Olivia
Online
TMY MEDIA
@CreatorOfMedia_
Joined August 2026
28 Following
2 Followers
16 Posts
@TeamYouTube Hi, its been months of us trying to fix this issue and we thoroughly need your assistance. I’m asking for another look at my channel termination. My channel was nearly 10 years old with no Community Guidelines strikes. After a warning on a Short, I completed the required policy training. An celebrity commentary video that was 3 years old was later removed, and my channel was terminated shortly after. when only giving a warning. My content included commentary and discussion about public figures, not an attempt to encourage harassment. My appeal was rejected, but I still believe termination was disproportionate to the circumstances. we have never received a warning before this incident or even a guidelines strike, Please reconsider whether this decision was justified and review my case for reinstatement. 🙏. the 3 year old video that was removed also remains on other channels with the same content, wish doesnt give my justification to why it was removed from our channel and the entire channel being removed with only a warning. please help and have a human look into this thoroughly.
Hi @TeamYouTube. We are respectfully requesting review of our termination because we genuinely believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the context of the content and the level of enforcement that was applied.
Channel: ( https://t.co/IH54GQdado )
This channel focused on commentary, news discussion, and educational content related to public figures and entertainment topics and had been active for more than 8 years. Before the termination, the channel had no Community Guidelines strikes. The only enforcement action on the account was a warning, which was accepted. The required policy training was completed, and changes were made to ensure future compliance.
The channel then received a removal on a 3-year-old commentary video. The notification specifically stated:
"You previously received a warning for your content. We're not giving you a strike this time, but we removed the content from YouTube. You can still upload, post, and livestream."
Within approximately 24 hours, the entire channel was terminated for severe or repeated violations of the harassment policy.
We fully understand that YouTube may terminate channels without strikes in cases involving severe violations. However, we have since found substantially similar versions of the same subject matter still available on the platform, including versions with commentary and versions without commentary.
Examples:
https://t.co/Jt3eoOJNH6
https://t.co/wlBlWsH8Ub
We understand that every video and every channel is reviewed individually. We are not asking for another creator's outcome to determine our own outcome. We are simply trying to understand what distinguished our content from these examples and why the result was immediate termination.
These screenshots and examples raise a question about whether the correct enforcement action was applied and whether the context of the content was fully considered.
Given the channel's history, the absence of strikes, the completion of policy training, the educational and commentary based nature of the content, and the availability of substantially similar content elsewhere on the platform, we respectfully ask that the channel be reviewed once more.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
@sixsaygen thank you, i appreciate it .
Hi
@TeamYouTube
. We are respectfully requesting review of our termination because we genuinely believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the context of the content and the level of enforcement that was applied. Channel: ( https://t.co/Hhtycgif3w ) This channel focused on commentary, news discussion, and educational content related to public figures and entertainment topics and had been active for more than 8 years. Before the termination, the channel had no Community Guidelines strikes. The only enforcement action on the account was a warning, which was accepted. The required policy training was completed, and changes were made to ensure future compliance. The channel then received a removal on a 3-year-old commentary video. The notification specifically stated: "You previously received a warning for your content. We're not giving you a strike this time, but we removed the content from YouTube. You can still upload, post, and livestream." Within approximately 24 hours, the entire channel was terminated for severe or repeated violations of the harassment policy. We fully understand that YouTube may terminate channels without strikes in cases involving severe violations. However, we have since found substantially similar versions of the same subject matter still available on the platform, including versions with commentary and versions without commentary. Examples: https://t.co/Jt3eoOJNH6 https://t.co/gBn595Yyuj We understand that every video and every channel is reviewed individually. We are not asking for another creator's outcome to determine our own outcome. We are simply trying to understand what distinguished our content from these examples and why the result was immediate termination. These screenshots and examples raise a question about whether the correct enforcement action was applied and whether the context of the content was fully considered. Given the channel's history, the absence of strikes, the completion of policy training, the educational and commentary based nature of the content, and the availability of substantially similar content elsewhere on the platform, we respectfully ask that the channel be reviewed once more. Thank you for your time and consideration.
❤️ THANK YOU — ALL MY CHANNELS HAVE BEEN REINSTATED! ❤️
I honestly want to thank everyone who supported me, listened to my situation, shared my posts, and stood by me during one of the most stressful experiences a creator can go through. All my channels have now been reinstated, and I’m incredibly grateful to finally be able to say that. 🙏❤️
But now that I’ve got my channels back, I don’t want this journey to be just about me. There are so many other creators out there who are still going through the same nightmare I experienced: losing channels they spent years building, receiving appeals that seem to be rejected automatically, and struggling to get a real human being to properly look at their cases.
