Dan & Phil Part 82: now onto the future

[Stakhanov]

Yea I don't know where this idea of a 3/03 video drop comes from. Is it just that the date is round? Very odd.
A video has been coming since the start of last year and when the tour was over and he still didn't upload a video it was clear he was in a hiatus so this is just month 5? 9? 12? of his break to me.
I just hope that the break he takes serves a purpose. That's it's actually helping him with the issues in his life rather than make him doubt himself more.

[firsttimeposter]

In Dan and Phil news:

Phil just sent a members-only post out where he asked for random dates, and said his next video would come out this weekend. I worked very hard to not suggest any demon dates.

Any guesses? Is he gonna try and be a remember-everything-that-happened-that-day person again?

Bless his heart for posting frequently. I really really appreciate it.

Me too. Everytime any of them post just a little, it reminds me of how much I like them:)) phil sure is ending this day off on a nice note, him using the ^^ smiley is the best!

[snokoplasmic]

Maybe it'll be something like this 2013 video

but with like, photos, or something? Or maybe Google searches again, which I wouldn't mind

[flarequake]

There’s another British Phill with two ls, Mr Jupitus, was a team captain on Never Mind the Buzzcocks for years, dunno if our Phil (yay, the northern ‘our’) is going for that vibe, if it was a typo or what (seems a stretch to say it’s L from Lester).

[knq]

I'm very curious to see what the video will be! What could he film where dates (without years) would be helpful to filming regardless of whether he actually uses them?

[Ataraxia25]

Maybe he's gonna try to guess what he did on this or that day ? (Just like the liveshow with Dan asking him what he did in february)

[Elemancy]

Moderating

Ok let's break this down.

Being a regular citizen doens't mean that you don't have certain rules you have to follow in your professional line.
As a citizen, it means you have to stick to the law, which are the rules that bind all of us.
In your professional line, there's usually your employment contract and the working regulations / Labor code or whatever the exact term is in English. Plus any or all laws or binding restrictions on your profession or statute. Plus, arguably, some (voluntary) regulations or standards in your industry which might not technically be a legal obligation but has such influence that you must adhere to it or suffer crippling professional consequences (like athletes not respecting the rules of anti-doping agencies or youtubers not respecting the terms of service of youtube/google).

What rules of his professional lines bind Phil exactly when he shared that story? Does he have a contract with us? With google? Is there anything that is required of him as influencer that goes beyond him voluntarily meeting our expectations or standards?

In second order, Is everything they share by default something they do in the function and capacity of them being professional entertainers? Or do we except they also share things as private individuals expressing themselves?
I would say there are distinctions in what they share. Their private and professional roles mix and mingle but that doesn't mean there is no difference and that everything they share fits their professional line .

They have an audience of millions and they carefully choose what to share and not share with us among the entirety of their lives.

I agree this is the case most of the time, but there are also moments where they slip up or aren't careful at all in what they share. I don't expect them to be careful in everything, to the contrary I hope they would throw caution into the wind more and just say what they really think. Though I guess this conversation shows that opening up might be professionally unwise as you will be held to different standards by different people and they can't always be compatible with your personal convictions.


As such, when it comes to them actively choosing to share something that could influence their audience in a negative way, it comes with the job.

I understand that this is your view of their professional responsibility, but where in their job description is this stated? I just mean to make the point that even if a lot of their audience would expect them to share and behave in a certain way they find responsible, In effect they have almost all the freedom they want in defining their responsibility.


they choose what to share and if what they choose to share is controversial and people call them out on it, so be it.

Indeed so be it and that is what already happens since people call them out on a whole lot of things, sometimes in direct contradiction with each other and unaware of the objections that could be raised about their own opinions and behaviors.
I think we agree here though in my previous posts the main point I wanted to make is that even when disagree with what they share I would plead for a discourse that insists less on calling out the concrete instagram story Phil shared as problematic and denouncing an anime cartoon as morally corrupt and is more self-aware with similar behavior that is common within the fandom and the diversity of opinion that exists about this anime and what we think it stands for.

They have a responsibility because it's the job, this isn't an opinion, this is a matter of fact. Like I said, it's literally why this type of job took that name.
I don't see how it's a fact. What is the job here and how is it defined that is more than an opinion of what you think the job ought to be? I see no legal or otherwise binding documents that define this responsibility? I just call youtubers youtubers, and don't really see the added value of calling them influencers, but regardless of how you call them they historically have pretty much defined their own responsibility. That is why there is so much variance in the sort of content influencers make, what they talk about and how, and the opinions they have. Unless they really do cross the lines set by the terms of service by the platform itself, youtubers tend to take on the responsibility they see fit for themselves.

And even if they violate the companies norms it can take a while before action is taken (I'm thinking of the despicable content of that "daddy of 5" channel, that also let to real legal repercussions)

I would like you to observe the first rule of this forum. I don't think you are being respectful responding with this gif and using a term like mansplaining. I have reported your post and asked clarification.

1. Be respectful of fellow users, moderators and the administration. Disagreements are permitted, but no name calling or hate speech of any kind will be tolerated.

I’m going to respond publicly since you’ve mentioned reporting the post.

IDB has always welcomed opinions that are not held by the majority of the user base - this helps foster discussion and keeps the forum alive. Our rules, as you quoted, do allow disagreements provided that name calling and hate speech aren’t involved. We generally allow discussions to become a little heated, since our jumping in at the slightest sign of disagreement would turn posters away.

However, your posts have led to many pages of posters explaining why your opinions are not acceptable and/or correct, with your response being - without fail - “okay, but here’s why I’m right”. Along with this, as discussions progress, the condescension and self-righteousness in your posts increases to the point that other posters feel that they have no choice but to take a harsher tone with you.

The mod team has discussed this situation, and we’re not going to take any direct action against any person involved. While the post you reported does brush up against the rules, it certainly does not break them. “Mansplaining” is most certainly not a pejorative word, as you described it in your report, and the post was not excessively inflammatory. On a personal note, I wrote rule ten {edit- which was quoted by you in your report}, and did not have this kind of post in mind when writing it.

We’re happy for this discussion to continue, but I will ask that everyone does their best to keep discussions civil, although I recognise that this is a difficult situation. A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”.

I usually end posts and private messages with “If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me or another moderator know”, and I’m happy to receive messages about this too, but I do need to say here that we’re not likely to change this decision.

I reported the post and asked clarification about the rules, in particular about the use of gifs with a term like mansplaining, and spoiler descriptions such as "TLDR and "wall of text". I let the person knew I reported the post because I think it's more honest to directly tell a person when I think they break a forum rule, instead of having to find out your post suddenly has changed because someone reported a word you used as a slur.
Fine, it's good to know that just responding with gifs and terms like "mansplaining" are not pejorative in the eyes of the moderators. Perhaps I just need to see it as a compliment then! I have to say it's getting pretty confusing for me what is considered respectful, name calling and slurs. "Asshole" apparently isn't a slur either and now you say that the reported post "does brush up against the rules" but doesn't break them. I'm not even sure what that means. It breaks the rules a little but not really? Duly noted.

