channel that has
grown to approximately 40,000 subscribers and more than 5 million views in just eight months.
YouTube recently removed my channel from the YouTube Partner Program and demonetized it
for “misleading family content,” and my appeal was denied.
I am asking for an independent human review by an experienced YPP or policy specialist,
because I believe YouTube has fundamentally misclassified my channel.

Why YouTube Should Take Another Look

Several facts do not appear consistent with the determination that my channel is misleading family content:
My videos are designated “Not Made for Kids,” and my analytics show that my audience is overwhelmingly adults.
My content consists primarily of commentary and humor involving anime, gaming and pop culture. YouTube’s own guidelines as well as COPPA both acknowledge that animated content does not necessarily mean its meant for children and that the key determinant should be the self selection of the creator to mark their content as not for children and disclose the content in this video both of which I have done.
YouTube has misinterpreted animated imagery on my channel before. A GIF of Squidward from SpongeBob was flagged for nudity or sexual content, apparently because the character does not wear pants. After human review, YouTube reversed that decision but only after multiple automated rejected appeals and nearly three weeks of asking for a human review.
Other animation creators have publicly reported receiving the same “misleading family content” determination, and some have had monetization restored after additional review.
Shortly before my demonetization, one of my videos received more than 500,000 views and reached #49 overall on YouTube’s Hyped leaderboard. That video addressed racist content on TikTok and ultimately exposed me to an extraordinary level of attention and harassment including a brigading campaign from a larger creator which is visible within the comments of the video. There was likely a coordinated increase in reports and other concerning signs around Early September to late August

My Audience and Content

My channel does not target young children. My audience analytics show that over 80% of my subscribers or viewers are 18 or older. The overwhelming majority of my viewers are adults.
I understand that audience demographics alone do not determine whether content is directed toward children; however, they are consistent with what I have been saying all along: my content is commentary and humor created for an older audience that happens to use anime, and other animated imagery. This has been reflected in the status of my videos, none of which are marked as for children either personally or by YouTube. In fact they are all explicitly marked as not for kids and contain disclosures regarding whether they contain profanity or other content as I am legally required to https://t.co/k3Sa1v9n6s’s own guidance explains that animated content can be general-audience content and that the presence of animated characters does not automatically make something children's content.
That is why I am concerned that the visual characteristics of my channel may be causing YouTube's systems or reviewers to misunderstand what the channel actually is.

The Hype Leaderboard and the Harassment Campaign

One part of the timeline is particularly important.I posted a video speaking out against racist content on TikTok a few weeks ago. The video received more than 400,000 views and reached #49 overall on YouTube's Hype leaderboard. Under YouTube’s own requirements, videos designated ‘Made for Kids’ are not eligible for the Hyped leaderboard. My video was not only eligible for Hype; it reached #49 overall on the leaderboard. While I understand that Hype eligibility and the YPP ‘misleading family content’ standard are not identical, this makes the later classification of my channel even more difficult for me to understand. Especially since I’ve had multiple videos be hyped to the leaderboard in the past
My video was also amplified by substantially larger creators, including TommyNFG and YXL Salah. As the video traveled well beyond my normal audience, another creator known for posting racist content targeted me and encouraged his followers to do the same. I then received approximately multiple hostile messages in roughly 24 hours, many of whom implicated said creator as the reason. Many were racist, some encouraged harm toward myself.
Shortly thereafter, YouTube demonetized my channel for “misleading family content.” I do not know whether the harassment campaign and my demonetization are connected. I also do not know whether people involved in the harassment campaign reported my videos or my channel to YouTube; however, the timing raises concerns, and I want YouTube to investigate it and find out. Since the people targeting me were willing to send racist messages and emails telling me to kill myself simply because I spoke out against racist content, I think it is entirely reasonable to ask YouTube whether some of those same people also reported my channel or videos which led to their demonetization.

Why This Issue Matters to Me

Earlier this year, I made a video about the online harassment of Black content creators, after a young Black creator died by suicide following online harassment, and I donated money from that video to a mental health organization.
As a young black creator who has themselves struggled with clinical depression and
I believed then, and still believe now, that online harassment can have serious real-world consequences which is why I continue to speak out about it.

