What are you even talking about?

YouTube Kids is from YouTube and is advertised as a kids-friendly filtered version of YouTube. YouTube Kids however failed to filter tons of disturbing and inappropriate content. The entire raison d'etre of YouTube Kids is to provide a filtered YouTube experience -- it failed hard.

EDIT: I can't even begin to comprehend how you think any of this is about "dogmatists censoring YouTube". YT Kids only providing kids-friendly content is no different from YT Music only providing music. It's not censorship, it's filtering. You can still go to YouTube proper and watch everything.

Your problem is still with YouTube kids and not with YouTube.

Your entire argument is the filtration they tried failed. We agree. Great.

My point is that the conclusion you draw is that everything needs more censorship. We disagree. I think parents need to take responsibility and not blame a company for providing a product they don't like.

Its the equivalent of censoring the radio because think of the children. It was a dumb idea then, it's a dumb idea now, because everyone knows that's not where it ends.

I don't see where you get the idea that that's the conclusion they draw. It seems like you arguing against something they never said.

How do you understand the arguments.

That they're unhappy with how they handled YouTube Kids, nothing about censoring the main YT product.

And I said his problem is with YouTube kids not YouTube.

Not sure what part of that you disagree with.

> My point is that the conclusion you draw is that everything needs more censorship.

That claim about their conclusion I do not understand, since I don't see where they are saying anything like that.

They believe YouTube kids is possible if only YouTube were to censor more content.

My argument is that more censorship won't help, because not everyone agrees on what is, and is not, kid friendly. So the entire enterprise is doomed to failure. The only solution I see is parents taking responsibility.