What I find pretty offensive though, especially since you do post this in public and go into quite a bit of detail about your reasoning, is your characterization of my posts. If you read my posts, there are many instances where I try to find common ground and say I agree, or partly agree. To reduce my posts to "ok, but here's why I'm right" is a really biased view. These discussions always spontaneously got going among multiple forum viewers and I've only always tried to better articulate and expand upon my views. You could just as well label the responses to my post as "ok, but here's why i'm right".
There have been people who shared similar views, and they were also met with a lot of criticism. If multiple users find my view on an issue controversial and they offer their own opinions, I can't help it either that you get a couple of pages of discussion that can get heated.

What I find really one-sided is when you call my posts "condescending and "self-righteous" and seem to find it ok that other people just take a harsher tone with me. On the basis of what, frankly? My writing style as a non English-speaker? Some vocabulary and phrasing I use? I do my very best to be civil and engage with the arguments of the people and discuss with them in a point - counter point way, and you just put that away as condescending and self-righteous? Disregarding any response that you could characterize in the same way.
Sorry that's a very biased and hurtful "modsplaining" of the discussion that took place, which isn't even directly connected to the post I reported which talks about a whole different issue.
I'm very disappointed at the moderating. You state yourself " A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”. Just after you attack me as a poster and characterize my posts in all kinds of subjective ways. Looks like this forum is no different than the one we moved from. If the moderating team thinks your contributions are X or Y, the rules don't apply.

I ask you to reconsider your decision and interpret the rules objectively, separate from whether you agree with the content of my posts or not and whatever you describe my writing style as. I would also like to know what constitutes a "condescending" or "self-righteous" post, since they seem to guide your decsion and so this notion doesn't get arbitrarily applied and user posts labeled as such. I would hope for fairness, but have to say it's not encouraging to ask for a review when you already state it's not likely you will change your mind.




I have to say that i find it pretty

Ah yes, that most hateful and discriminatory term of the ‘mansplainer.’ It is important we reflect on the storied history behind the centuries long persecution of those pedantic purveyors of long winded essays offering opinions framed as academically and grammatically sound takes on issues much more complex, involved and manifold in nature than a peer reviewed article or a Merriam-Webster's definition can encompass. Indeed, we must reflect on the impact behind using the term mansplainer and realize the harsh implications of calling a spade a spade. For we should find better ways to describe when one person tediously outlines the flaws behind what he deems to be ‘selective’ and ‘vague’ reasonings, especially when his own selective contributions are phrased in a way that doesn't just come across as a contrarian, patronizing head pat to everyone offering their objective experiences and commentary in a more equitable way.
Friends, romans, countrymen, we must stop the hate here. For too long have we used the term mansplaining to paraphrase the long winded, circular rhetoric of those with a need to argue the art of conversation over focusing on the topic of conversation itself. Justice for our comrade Stakhanov, I beseech you all.

@Stakhanov I'm not sure even you believe half of what you just said though if you did I find it curious as to why. Indeed, I see no legal or otherwise binding documents or codified set of regulations that define the word mansplaining in the context of hate speech so I’m not sure I understand what’s the problem here. I don’t doubt that there is interesting (academic) theories and books about what the term ought to mean or how it’s used but you can basically construct a deontology for every new idiom or linguistic turn of phrase, modsplaining included. (Honestly, sir, what a low blow to the forum moderator. How could you?)

On a more relevant note, about the implied responsibility of influencers, that’s the double edged sword Dan and Phil will (for better or for worse) always have to face in having their opinions, recommendations and every facet of what they do and say weighed against the forum of public opinion and scrutiny by very virtue of their profession, if not by just virtue of having a publicly accessible presence on social media, whether or not it’s a part of their job description directed by a set of regulations you agree with or a gallery of subjective viewpoints you don’t. (This also falls in line with the previous discussion about intent and impact that I’m glad for my own peace of mind I didn’t continue for obvious reasons.) I may not be an influencer and there is nothing which legally binds me as an individual to follow any modes of conduct regarding my actions, words or the content I consume, just as consumers themselves are not legally bound to be conscientious about the products they buy or the ethical implications of where those products come from, how it’s manufactured or how it’s disposed of, but we understand and continue to learn about the importance of recognizing the responsibility implied in terms of long term environmental, industrial and social impact.
Nothing we do exists in a vacuum and as individuals and communities inextricably linked to each other who do influence each other in ways both tangible and subconscious, how we react to, manage and analyze those subtle influences is important in how we cultivate that information and manifest its impact in our daily lives. It's true our tastes in media are subjective and up to each person to determine the boundaries behind what they deem acceptable or not, but that doesn’t mean for example with me enjoying Gurren Lagann that I can’t take issue with young teen Yoko being drawn in the hyper sexualized body of a twenty something year old even when I find it funny to see boota (small mole pig creature) diving nose first into her cleavage or that I can’t enjoy the nostalgia of the old Tenchi Muyo series or Outlaw Star without squinting at other aspects of how certain characters and relationships were portrayed. (and sometimes inwardly flinching at how much I missed the first time I watched it when I was younger and realizing how influential those little details were regardless of my lack of implicit understanding of them)I'm not about to go slamming my fist into studio Gainax's door and demand they stop it with the boobage, but at the same time, considering the prepubescent, revealing depictions of some of the characters, it's an unavoidable point of commentary.

It’s not about censoring opinion or rallying against Phil, but more about critically examining the themes, tropes and material of the media and products being marketed to us, even in the most benign seeming of recommendations. No one is demanding Phil to stop watching what he wants as I’m sure his tastes probably extend to things beyond what he mentions on social media, especially as someone whose age and experience has given him the ability to internalize mature subject matter from the point of view of someone with the developed maturity and critical reflection to enjoy aspects of it while immediately recognizing other aspects that might be more questionable, but when those interests are publically shared with others of varying age groups who might not have yet developed those markers of critical reflection and experience it remains a point worthy of dissection and a closer second look. This isn't a cry for 'think of the children!' but more of a petition to openly discuss the pros and cons behind certain viewing habits and genres to help develop and invite critical reflection/social awareness and in turn prevent blind outrage and misconceptions of the context behind the conversation being had. Having that wealth of background information makes for a more balanced discussion and helps people form a more informed perspective.
This is comparable to how Dan once commented on the perfectly toned musclulature of the boys in Free! as an overwhelming factor of interest for the audience watching over simply just the plot in the same way many people stared at Shawn Mendes’ Calvin Klein photos in a manner that wasn’t just simple appreciation for the finely tailored workmanship of the underwear he had on or when Dan also skeptically wondered about the way in which the kiss was depicted in Yuri on Ice and how progressive or not it really was or how reactionary/divisive/detrimental certain parts of interacting with social platforms can be. These were all past liveshow comments touching on, albeit briefly, topics of fetishization, sexualization, drama/fear mongering, etc. Maybe you could argue he had no stated obligation to express his opinions on the implications of the media he engages with, but he did and so do we. And it’s a nice precedent for Dan to set as a public figure, to analyze his interests, however casually, from a detached, critical perspective even while proclaiming his love for other aspects of it at the same time. It shows a tacit awareness of his own responsibility when it comes to things he talks about with us and leaves an implied note of encouragement for us to take our own responsibility in taking a step back to reflect on what and who we engage with and how, without letting blind adoration, mob mentality or apathy prevent us from doing so.
This in turn is also comparable to the critical reflections Tomska often makes about his own life in terms of his daily habits, the media he watches, comments he receives, content he makes, etc. and how he decides to take personal responsibility in the manner he presents certain topics without stifling his personal expression or depriving himself of the media he enjoys. These are just two examples of influencers (whether you think the term is applicable or not)who show a certain level of respect and care for their elevated positions and the potential impact they can have on the millions of viewers who watch them.

And the idea that fandom needs to stop with these discussions and proclaim its own self-awareness first by holding up a mirror to its actions, as if that somehow nullifies the intended conversation is missing the point entirely.
"Other people teach us who we are. Their attitudes to us are the mirror in which we learn to see ourselves, but the mirror is distorted. We are, perhaps, rather dimly aware of the immense power of our social environment.” -Alan W. Watts

On a more enjoyable note, I wonder if the topic of Phil's new video might somehow coincide with what I mentioned before about him delving into more metaphysical topics he's mentioned, like astrology and tarot, to keep that theme going from past videos. He might have bought a book on horoscopes or numerology and could be using those submitted calendar dates to research their possible meanings. Every time he's briefly touched on the subject, I've always been eager to know more about his belief/experience regarding it. But if not, I'll gladly take another google search history video.

[Stakhanov]

@Elemancy

Moderating

Ok let's break this down.

Being a regular citizen doens't mean that you don't have certain rules you have to follow in your professional line.
As a citizen, it means you have to stick to the law, which are the rules that bind all of us.
In your professional line, there's usually your employment contract and the working regulations / Labor code or whatever the exact term is in English. Plus any or all laws or binding restrictions on your profession or statute. Plus, arguably, some (voluntary) regulations or standards in your industry which might not technically be a legal obligation but has such influence that you must adhere to it or suffer crippling professional consequences (like athletes not respecting the rules of anti-doping agencies or youtubers not respecting the terms of service of youtube/google).

What rules of his professional lines bind Phil exactly when he shared that story? Does he have a contract with us? With google? Is there anything that is required of him as influencer that goes beyond him voluntarily meeting our expectations or standards?

In second order, Is everything they share by default something they do in the function and capacity of them being professional entertainers? Or do we except they also share things as private individuals expressing themselves?
I would say there are distinctions in what they share. Their private and professional roles mix and mingle but that doesn't mean there is no difference and that everything they share fits their professional line .

They have an audience of millions and they carefully choose what to share and not share with us among the entirety of their lives.

I agree this is the case most of the time, but there are also moments where they slip up or aren't careful at all in what they share. I don't expect them to be careful in everything, to the contrary I hope they would throw caution into the wind more and just say what they really think. Though I guess this conversation shows that opening up might be professionally unwise as you will be held to different standards by different people and they can't always be compatible with your personal convictions.


As such, when it comes to them actively choosing to share something that could influence their audience in a negative way, it comes with the job.

I understand that this is your view of their professional responsibility, but where in their job description is this stated? I just mean to make the point that even if a lot of their audience would expect them to share and behave in a certain way they find responsible, In effect they have almost all the freedom they want in defining their responsibility.


they choose what to share and if what they choose to share is controversial and people call them out on it, so be it.

Indeed so be it and that is what already happens since people call them out on a whole lot of things, sometimes in direct contradiction with each other and unaware of the objections that could be raised about their own opinions and behaviors.
I think we agree here though in my previous posts the main point I wanted to make is that even when disagree with what they share I would plead for a discourse that insists less on calling out the concrete instagram story Phil shared as problematic and denouncing an anime cartoon as morally corrupt and is more self-aware with similar behavior that is common within the fandom and the diversity of opinion that exists about this anime and what we think it stands for.

They have a responsibility because it's the job, this isn't an opinion, this is a matter of fact. Like I said, it's literally why this type of job took that name.
I don't see how it's a fact. What is the job here and how is it defined that is more than an opinion of what you think the job ought to be? I see no legal or otherwise binding documents that define this responsibility? I just call youtubers youtubers, and don't really see the added value of calling them influencers, but regardless of how you call them they historically have pretty much defined their own responsibility. That is why there is so much variance in the sort of content influencers make, what they talk about and how, and the opinions they have. Unless they really do cross the lines set by the terms of service by the platform itself, youtubers tend to take on the responsibility they see fit for themselves.

And even if they violate the companies norms it can take a while before action is taken (I'm thinking of the despicable content of that "daddy of 5" channel, that also let to real legal repercussions)

I would like you to observe the first rule of this forum. I don't think you are being respectful responding with this gif and using a term like mansplaining. I have reported your post and asked clarification.

1. Be respectful of fellow users, moderators and the administration. Disagreements are permitted, but no name calling or hate speech of any kind will be tolerated.

I’m going to respond publicly since you’ve mentioned reporting the post.

IDB has always welcomed opinions that are not held by the majority of the user base - this helps foster discussion and keeps the forum alive. Our rules, as you quoted, do allow disagreements provided that name calling and hate speech aren’t involved. We generally allow discussions to become a little heated, since our jumping in at the slightest sign of disagreement would turn posters away.

However, your posts have led to many pages of posters explaining why your opinions are not acceptable and/or correct, with your response being - without fail - “okay, but here’s why I’m right”. Along with this, as discussions progress, the condescension and self-righteousness in your posts increases to the point that other posters feel that they have no choice but to take a harsher tone with you.

The mod team has discussed this situation, and we’re not going to take any direct action against any person involved. While the post you reported does brush up against the rules, it certainly does not break them. “Mansplaining” is most certainly not a pejorative word, as you described it in your report, and the post was not excessively inflammatory. On a personal note, I wrote rule ten {edit- which was quoted by you in your report}, and did not have this kind of post in mind when writing it.

We’re happy for this discussion to continue, but I will ask that everyone does their best to keep discussions civil, although I recognise that this is a difficult situation. A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”.

I usually end posts and private messages with “If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me or another moderator know”, and I’m happy to receive messages about this too, but I do need to say here that we’re not likely to change this decision.