I know what it feels like to be in that position, and I don’t want to turn my back on people who are still there.
That’s why I made this poster highlighting some of the creators who are still trying to get their channels back. I tried my best to include everybody’s names, stories, and situations, but unfortunately, the AI I used to create the poster couldn’t fit every person and every detail into one image. Please understand that this doesn’t mean anybody else’s situation is less important. There are many more creators who deserve to be heard, and I wish I could include every single one of them.
@TeamYouTube @YouTube, please give these creators a genuine HUMAN REVIEW. 🙏
Every case deserves to be looked at properly. If a channel has genuinely violated a policy, explain the issue clearly. But if a mistake has been made, or important context has been missed, creators deserve a fair opportunity to have that recognised and corrected.
Behind every channel is a real person. People put their time, creativity, hard work, and sometimes years of their lives into building something they care about. Losing everything without understanding why can be devastating.
I was in the same boat, and now that I’ve had my channels reinstated, I want to use whatever attention I have to help others who are still fighting. It’s only fair that they get the same opportunity to have their voices heard.
❤️ TO EVERY CREATOR STILL FIGHTING:
Please don’t feel like you’re alone in this. If your channel has been terminated and you’re still trying to get it back, share your situation in the replies or comment section. Explain what happened, what reason YouTube gave you, and whether your appeal was rejected.
Let’s help bring attention to these cases and encourage YouTube to review them fairly. I can’t promise that I can get everybody’s channel reinstated, but I can try to help make sure more people are heard.
Thank you again to everyone who helped me through this. Now it’s time to help others. ❤️
REAL CREATORS. REAL STORIES. FAIR HUMAN REVIEWS.
@TeamYouTube @YouTube
#YouTube #HumanReview #CreatorSupport #ReinstateCreators
hello @TeamYouTube , i am asking for a human review on our channel termination, we have never received a strike on youtube ever 8 years on the platform, we have never promoted harassment of any kind, only commentator and educational value in entertainment. a warning went into a full termination when we have never even had a warning before on our account, this is a severe error and there was no chance at any correction. a video was flagged from 3 years prior that had no current activity of any violations, the video that taken down is still up on other youtube accounts. please fix this. human review. ( https://t.co/IH54GQdado )
Hi @TeamYouTube. We are respectfully requesting review of our termination because we genuinely believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the context of the content and the level of enforcement that was applied.
Channel: ( https://t.co/IH54GQdado )
This channel focused on commentary, news discussion, and educational content related to public figures and entertainment topics and had been active for more than 8 years. Before the termination, the channel had no Community Guidelines strikes. The only enforcement action on the account was a warning, which was accepted. The required policy training was completed, and changes were made to ensure future compliance.
The channel then received a removal on a 3-year-old commentary video. The notification specifically stated:
"You previously received a warning for your content. We're not giving you a strike this time, but we removed the content from YouTube. You can still upload, post, and livestream."
Within approximately 24 hours, the entire channel was terminated for severe or repeated violations of the harassment policy.
We fully understand that YouTube may terminate channels without strikes in cases involving severe violations. However, we have since found substantially similar versions of the same subject matter still available on the platform, including versions with commentary and versions without commentary.
Examples:
https://t.co/Jt3eoOJNH6
https://t.co/wlBlWsH8Ub
We understand that every video and every channel is reviewed individually. We are not asking for another creator's outcome to determine our own outcome. We are simply trying to understand what distinguished our content from these examples and why the result was immediate termination.
These screenshots and examples raise a question about whether the correct enforcement action was applied and whether the context of the content was fully considered.
Given the channel's history, the absence of strikes, the completion of policy training, the educational and commentary based nature of the content, and the availability of substantially similar content elsewhere on the platform, we respectfully ask that the channel be reviewed once more.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
@s6ygen were you monetized?
what about in the sense of a "multiple violation" dating back to 3 years old? i had a short video taken down due to uncensored language and from that point on i didnt upload like that again, and i only received a warning , about a week later they took a video down that i did 3 years ago that also happened to be uncensored but the context of commentary shows that i myself was not promoting harrassment of any kind , it was for commentary and educational use only, they flagged it took it down and sent me an email saying it would still only be a warning even after the initial warning, they terminated my account hours later after that. the 3 year old video that was flagged remains on the platform elsewhere on youtube on several different channels uncensored as well, how is it fair to jump from a warning to immediate termination with a 8 year old channel that hasnt never even been striked before? when that same content is elsewhere but channel gets terminated for it. @NickNimmin
Hi @TeamYouTube I’m asking for a human review based on specific evidence that raises a serious question about the enforcement and shows severe inconsistency for termination.