One Question I Still Cannot Answer

I’m a Political Science major who hopes to attend law school. One of the things I am being trained to do is look at a rule, examine the evidence and determine whether the evidence actually supports the conclusion. That is what I have been trying to do here. The central question I cannot answer is: What about my channel led YouTube to conclude that I am targeting children or families?
My videos are marked Not Made for Kids. My audience is overwhelmingly adult. YouTube’s own guidance recognizes that animation can be content not for children.
YouTube previously reversed an incorrect classification involving animated imagery on my channel after human review.
And immediately before this happened, one of my videos had reached #49 overall on YouTube’s own Hype leaderboard for emerging YPP creators.
I also find it difficult to understand why, if my channel actually targets young children while exposing them to inappropriate mature content, the appropriate response is to remove my participation in advertising revenue while leaving the allegedly problematic content available to viewers and continuing to serve advertisements on it.
My video explaining this situation received approximately 95,000 views during its first 24 hours. I believe the response reflects a broader concern among creators about whether YouTube’s automated enforcement systems are accurately understanding context.

What I Am Asking
@TeamYouTube
to Do
I respectfully ask YouTube to:

1. Conduct an independent human review of my channel by an experienced YPP or policy
specialist, specifically examining whether my content actually targets children rather than
inferring a child audience from anime or animated imagery.

2. Explain what specific content on my channel caused YouTube to
classify it as “misleading family content.”

3. Review YouTube's internal records to determine whether my channel experienced an
unusual increase in reports during or immediately after the harassment campaign and, if
so, whether that activity played any role in triggering the review that resulted in my
Demonetization.

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@happiboixx 💀💀

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

Yeah ggs man 💔 they NOT beating DR.DOOM

[DiscussingFilm @DiscussingFilm]

Official new look at the cast of ‘AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY’.

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@symeresusd

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

“Nothing will beat the oath” idk man I feel like just throwing the oath in a garbage ass movie makes it meaningless. VS the setup in lanterns we see how he got to his personal oath. The story surrounding it matters 😭. which is why when the INJUSTICE 2 one is actually tough. And that 2011 movie shit ain’t moving me.

praising this cause the shit is just slapped on is crazy work.😭 dudes just give a nod solely cause it’s taken from the comics 💀. And this is why on screen green lantern has been either inoffensive at best or trash. Making him not have as much appeal as he SHOULD….

[KozyBoyKam 🌌 @KozyBoyKam]

Nothing will beat THE OATH. 🟢

This movie has its flaws but you can't say they didn't embrace the source material and lore.

[TierlistMan39 @TierlistMan39]

@TeamYouTube I want my appeals viewed and an actual answer to what content on my channel is misleading family content

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@happiboixx

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

We about to see insane amounts of people act like this green lantern series wouldn’t have flopped 😭😭😭 oh my goodness bruh 😭😭😭😭 if this show went through yall would have been like this 💀

[DiscussingFilm @DiscussingFilm]

First concept art from the cancelled ‘GREEN LANTERN’ series.

• Would have took place in 2 time periods - Alan Scott in 1941 and Guy Gardner in 1984

• Jessica Cruz, Simon Baz, Kilowog & Sinestro would’ve been in the series + a new Lantern character Bree Jarta

• The Manhunters were planned to be the primary villains

• Seth Grahame-Smith was set to serve as showrunner with Marc Guggenheim in the writers room

(Source: https://t.co/z80f0pGcdc)

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@zephfire_16 😭

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@TierlistMan39 @TeamYouTube @TeamYouTube address this!!!

[John-El✨ @John_ElSuperman]

Green Lantern as an IP has never been more talked about, or loved by the general audience as it is right now.

Regardless of what a Comic Book Twitter will say, it's a fact.

It's okay to dislike what the show did. But to burry it's success like this, is goofy asf.

[Codenamesuper @Codenamesuper]

@Rebel0fReality They gotta be trolling if that’s what they got out of that 😭😭😭😭

[ᴠɪɴᴄᴇ ᴀsᴇᴏ @RhafaelAseo]

made another one for Lanterns finale. One of the best TV shows I’ve seen in years. 🔥🔥🔥