I reported the post and asked clarification about the rules, in particular about the use of gifs with a term like mansplaining, and spoiler descriptions such as "TLDR and "wall of text". I let the person knew I reported the post because I think it's more honest to directly tell a person when I think they break a forum rule, instead of having to find out your post suddenly has changed because someone reported a word you used as a slur.
Fine, it's good to know that just responding with gifs and terms like "mansplaining" are not pejorative in the eyes of the moderators. Perhaps I just need to see it as a compliment then! I have to say it's getting pretty confusing for me what is considered respectful, name calling and slurs. "Asshole" apparently isn't a slur either and now you say that the reported post "does brush up against the rules" but doesn't break them. I'm not even sure what that means. It breaks the rules a little but not really? Duly noted.

What I find pretty offensive though, especially since you do post this in public and go into quite a bit of detail about your reasoning, is your characterization of my posts. If you read my posts, there are many instances where I try to find common ground and say I agree, or partly agree. To reduce my posts to "ok, but here's why I'm right" is a really biased view. These discussions always spontaneously got going among multiple forum viewers and I've only always tried to better articulate and expand upon my views. You could just as well label the responses to my post as "ok, but here's why i'm right".
There have been people who shared similar views, and they were also met with a lot of criticism. If multiple users find my view on an issue controversial and they offer their own opinions, I can't help it either that you get a couple of pages of discussion that can get heated.

What I find really one-sided is when you call my posts "condescending and "self-righteous" and seem to find it ok that other people just take a harsher tone with me. On the basis of what, frankly? My writing style as a non English-speaker? Some vocabulary and phrasing I use? I do my very best to be civil and engage with the arguments of the people and discuss with them in a point - counter point way, and you just put that away as condescending and self-righteous? Disregarding any response that you could characterize in the same way.
Sorry that's a very biased and hurtful "modsplaining" of the discussion that took place, which isn't even directly connected to the post I reported which talks about a whole different issue.
I'm very disappointed at the moderating. You state yourself " A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”. Just after you attack me as a poster and characterize my posts in all kinds of subjective ways. Looks like this forum is no different than the one we moved from. If the moderating team thinks your contributions are X or Y, the rules don't apply.

I ask you to reconsider your decision and interpret the rules objectively, separate from whether you agree with the content of my posts or not and whatever you describe my writing style as. I would also like to know what constitutes a "condescending" or "self-righteous" post, since they seem to guide your decsion and so this notion doesn't get arbitrarily applied and user posts labeled as such. I would hope for fairness, but have to say it's not encouraging to ask for a review when you already state it's not likely you will change your mind.




I have to say that i find it pretty

Ah yes, that most hateful and discriminatory term of the ‘mansplainer.’ It is important we reflect on the storied history behind the centuries long persecution of those pedantic purveyors of long winded essays offering opinions framed as academically and grammatically sound takes on issues much more complex, involved and manifold in nature than a peer reviewed article or a Merriam-Webster's definition can encompass. Indeed, we must reflect on the impact behind using the term mansplainer and realize the harsh implications of calling a spade a spade. For we should find better ways to describe when one person tediously outlines the flaws behind what he deems to be ‘selective’ and ‘vague’ reasonings, especially when his own selective contributions are phrased in a way that doesn't just come across as a contrarian, patronizing head pat to everyone offering their objective experiences and commentary in a more equitable way.
Friends, romans, countrymen, we must stop the hate here. For too long have we used the term mansplaining to paraphrase the long winded, circular rhetoric of those with a need to argue the art of conversation over focusing on the topic of conversation itself. Justice for our comrade Stakhanov, I beseech you all.

@Stakhanov I'm not sure even you believe half of what you just said though if you did I find it curious as to why. Indeed, I see no legal or otherwise binding documents or codified set of regulations that define the word mansplaining in the context of hate speech so I’m not sure I understand what’s the problem here. I don’t doubt that there is interesting (academic) theories and books about what the term ought to mean or how it’s used but you can basically construct a deontology for every new idiom or linguistic turn of phrase, modsplaining included. (Honestly, sir, what a low blow to the forum moderator. How could you?)

On a more relevant note, about the implied responsibility of influencers, that’s the double edged sword Dan and Phil will (for better or for worse) always have to face in having their opinions, recommendations and every facet of what they do and say weighed against the forum of public opinion and scrutiny by very virtue of their profession, if not by just virtue of having a publicly accessible presence on social media, whether or not it’s a part of their job description directed by a set of regulations you agree with or a gallery of subjective viewpoints you don’t. (This also falls in line with the previous discussion about intent and impact that I’m glad for my own peace of mind I didn’t continue for obvious reasons.) I may not be an influencer and there is nothing which legally binds me as an individual to follow any modes of conduct regarding my actions, words or the content I consume, just as consumers themselves are not legally bound to be conscientious about the products they buy or the ethical implications of where those products come from, how it’s manufactured or how it’s disposed of, but we understand and continue to learn about the importance of recognizing the responsibility implied in terms of long term environmental, industrial and social impact.
Nothing we do exists in a vacuum and as individuals and communities inextricably linked to each other who do influence each other in ways both tangible and subconscious, how we react to, manage and analyze those subtle influences is important in how we cultivate that information and manifest its impact in our daily lives. It's true our tastes in media are subjective and up to each person to determine the boundaries behind what they deem acceptable or not, but that doesn’t mean for example with me enjoying Gurren Lagann that I can’t take issue with young teen Yoko being drawn in the hyper sexualized body of a twenty something year old even when I find it funny to see boota (small mole pig creature) diving nose first into her cleavage or that I can’t enjoy the nostalgia of the old Tenchi Muyo series or Outlaw Star without squinting at other aspects of how certain characters and relationships were portrayed. (and sometimes inwardly flinching at how much I missed the first time I watched it when I was younger and realizing how influential those little details were regardless of my lack of implicit understanding of them)I'm not about to go slamming my fist into studio Gainax's door and demand they stop it with the boobage, but at the same time, considering the prepubescent, revealing depictions of some of the characters, it's an unavoidable point of commentary.

