This was for a game request? What was their exact rejection reason? And could you provide the run that you submitted?
I haven't heard requests being rejected because of ads before
It is indeed for a game request. The rejection reason was "Every time I click to watch it it leads me to another website" (presumably in reference to a pop-up ad).
I've PM'd you the run link (I'd rather not link it publicly until it is properly submitted, but I'll PM anyone who asks).
You've sent me the link to the video. After going on the website, without an ad blocker, I pressed "play" on the video and another web page opened and it started downloading a file called OperaBrowser.exe that was blocked for being malicious. I then went back on the page to press play and another advert page opened.
This is why it was rejected as your video hosting platform isn't very good so site staff can't even watch your run due to adverts getting in the way. Use YouTube or another common video hosting service instead.
You've sent me the link to the video. After going on the website, without an ad blocker, I pressed "play" on the video and another web page opened and it started downloading a file called OperaBrowser.exe that was blocked for being malicious. I then went back on the page to press play and another advert page opened.
It does a couple overlay link ads, then it plays all the way to the end uninterrupted (as long as you don't need to touch the player again). As for the content of the ads, all I was ever tried to be showed were AliExpress ads, but I obviously have no control over what gets shown. I actually just block the popups myself.
This is why it was rejected as your video hosting platform isn't very good so site staff can't even watch your run due to adverts getting in the way. Use YouTube or another common video hosting service instead.
I ended up restreaming my run on kick.com and submitted that, it was approved shortly after.
Is the problem here that content interception ads ("we interrupt your transmission to show you this ad") are considered acceptable while link overlay ads ("this page is an ad link until you click it") aren't? The latter are even easier to block...
where the hell are you hosting your videos?
I was using VidGuard.
the problem is that its very intrusive and usually malicious websites have ads like that. so the moment you click and something pops up unexpectedly you likely think its a virus or something and close everything down.
just upload to youtube, there is no reason not to.
So, it is pretty much like I said, then?
Is the problem here that content interception ads ("we interrupt your transmission to show you this ad") are considered acceptable while link overlay ads ("this page is an ad link until you click it") aren't?
its very intrusive
I suppose there is some subjectivity in what you consider "intrusive", but at the very least content overlay ads are objectively easier to block than content interception ads. You can do it without an ad blocker, even.
usually malicious websites have ads like that
That is factually incorrect. Overlay ads are easier to implement than content interception ads so they are usually found on websites operated by people or companies that have a constrained budget. A subset of those happen to be malicious because malicious sites are always at high risk of takedown, but that is very broad brush to paint every site with.
The problem with this mentality is that you spread the idea that websites are only trustworthy if either they:
- Are operated with almost no ads (or just banner ads, which pay pennies), almost always at a loss, and at continual risk of shutting down when the operators don't feel like burning their pockets anymore (for a relevant example, see splits.io).
- Are operated by giant corporations with millions or billions of dollars, venture capital, etc., and leave no room for new competitors that want to provide a service. Then they become an oligopoly, and when they pull the rug from under you, you are screwed (for a relevant example, see the twitch VOD debacle).
Or even better, those corporations get their hands everywhere and when they murder you while providing you a service somewhere, you can't sue them because of the terms of service of some other unrelated thing you did or used (Disney did this a while ago, look it up).
just upload to youtube, there is no reason not to.
I think there are reasons to use or prefer alternative services outside of the biggest player in the game.
@Quicksnow The problem to me is that you are saying one thing but another thing is true. I click at the link and it does not seem like you can block those ads as easy as you claim. Or maybe it is like this just for me, idk. What I'm also curious is that it claims that "The owner of this video doesn't allow AdBlocker." Therefore you seem to be blocking our ability to block the ads... You are not convincing me.
I do agree that there are plenty of reasons not to use youtube and instead an alternative. But maybe not this one (VidGuard).
@happycamper_ There is misunderstanding here. I was going to post this:
There exists a feature to check for adblock in VidGuard. But it effectively changes nothing significantly: the overlay ads are still enabled even with adblock (at least with my adblocker). You will not block the ads with an adblocker, even if allowed. What I meant to say by not needing adblock is that the way you avoid those ads is by disabling pop-ups. The reason I left it on is that while it makes no effective difference in the viewing experience it might affect revenue-sharing terms.
However, I double-checked and while the adblocker I was using (AdBlocker Ultimate) did not block those pop-ups, there are apparently others that do (Adblock Plus did it for me). So, for your benefit, I went ahead and disabled the anti-adblock.
Putting that aside from a moment... I don't believe YouTube or other sites would be disallowed if Google suddenly broke adblock (they have been trying for years now). Why would that be a problem here?
EDIT: By the way, I'm happy for every runner to host their runs wherever they like, I'm just using VidGuard because they impose neither storage limits nor remove idle videos, at least as far as I could see. I actually submitted a ticket over a month ago to request support for additional profile association with a variety of video hosting sites, but got no feedback nor acknowledgement so far.
i dont know how it works to get ads on your website. cant you just submit your site to google adsense thingie and theyll look it over and then you can place ads on your site if they accept it.
depending on what your site is offering you could pay a bunch of the costs with donations. like catbox (anonymous file hosting website) gets their monthly fees almost fully paid with patreon subscriptions. their site claims patreon alone has paid 1300$ of this months fees.
but that is very broad brush to paint every site with
i did say "usually" not "every time".
I'm just using VidGuard because they impose neither storage limits nor remove idle videos
if thats your concern then youtube also doesnt do either of those? the only limit is 12 hours at max on a video but likely wont ever be a problem.
it just sounds like you dont want to upload to youtube because its the most well known video hosting site. which sure i guess is a reason but at this point where you are having troubles without it, you should just use it until you find a good alternative for you.
@unfound I actually received feedback about the adult ads and immediately disabled them. I don't see why adult ads would be a problem when they can be disabled.
i dont know how it works to get ads on your website. cant you just submit your site to google adsense thingie and theyll look it over and then you can place ads on your site if they accept it.
depending on what your site is offering you could pay a bunch of the costs with donations. like catbox (anonymous file hosting website) gets their monthly fees almost fully paid with patreon subscriptions. their site claims patreon alone has paid 1300$ of this months fees.
Sorry, I can't quite make out what you are trying to say. It sounds like either you think I run VidGuard (I don't) or you are proposing I bootstrap my own video hosting site (I have no income to risk on such a venture at the moment, even if there is a chance I could get lucky enough to sustain myself on donations, like I said, very few manage that).
if thats your concern then youtube also doesnt do either of those? the only limit is 12 hours at max on a video but likely wont ever be a problem.
In addition to what @unfound said (and I'll add, Google Drive has storage limits), and what I have also said above (I suppose you are counting that a "being the most well known video hosting site"), there is also the fact that dealing with Google for support with any issues you might encounter is a nightmare. I've already submitted a handful of tickets to VidGuard and received a prompt response, so from my viewpoint they are providing a better service for me as a content producer.
I could just as well turn it around and say that it appears the real problem with VidGuard is that it is not YouTube or another video hosting site backed by a big company (the complaints about adult ads and adblocker were already addresses, but it appears people are still not happy).
Sorry, I can't quite make out what you are trying to say. It sounds like either you think I run VidGuard (I don't) or you are proposing I bootstrap my own video hosting site (I have no income to risk on such a venture at the moment, even if there is a chance I could get lucky enough to sustain myself on donations, like I said, very few manage that).
youre the one who suddenly started saying how not everyone can get ads on their sites so i replied to that :D?
In addition to what @unfound said (and I'll add, Google Drive has storage limits), and what I have also said above (I suppose you are counting that a "being the most well known video hosting site"), there is also the fact that dealing with Google for support with any issues you might encounter is a nightmare
google drive is a file hosting cloud service not a video host, though it is fine for submissions (just potentially annoying for the verifier and you need to speficially make the file accessible for everyone and it also reveals your email address to everyone). unless you are a big creator trying to make money off of your videos you dont have to ever deal with google's support.
youre the one who suddenly started saying how not everyone can get ads on their sites so i replied to that :D?
I don't recall ever saying that. The closest relevant thing I said was how content interception ads were hard to implement, so most sites are stuck with either banner ads (which pay very little money) or content overlay ads (the alleged motive of contention against VidGuard, although as I said it turns out you can actually use an adblocker successfully). But that is kind of the exact opposite of what you are implying: I'm saying people can and do put ads on their sites, and this entire discussion is about their style and implementation.
google drive is a file hosting cloud service not a video host
I'm well aware. I suppose there is some ambiguity in my phrasing: Google Drive and YouTube are both operated by Google, and they were both suggested as (in my opinion, worse) alternatives to the hosting platform I was using. The bit about Google Drive was more of a side note, I was referring to YouTube (I thought that quoting your characterization of YouTube as "the most well known video hosting site" would have made that clear, but alas).
Although, on the topic of Google Drive specifically: like I said, there are storage limits, leaking your email address as you mention is also a nuisance, and on the matter of support, God help you if your video ever gets automatically flagged for copyright infringement (last I heard, they scan files automatically and use AI detection systems that as we all know by now are prone to hallucination).
EDIT: It appears that @unfound has removed comments and account, so I will quote a comment below that mentioned another inconvenience of YouTube (and a caveat to one of @SioN's comments):
if you do not wish to verify your phone number, the limit is 15 minutes length for a video, and you can only post 10 videos a day