The channel had 8+ years of history, zero prior strikes, and only a warning before the termination. After the second video was removed, YouTube explicitly stated: “We’re not giving you a strike this time” and that I could still upload, post, and livestream.
~16 hours later, the entire channel was terminated for “severe or repeated” harassment violations on a video 3 years old . Given The Time Frame Of That Video And The Context Of It Not Promoting Harassment Which Is Proven In The Video Commentary This Is An Error.
I have since found the same video/topic and substantially identical statements still publicly available on other YouTube channels, including an uncensored version without commentary and another with commentary.
This raises a specific question: If the termination was based on “repeated” violations, what made my second video a termination-level violation when it was not issued a strike, the channel was told it could continue normally, and substantially identical content remains available on the platform?
I’m not asking for special treatment or another creator’s enforcement to determine mine. I’m asking whether the context of my content and the enforcement history were correctly interpreted. I feel a termination for this is not treating it fairly if the content is else where on the platform without any issues.
Could you please verify once more whether the correct enforcement action was applied? If an error was made, I respectfully ask that the channel be reinstated and the appropriate enforcement applied. we have followed community guidelines for years and never once even received a strike , even with this this incident no strike was ever given. From Warning To Immediate Termination doesnt make sense after the email stated that the channel it was only a warning. please have a rereview this thoroughly and check the actual context of said video and please do the right thing and reinstate.
Channel:
https://t.co/Hhtycgif3w
@TeamYouTube
Requesting a human review of my channel termination.
Timeline: • Short removed for harassment → only a warning issued, channel remained fully active • ~2 weeks later a 3-year-old video removed under the same policy → email explicitly stated no strike would be given and the channel could still post normally • 16 hours later the entire channel was terminated
The channel had zero prior Community Guidelines strikes. The older video had been public for years with no action, and the same/similar content is still live on other YouTube channels today (both with and without commentary).
The Short was treated as warning level when first reviewed. Using it later, together with a years-old video that remains available elsewhere, to justify a permanent ban feels inconsistent.
I am not asking for special treatment only a fair, full human review of the actual sequence and the fact that identical content is still allowed on the platform.
Channel URL: https://t.co/IH54GQdado
Thank you.
if you search on twitter all the other terminations and look at what all the asmr creators who channels got taken down they all have the link tree link in common and when u click the link tree it says in potentially leads to sensitive 18+ content which is TOS under youtube policies. its def not a reason to terminate they took me down too without warning so i know how you're feeling.
@TeamYouTube The Review is incorrect. its no way a channel of 10 plus years with no community guideline breaks is just terminated in an instance. the video you removed from the channel remains up elsewhere , the channel overall never promoted or intended to promote harassment in anyway. After a warning was giving for short video that was actually a prank and taken down , the policy course was taken and the warning was valid due to no context but for the other video that was flagged , there was full context of it not promoting harassment within the commentary for the channel to go down in a statement of "severe or repeated violations" makes no sense if it was stated that no strike would be given for the channel after the video take down and that the channel would still be in good standing , thats a huge contradiction and inconsistency. i have been an upstanding creator on the platform for over 10 years and have never had this issue, i respectfully ask for you to reconsider this action and just reduce it to the original warning that was proposed. The action to terminate the channel after in our own emails state that it was no strike or penalty worthy of a measure , please take a look at this thoroughly, the context is not being looked at all. we also would like to keep youtube a safe space and doing this to your creators without an actual severe reason is wrong, please look into this thoroughly. the second video you removed clearly shows this is a mistake and a context error, if that video remains available on other channels with no context and uncensored. the system said it woudl not be a strike or warning for the second video so how is a termination valid? please reduce this to the original warning. if these questions can not be answered we would deem this decision as false . yes youtube policy states a severe violation can result in a termination but it happened in neither video take down , it was an after the fact thing then later labeled as "severe or repeated violations" when the emails and enforcement state otherwise. please fix this and look at it thoroughly and reduce this action. we have sent in countless proof.
@TeamYouTube
Requesting a human review of my channel termination.