It’s not about censoring opinion or rallying against Phil, but more about critically examining the themes, tropes and material of the media and products being marketed to us, even in the most benign seeming of recommendations. No one is demanding Phil to stop watching what he wants as I’m sure his tastes probably extend to things beyond what he mentions on social media, especially as someone whose age and experience has given him the ability to internalize mature subject matter from the point of view of someone with the developed maturity and critical reflection to enjoy aspects of it while immediately recognizing other aspects that might be more questionable, but when those interests are publically shared with others of varying age groups who might not have yet developed those markers of critical reflection and experience it remains a point worthy of dissection and a closer second look. This isn't a cry for 'think of the children!' but more of a petition to openly discuss the pros and cons behind certain viewing habits and genres to help develop and invite critical reflection/social awareness and in turn prevent blind outrage and misconceptions of the context behind the conversation being had. Having that wealth of background information makes for a more balanced discussion and helps people form a more informed perspective.
This is comparable to how Dan once commented on the perfectly toned musclulature of the boys in Free! as an overwhelming factor of interest for the audience watching over simply just the plot in the same way many people stared at Shawn Mendes’ Calvin Klein photos in a manner that wasn’t just simple appreciation for the finely tailored workmanship of the underwear he had on or when Dan also skeptically wondered about the way in which the kiss was depicted in Yuri on Ice and how progressive or not it really was or how reactionary/divisive/detrimental certain parts of interacting with social platforms can be. These were all past liveshow comments touching on, albeit briefly, topics of fetishization, sexualization, drama/fear mongering, etc. Maybe you could argue he had no stated obligation to express his opinions on the implications of the media he engages with, but he did and so do we. And it’s a nice precedent for Dan to set as a public figure, to analyze his interests, however casually, from a detached, critical perspective even while proclaiming his love for other aspects of it at the same time. It shows a tacit awareness of his own responsibility when it comes to things he talks about with us and leaves an implied note of encouragement for us to take our own responsibility in taking a step back to reflect on what and who we engage with and how, without letting blind adoration, mob mentality or apathy prevent us from doing so.
This in turn is also comparable to the critical reflections Tomska often makes about his own life in terms of his daily habits, the media he watches, comments he receives, content he makes, etc. and how he decides to take personal responsibility in the manner he presents certain topics without stifling his personal expression or depriving himself of the media he enjoys. These are just two examples of influencers (whether you think the term is applicable or not)who show a certain level of respect and care for their elevated positions and the potential impact they can have on the millions of viewers who watch them.

And the idea that fandom needs to stop with these discussions and proclaim its own self-awareness first by holding up a mirror to its actions, as if that somehow nullifies the intended conversation is missing the point entirely.
"Other people teach us who we are. Their attitudes to us are the mirror in which we learn to see ourselves, but the mirror is distorted. We are, perhaps, rather dimly aware of the immense power of our social environment.” -Alan W. Watts

On a more enjoyable note, I wonder if the topic of Phil's new video might somehow coincide with what I mentioned before about him delving into more metaphysical topics he's mentioned, like astrology and tarot, to keep that theme going from past videos. He might have bought a book on horoscopes or numerology and could be using those submitted calendar dates to research their possible meanings. Every time he's briefly touched on the subject, I've always been eager to know more about his belief/experience regarding it. But if not, I'll gladly take another google search history video.

If you don't believe I believe half of the things I say, I've got no desire to respond to your ad hominems. So enjoy the gif!

[Stakhanov]

Ouch did he just say 4% of his followers aren't valid? He's gonna get in trouble for that!

[Elemancy]

@Elemancy

Moderating

I would like you to observe the first rule of this forum. I don't think you are being respectful responding with this gif and using a term like mansplaining. I have reported your post and asked clarification.

1. Be respectful of fellow users, moderators and the administration. Disagreements are permitted, but no name calling or hate speech of any kind will be tolerated.

I’m going to respond publicly since you’ve mentioned reporting the post.

IDB has always welcomed opinions that are not held by the majority of the user base - this helps foster discussion and keeps the forum alive. Our rules, as you quoted, do allow disagreements provided that name calling and hate speech aren’t involved. We generally allow discussions to become a little heated, since our jumping in at the slightest sign of disagreement would turn posters away.

However, your posts have led to many pages of posters explaining why your opinions are not acceptable and/or correct, with your response being - without fail - “okay, but here’s why I’m right”. Along with this, as discussions progress, the condescension and self-righteousness in your posts increases to the point that other posters feel that they have no choice but to take a harsher tone with you.

The mod team has discussed this situation, and we’re not going to take any direct action against any person involved. While the post you reported does brush up against the rules, it certainly does not break them. “Mansplaining” is most certainly not a pejorative word, as you described it in your report, and the post was not excessively inflammatory. On a personal note, I wrote rule ten {edit- which was quoted by you in your report}, and did not have this kind of post in mind when writing it.

We’re happy for this discussion to continue, but I will ask that everyone does their best to keep discussions civil, although I recognise that this is a difficult situation. A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”.

I usually end posts and private messages with “If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me or another moderator know”, and I’m happy to receive messages about this too, but I do need to say here that we’re not likely to change this decision.

I reported the post and asked clarification about the rules, in particular about the use of gifs with a term like mansplaining, and spoiler descriptions such as "TLDR and "wall of text". I let the person knew I reported the post because I think it's more honest to directly tell a person when I think they break a forum rule, instead of having to find out your post suddenly has changed because someone reported a word you used as a slur.
Fine, it's good to know that just responding with gifs and terms like "mansplaining" are not pejorative in the eyes of the moderators. Perhaps I just need to see it as a compliment then! I have to say it's getting pretty confusing for me what is considered respectful, name calling and slurs. "Asshole" apparently isn't a slur either and now you say that the reported post "does brush up against the rules" but doesn't break them. I'm not even sure what that means. It breaks the rules a little but not really? Duly noted.

What I find pretty offensive though, especially since you do post this in public and go into quite a bit of detail about your reasoning, is your characterization of my posts. If you read my posts, there are many instances where I try to find common ground and say I agree, or partly agree. To reduce my posts to "ok, but here's why I'm right" is a really biased view. These discussions always spontaneously got going among multiple forum viewers and I've only always tried to better articulate and expand upon my views. You could just as well label the responses to my post as "ok, but here's why i'm right".
There have been people who shared similar views, and they were also met with a lot of criticism. If multiple users find my view on an issue controversial and they offer their own opinions, I can't help it either that you get a couple of pages of discussion that can get heated.

What I find really one-sided is when you call my posts "condescending and "self-righteous" and seem to find it ok that other people just take a harsher tone with me. On the basis of what, frankly? My writing style as a non English-speaker? Some vocabulary and phrasing I use? I do my very best to be civil and engage with the arguments of the people and discuss with them in a point - counter point way, and you just put that away as condescending and self-righteous? Disregarding any response that you could characterize in the same way.
Sorry that's a very biased and hurtful "modsplaining" of the discussion that took place, which isn't even directly connected to the post I reported which talks about a whole different issue.
I'm very disappointed at the moderating. You state yourself " A good rule of thumb, and how I personally moderate the forum, is to “attack the post, not the poster”. Just after you attack me as a poster and characterize my posts in all kinds of subjective ways. Looks like this forum is no different than the one we moved from. If the moderating team thinks your contributions are X or Y, the rules don't apply.

I ask you to reconsider your decision and interpret the rules objectively, separate from whether you agree with the content of my posts or not and whatever you describe my writing style as. I would also like to know what constitutes a "condescending" or "self-righteous" post, since they seem to guide your decsion and so this notion doesn't get arbitrarily applied and user posts labeled as such. I would hope for fairness, but have to say it's not encouraging to ask for a review when you already state it's not likely you will change your mind.




I have to say that i find it pretty

Ah yes, that most hateful and discriminatory term of the ‘mansplainer.’ It is important we reflect on the storied history behind the centuries long persecution of those pedantic purveyors of long winded essays offering opinions framed as academically and grammatically sound takes on issues much more complex, involved and manifold in nature than a peer reviewed article or a Merriam-Webster's definition can encompass. Indeed, we must reflect on the impact behind using the term mansplainer and realize the harsh implications of calling a spade a spade. For we should find better ways to describe when one person tediously outlines the flaws behind what he deems to be ‘selective’ and ‘vague’ reasonings, especially when his own selective contributions are phrased in a way that doesn't just come across as a contrarian, patronizing head pat to everyone offering their objective experiences and commentary in a more equitable way.
Friends, romans, countrymen, we must stop the hate here. For too long have we used the term mansplaining to paraphrase the long winded, circular rhetoric of those with a need to argue the art of conversation over focusing on the topic of conversation itself. Justice for our comrade Stakhanov, I beseech you all.

@Stakhanov I'm not sure even you believe half of what you just said though if you did I find it curious as to why. Indeed, I see no legal or otherwise binding documents or codified set of regulations that define the word mansplaining in the context of hate speech so I’m not sure I understand what’s the problem here. I don’t doubt that there is interesting (academic) theories and books about what the term ought to mean or how it’s used but you can basically construct a deontology for every new idiom or linguistic turn of phrase, modsplaining included. (Honestly, sir, what a low blow to the forum moderator. How could you?)

On a more relevant note, about the implied responsibility of influencers, that’s the double edged sword Dan and Phil will (for better or for worse) always have to face in having their opinions, recommendations and every facet of what they do and say weighed against the forum of public opinion and scrutiny by very virtue of their profession, if not by just virtue of having a publicly accessible presence on social media, whether or not it’s a part of their job description directed by a set of regulations you agree with or a gallery of subjective viewpoints you don’t. (This also falls in line with the previous discussion about intent and impact that I’m glad for my own peace of mind I didn’t continue for obvious reasons.) I may not be an influencer and there is nothing which legally binds me as an individual to follow any modes of conduct regarding my actions, words or the content I consume, just as consumers themselves are not legally bound to be conscientious about the products they buy or the ethical implications of where those products come from, how it’s manufactured or how it’s disposed of, but we understand and continue to learn about the importance of recognizing the responsibility implied in terms of long term environmental, industrial and social impact.
Nothing we do exists in a vacuum and as individuals and communities inextricably linked to each other who do influence each other in ways both tangible and subconscious, how we react to, manage and analyze those subtle influences is important in how we cultivate that information and manifest its impact in our daily lives. It's true our tastes in media are subjective and up to each person to determine the boundaries behind what they deem acceptable or not, but that doesn’t mean for example with me enjoying Gurren Lagann that I can’t take issue with young teen Yoko being drawn in the hyper sexualized body of a twenty something year old even when I find it funny to see boota (small mole pig creature) diving nose first into her cleavage or that I can’t enjoy the nostalgia of the old Tenchi Muyo series or Outlaw Star without squinting at other aspects of how certain characters and relationships were portrayed. (and sometimes inwardly flinching at how much I missed the first time I watched it when I was younger and realizing how influential those little details were regardless of my lack of implicit understanding of them)I'm not about to go slamming my fist into studio Gainax's door and demand they stop it with the boobage, but at the same time, considering the prepubescent, revealing depictions of some of the characters, it's an unavoidable point of commentary.

It’s not about censoring opinion or rallying against Phil, but more about critically examining the themes, tropes and material of the media and products being marketed to us, even in the most benign seeming of recommendations. No one is demanding Phil to stop watching what he wants as I’m sure his tastes probably extend to things beyond what he mentions on social media, especially as someone whose age and experience has given him the ability to internalize mature subject matter from the point of view of someone with the developed maturity and critical reflection to enjoy aspects of it while immediately recognizing other aspects that might be more questionable, but when those interests are publically shared with others of varying age groups who might not have yet developed those markers of critical reflection and experience it remains a point worthy of dissection and a closer second look. This isn't a cry for 'think of the children!' but more of a petition to openly discuss the pros and cons behind certain viewing habits and genres to help develop and invite critical reflection/social awareness and in turn prevent blind outrage and misconceptions of the context behind the conversation being had. Having that wealth of background information makes for a more balanced discussion and helps people form a more informed perspective.
This is comparable to how Dan once commented on the perfectly toned musclulature of the boys in Free! as an overwhelming factor of interest for the audience watching over simply just the plot in the same way many people stared at Shawn Mendes’ Calvin Klein photos in a manner that wasn’t just simple appreciation for the finely tailored workmanship of the underwear he had on or when Dan also skeptically wondered about the way in which the kiss was depicted in Yuri on Ice and how progressive or not it really was or how reactionary/divisive/detrimental certain parts of interacting with social platforms can be. These were all past liveshow comments touching on, albeit briefly, topics of fetishization, sexualization, drama/fear mongering, etc. Maybe you could argue he had no stated obligation to express his opinions on the implications of the media he engages with, but he did and so do we. And it’s a nice precedent for Dan to set as a public figure, to analyze his interests, however casually, from a detached, critical perspective even while proclaiming his love for other aspects of it at the same time. It shows a tacit awareness of his own responsibility when it comes to things he talks about with us and leaves an implied note of encouragement for us to take our own responsibility in taking a step back to reflect on what and who we engage with and how, without letting blind adoration, mob mentality or apathy prevent us from doing so.
This in turn is also comparable to the critical reflections Tomska often makes about his own life in terms of his daily habits, the media he watches, comments he receives, content he makes, etc. and how he decides to take personal responsibility in the manner he presents certain topics without stifling his personal expression or depriving himself of the media he enjoys. These are just two examples of influencers (whether you think the term is applicable or not)who show a certain level of respect and care for their elevated positions and the potential impact they can have on the millions of viewers who watch them.

And the idea that fandom needs to stop with these discussions and proclaim its own self-awareness first by holding up a mirror to its actions, as if that somehow nullifies the intended conversation is missing the point entirely.
"Other people teach us who we are. Their attitudes to us are the mirror in which we learn to see ourselves, but the mirror is distorted. We are, perhaps, rather dimly aware of the immense power of our social environment.” -Alan W. Watts

On a more enjoyable note, I wonder if the topic of Phil's new video might somehow coincide with what I mentioned before about him delving into more metaphysical topics he's mentioned, like astrology and tarot, to keep that theme going from past videos. He might have bought a book on horoscopes or numerology and could be using those submitted calendar dates to research their possible meanings. Every time he's briefly touched on the subject, I've always been eager to know more about his belief/experience regarding it. But if not, I'll gladly take another google search history video.

If you don't believe I believe half of the things I say, I've got no desire to respond to your ad hominems. So enjoy the gif!

[fieldoflovers]

the analytics tweet made me laugh, also I would absolutely love if phil shared more about his analytics with us, it'd be so fascinating.

New video: the only dates thing i've seen go around has been the google "celebrity+ bday month and date to get a look" so maybe it'll be a play on that? except maybe with old photos or google search history? idk i'm excited

Also ofc the background change helps but I think this year of consistent content and phil uploading more is really like a fresh start for the amazingphil channel. I was thinking about my favourite years in the channel and 2017 was up there and I think 2019 might have already beaten that, he's working hard and delivering really great content and I hope he's liking the response/engagement even if the views aren't like super high.

[plinthofmylife]

Though I’d love for him to do Instagram stories, Instagram posts, liveshow, a video or a video appearance, just telling us where’s he’s at in his thought progress through twitter or whatever would make my brain stop craving his content to much. Right now, it feels as though he had completely chosen to ignore us, which feels rotten I guess haha:/

Yes, definitely. Rambly thoughts on creation/breaks below (is this my IDB signature at this point?)

One of the more "new" lifestyle youtubers (maybe 3-4 years into youtube) I occasionally follow just hit 800K subs and said that she was feeling like she'd accomplished everything she set out to do and was happy with how financially set she was with her merch (a line of planners and a course) and videos and was thinking about a small break from making videos.

Because I am always thinking about DNP because I am trash, I was thinking, wow, Dan's been on youtube for nearly 10 years has 7-10 times the subs she does (depending on if you include DAPG), he's done two world tours, put out a film, runs a merch company that employs several people, had a radio show for 3 years on the BBC, co-hosted the brits - pretty much I thought about the fact that Dan is younger than she is, and has a lot more in the "accomplishments" index than her, but she still expressed that success was feeling pretty listless for her and she's done everything she set out to do.

I kinda wondered.. if you add in Dan's anxiety/depression and the fact that he often seems to express he's not sure if he "deserves" his success, him having dropped out of college, it's not really surprising if he might be feeling like youtube is already dying off and maybe he needs a new set of goals.

BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE DAN WILL YOU PLEASE GIVE US SOME IDEAS.

That being said, I'm a full-time creator, and sometimes when your job is making content, it can feel like everything you need to put out needs to be content not just communication. I struggle with even composing even tweets sometimes (esp when depressed) because I feel like if it's not good/funny/informative, it's better to say nothing. If I had as many obsessive followers as Dan, I would feel that way times 7 million.

[gnostic]

I've never felt so emotional about Phil as now when he valiantly does his best to carry the fandom forth on his shoulders.

Might even buy some merch off him tbh. Because clearly I need MORE animal socks.

[Amiaw]

I've never felt so emotional about Phil as now when he valiantly does his best to carry the fandom forth on his shoulders.

Might even buy some merch off him tbh. Because clearly I need MORE animal socks.

I've seen a lot of Phil appreciation lately and as a Phillie it's really nice to see him getting so much love. I know that Phil's views are not what they were but if Phil has 500K viewers that really appreciate his content then he's already doing better than most youtubers that have been around for awhile. As far as his videos this year I'm not sure that I love his new direction yet but if he keeps trying different things I'm sure he'll eventually hit on something that works.

[Ablissa]

Some brilliant posts here today!
I'm not going to return to the previous discussion, but I want to place a few shoutouts here under the cut (in no particular order)

@jesp and the rest of the mod team, you're all awesome.
@knq - your post about the days after Phil's video made me laugh.
@Katka - I'm not going to quote you to not stir up more trouble, but I agree so hard and I'm laughing as well.
@Elemancy - your whole post also has me nodding in agreement.
@liola our marketing Queen

Now, as for Phil's video -
I have a feeling it might be him checking different dates in the calendar for things like dog day, pizza day and so on? Trying to find the weirdest ones? Though now that I typed it out, it sounds a bit boring/hard to make a video for, so I hope it won't be that.

Dan's (future) video
I've definitely seen predictions that it will be posted on the anniversary of TTLMT. I've seen them all over the phandom, not just IDB. I was also quite convinced that this might be true, but I'm having second thoughts because, as it's been mentioned here, it's not even the anniversary of his last proper video (that would be GTPWTW). He himself gave no indication that it might be on the 3rd of March, this is all entirely our speculation.

I kinda hope it won't be then, because if it's meant to be a 'one year since TTLMT' kind of thing, then the expectations will be sky-high... and we all know how that goes.

I hope that Dan is giving Phil at least 1 massage/day for carrying this entire fandom on his back.

[rizzo]

I've never felt so emotional about Phil as now when he valiantly does his best to carry the fandom forth on his shoulders.

Might even buy some merch off him tbh. Because clearly I need MORE animal socks.

I've seen a lot of Phil appreciation lately and as a Phillie it's really nice to see him getting so much love. I know that Phil's views are not what they were but if Phil has 500K viewers that really appreciate his content then he's already doing better than most youtubers that have been around for awhile. As far as his videos this year I'm not sure that I love his new direction yet but if he keeps trying different things I'm sure he'll eventually hit on something that works.

OMG. Maybe this is it. Maybe Dan's playing the long game. An exceptionally well executed, long-term "Can Phil express an opinion?"

It's not that he's not ready to post a video or really wants to avoid posting online..... He just wants to give Phil his spotlight, some space, and enough time to ramp-up his 2019 solo content. He wants to convert everyone into a Phillie.

[Phantasy]

I've never felt so emotional about Phil as now when he valiantly does his best to carry the fandom forth on his shoulders.

Might even buy some merch off him tbh. Because clearly I need MORE animal socks.

I've seen a lot of Phil appreciation lately and as a Phillie it's really nice to see him getting so much love. I know that Phil's views are not what they were but if Phil has 500K viewers that really appreciate his content then he's already doing better than most youtubers that have been around for awhile. As far as his videos this year I'm not sure that I love his new direction yet but if he keeps trying different things I'm sure he'll eventually hit on something that works.

OMG. Maybe this is it. Maybe Dan's playing the long game. An exceptionally well executed, long-term "Can Phil express an opinion?"

It's not that he's not ready to post a video or really wants to avoid posting online..... He just wants to give Phil his spotlight, some space, and enough time to ramp-up his 2019 solo content. He wants to convert everyone into a Phillie.

For some reason I don’t see Dan being quite that altruistic... To me it feels more like Dan took a leave of absence from work and Phil had to take extra shifts at the youtube factory to make up the slack.

Kidding aside, I think this year is more about exploring their individual passions and creative expressions and sharing that with the world while focusing on their life as a couple in a more private sense as they ready themselves for the next chapter. If they have plans to grow as a couple and buy a house soon or adopt a pet it pretty much blows the doors open on their relationship, this downt time together might be the last good chance at a semblance of a private life.

[liola]

(This has nothing to do with anything but @plinthofmylife I can't express how fascinated I am with everything you post about your own creator experience and also where were you when I needed an industry look-in while I was writing my thesis sigh )

I think the hunch of "google search history on a particular day" is pretty interesting, although i would love if it went with some in-depth on explaining what he was doing/ why he was searching for it. I think Phil has such an easy comedy side on him, he always makes me laugh out loud with the way he tells stories even when he's not trying.

As for Dan's suspected posting date, I think people latched onto March 3rd because in his answer time about the break of his channel he mentioned that TTLMT was the last "real" dinof video he posted. Like I said, I wouldn't put it past him to round it up to that date just because it might look like an intentional break and not just a creative crisis, although why he would think that would look okay to his audience without communicating it I have no idea. But I often find myself rolling my eyes at some of their choices and who am I to say anything.

Whatever he does, whenever he does it, I hope he's ready for whatever reaction will come, both good and bad. I'm divided between wanting him to Beyoncé it and hope he gives a warning just so I can hide from the reaction

[noodlebum]

Now, as for Phil's video -
I have a feeling it might be him checking different dates in the calendar for things like dog day, pizza day and so on? Trying to find the weirdest ones?

This seems like a good possibility, with some kind of twist maybe.

I've never felt so emotional about Phil as now when he valiantly does his best to carry the fandom forth on his shoulders.

Might even buy some merch off him tbh. Because clearly I need MORE animal socks.

I've seen a lot of Phil appreciation lately and as a Phillie it's really nice to see him getting so much love. I know that Phil's views are not what they were but if Phil has 500K viewers that really appreciate his content then he's already doing better than most youtubers that have been around for awhile. As far as his videos this year I'm not sure that I love his new direction yet but if he keeps trying different things I'm sure he'll eventually hit on something that works.

OMG. Maybe this is it. Maybe Dan's playing the long game. An exceptionally well executed, long-term "Can Phil express an opinion?"

I love this idea

[lionandllama]

Literally can’t believe that my simple question “Do you also think it’s not cool that they continue to somewhat promote sexist, borderline-paedophilic anime to their audience via social media?” provoked someone to yet again burst out of their cellar to defend the poor multi millionaires from people claiming that they are, indeed, influencers and that I had to read things like “heterophobic” and “ad hominem” with my own two eyes.
Don’t even wanna say more, except that I agree with literally everyone else except him and am glad that you all share the opinion that it’s really not a good thing to uncritically support problematic anime with toxic tropes, thank you very much.
To sum this up, I’m gonna share one of Dan’s recent likes:




Good, now onto Phil’s new video. I’m so grateful that he keeps up with the constant content, I just hope he really does stuff he actually enjoys and doesn’t feel pressured to keep the fandom alive right now.
I saw a few suggestions of October 19th in the membership comments but I think we all agree that he’ll blissfully ignore those. lol

[glitterintheair]

Dan's (future) video
I've definitely seen predictions that it will be posted on the anniversary of TTLMT. I've seen them all over the phandom, not just IDB. I was also quite convinced that this might be true, but I'm having second thoughts because, as it's been mentioned here, it's not even the anniversary of his last proper video (that would be GTPWTW). He himself gave no indication that it might be on the 3rd of March, this is all entirely our speculation.

I went back and checked what Dan said in the Tumblr Q&A and he said 'TTLMT was the last real video I uploaded', so I feel like that he considers the 3rd the anniversary of his last proper video. Not that I'm 100% sure he will upload on that day, though. Like, I won't be surprised if we won't get anything.

I just hope we will get a video sooner than later, mostly because I miss Dan and it's clear that we won't see him until he uploads something.

[noodlebum]

I hope he has something exciting up his sleeve after so long, but then that's probably why it's been so long, because he feels it has to be major exciting. Just needs to pull the plaster off, upload something, then move on with everything else

[Ablissa]

I went back and checked what Dan said in the Tumblr Q&A and he said 'TTLMT was the last real video I uploaded', so I feel like that he considers the 3rd the anniversary of his last proper video. Not that I'm 100% sure he will upload on that day, though. Like, I won't be surprised if we won't get anything.

I just hope we will get a video sooner than later, mostly because I miss Dan and it's clear that we won't see him until he uploads something.

I completely forgot that he said that! That does give more credibility to this theory. I'm just a bit worried because the more people expect it, the more disappointed they will inevitably be. The longer it takes, the higher the expectations. I'm almost scared of him uploading something at this point, despite wanting the return to normalcy, because it's going to cause hysteria in the phandom.

He does upload on the 3rd -> people will expect some sort of a groundbreaking video, and we all know what 'groundbreaking' usually means in this fandom. Some people will defend Dan to the death, the ones that disliked the video will fight for a bit, it's going to be messy.
He uploads after the 3rd -> I can only imagine the state of this fandom on the 4th if nothing is uploaded lmao.
He uploads before the 3rd -> I can't see it happening tbh but I feel like that would actually be the best option.

[autumnhearth]

I’m also incredibly grateful that Phil is putting out more frequent videos, but I don’t really like the view that he is carrying the phandom on his back or picking up the slack (even if that is indeed the case). Right now he is being the productive YouTuber he was before all the joint branding and tours. He’s said it’s something he still enjoys and of course it also brings in the pay checks. I also appreciate his extra effort in community involvement from writing his own cc to the members only “content” (communication). Yes he’s making extra money from it, but at the same time viewer engagement is something he was known for early on (and is one of the reasons Dan said he was the best UK YouTuber back in 2009 ).

I forget if it was said on here or Tumblr, but someone mentioned that perhaps the time and effort that went towards gaming videos seems to be put towards AP videos and that was something we were missing. I’m not saying and I don’t think they were saying that the gaming channel needed to die for AP to rise, but I do think that it’s good they put gaming on hiatus so that Phil could focus more on his channel, hopefully gaining some forward momentum, while putting thought into how they want to handle joint content and come back fresh and able to balance both, rather than just dragging their way through the old routine. So that’s my positive take this morning. (Of course my husband is of the mind that they just need to film themselves playing a game, any game, and that it’s not that hard )

[noodlebum]

I’m not saying and I don’t think they were saying that the gaming channel needed to die for AP to rise, but I do think that it’s good they put gaming on hiatus so that Phil could focus more on his channel, hopefully gaining some forward momentum, while putting thought into how they want to handle joint content and come back fresh and able to balance both.

Yes I like this idea of getting their own channels back on track first before going back to any joint ventures. Get their own identities back for a bit and be seen more as two separate people again, not a 2-headed (albeit lovely) beast