Timeline: • Short removed for harassment → only a warning issued, channel remained fully active • ~2 weeks later a 3-year-old video removed under the same policy → email explicitly stated no strike would be given and the channel could still post normally • 16 hours later the entire channel was terminated
The channel had zero prior Community Guidelines strikes. The older video had been public for years with no action, and the same/similar content is still live on other YouTube channels today (both with and without commentary).
The Short was treated as warning level when first reviewed. Using it later, together with a years-old video that remains available elsewhere, to justify a permanent ban feels inconsistent.
I am not asking for special treatment only a fair, full human review of the actual sequence and the fact that identical content is still allowed on the platform.
Channel URL: https://t.co/IH54GQdado
Thank you.
Hi @TeamYouTube. We are respectfully requesting review of our termination because we genuinely believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the context of the content and the level of enforcement that was applied.
Channel: ( https://t.co/IH54GQdado )
This channel focused on commentary, news discussion, and educational content related to public figures and entertainment topics and had been active for more than 8 years. Before the termination, the channel had no Community Guidelines strikes. The only enforcement action on the account was a warning, which was accepted. The required policy training was completed, and changes were made to ensure future compliance.
The channel then received a removal on a 3-year-old commentary video. The notification specifically stated:
"You previously received a warning for your content. We're not giving you a strike this time, but we removed the content from YouTube. You can still upload, post, and livestream."
Within approximately 24 hours, the entire channel was terminated for severe or repeated violations of the harassment policy.
We fully understand that YouTube may terminate channels without strikes in cases involving severe violations. However, we have since found substantially similar versions of the same subject matter still available on the platform, including versions with commentary and versions without commentary.
Examples:
https://t.co/Jt3eoOJNH6
https://t.co/wlBlWsH8Ub
We understand that every video and every channel is reviewed individually. We are not asking for another creator's outcome to determine our own outcome. We are simply trying to understand what distinguished our content from these examples and why the result was immediate termination.
These screenshots and examples raise a question about whether the correct enforcement action was applied and whether the context of the content was fully considered.
Given the channel's history, the absence of strikes, the completion of policy training, the educational and commentary based nature of the content, and the availability of substantially similar content elsewhere on the platform, we respectfully ask that the channel be reviewed once more.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Hi @TeamYouTube. We are respectfully requesting review of our termination because we genuinely believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the context of the content and the level of enforcement that was applied.
Channel: ( https://t.co/IH54GQdado )
This channel focused on commentary, news discussion, and educational content related to public figures and entertainment topics and had been active for more than 8 years. Before the termination, the channel had no Community Guidelines strikes. The only enforcement action on the account was a warning, which was accepted. The required policy training was completed, and changes were made to ensure future compliance.
The channel then received a removal on a 3-year-old commentary video. The notification specifically stated:
"You previously received a warning for your content. We're not giving you a strike this time, but we removed the content from YouTube. You can still upload, post, and livestream."
Within approximately 24 hours, the entire channel was terminated for severe or repeated violations of the harassment policy.
We fully understand that YouTube may terminate channels without strikes in cases involving severe violations. However, we have since found substantially similar versions of the same subject matter still available on the platform, including versions with commentary and versions without commentary.
Examples:
https://t.co/Jt3eoOJNH6
https://t.co/wlBlWsH8Ub
We understand that every video and every channel is reviewed individually. We are not asking for another creator's outcome to determine our own outcome. We are simply trying to understand what distinguished our content from these examples and why the result was immediate termination.
These screenshots and examples raise a question about whether the correct enforcement action was applied and whether the context of the content was fully considered.
Given the channel's history, the absence of strikes, the completion of policy training, the educational and commentary based nature of the content, and the availability of substantially similar content elsewhere on the platform, we respectfully ask that the channel be reviewed once more.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
JackandJill
Seen from Brazil
نونا ام طيز صغنونة
Seen from Egypt
Bal Porsuğu Reis
Seen from Turkey
xbtcas
Seen from United States
Jessica
Seen from South Africa
فحل شطري عمر ٢٣
Seen from Canada
Azgn Gacılar
Seen from Turkey
Cuckold Koca Adayı
Seen from Turkey
jackandjillfans
Seen from Brazil
نسنس حسابي الجديد🌚🔥
Seen from Saudi Arabia
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.5M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
118.8M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.6M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.1M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.3M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90.1M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
84M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.5M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.5M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.5M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.3M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63.1M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.2M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.7M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers