Discussions

[Sugarking]

@DBDukes did I say exactly, that you made profit? No, it was a "I wonder if" scenario. And it wasn't targeted at you specifically, but anyone who would defend roku's decision to forbid people to watch what they wanted to. I did not say "DBDukes DEFINITELY has a financial interest with roku, FACT" now who has ideas in their heads?

[DBDukes]

---

@Sugarking wrote:

... but anyone who would defend roku's decision to forbid people to watch what they wanted to....

---

I have not defended that, because Roku did no such thing. It's been explained to you, but it doesn't match the world you've created in your head, so you reject it.

Roku had a process for testing apps (they call them channels; seriously Roku, stop doing that) that was abused by companies. Roku them called Private Channels, later renamed as Non-Certified Channels. Others called the Hidden Channels/Apps.

Roku revamped the process, introducing the Independent Developer Kit last October. It includes a Beta Channel (app) process that actually enforces limits on the number of apps a developer can have (10, which I think is fine), the length of time a beta app can exist (120 days, which I think is fine), and how many users a beta app can have (10, which I think is way too low).

And, wait for it, the new guidelines allow for marking an app as "adult."

Roku didn't remove PornHub because of its content. It was removed because all non-certified apps were removed, including the popular CLOC app by @renojim . His app wasn't removed because of adult content. It wasn't removed because Roku has a thing against clocks. It was removed because the it was a non-certified app. Just like PornHub. Just like VidAngel. It's as simple as that. Any suggestion otherwise is false.

[Sugarking]

@DBDukes @Again talking down to people and referring to what's in my head like you're a mind reader.

I never said it was a ban specific on pornhub, but the thread topic is on adult content being removed, so the focus is on that.

Private channels like you said are being removed, this includes pornhub.

When I say "people should be allowed to watch what they want" it includes anything on a private channel that isn't illegal. It doesn't have to be adult material, but the focus of this thread is on the subsequent removal of adult material as a result of removing private channels. 

Yes there's a possibility to get an adult channel certified, but the likelihood of that happening is slim to none.

But sure, insult my intelligence again by claiming I don't know anything or what I'm talking about. "Only DBDukes knows everything, only DBDukes is the authority on what's going on"

We're here to voice our displeasure with the removal of adult content, it doesn't matter that it's removed because of other non adult private channels being removed too. That's a whole other subject although related. People just care about being able to continue to view their adult content in this thread. 

The vidangel thread commenters probably just want to be able to view that platform and could care less about pornhub. 

Ideally no private channels should be removed unless the issue was a legal one involving piracy or illegal content involving abuse or something similar. Perhaps said beta channels, due to popularity should have the option to exist in some form. Though I doubt pornhub and many others could get certified.

[DBDukes]

---

@Sugarking wrote: 

... claiming I don't know anything or what I'm talking about. ...

---

Again, a false claim. I've previously addressed this, and yet you continue.

---

@Sugarking wrote:
... I never said it was a ban specific on pornhub, but the thread topic is on adult content being removed, so the focus is on that.

Private channels like you said are being removed, this includes pornhub. ...

---

Yet you and others make the claim that Roku is removing the apps because of content. And it's been addressed repeatedly that the content has nothing to do with the removal.

I don't think you can't grasp that. I think you simply refuse to. But you be you.

[najunk]

Endless podcasts (code:  ITPC) is a non-certified  that did not get pulled as of yet.  Still suggesting otherwise is false? Interesting.

[DBDukes]

---

@najunk wrote:

Endless podcasts (code:  ITPC) is a non-certified  that did not get pulled as of yet.  Still suggesting otherwise is false? Interesting.

---

That is interesting indeed. TheEndless (a former Roku employee) ran a lot of private apps and retired most of them some time back. I wonder if he inadvertently loaded it as a Roku app instead of one of his own.

[Sugarking]

@DBDukes Again I don't know what your problem is with putting words in people's mouth's or acting like a know it all, but you don't even know me or anyone else here.

I believe I explained it plain as day. "THERE IS NO ADULT CONTENT ON ROKU ANYMORE" this is what people are upset about. All the adult content was on private channels, get rid of private channels, ergo you effectively BAN adult content. The content gets BANNED by a sweeping effect.

[DBDukes]

@Sugarking 

That's not a ban. That's an impact. There's a difference.

Is CLOC banned? No. It's impacted. Is VidAngel banned? No. It's impacted. Is PornHub banned? No. It's impacted.

[Sugarking]

@DBDukes now you're just using semantics, because you don't want to lose the argument. It's virtually the same thing. Whether its impacted or banned you still can't access adult content. "But everybody who keeps saying it's banned is wrong" so I guess everyone should say "roku impacted adult content" I can't access adult content on my roku it got "impacted" from a decision Roku made. 

Call it what you want, the result is still the same.

[DBDukes]

---

@Sugarking wrote:

... Whether its impacted or banned you still can't access adult content. ...

Call it what you want, the result is still the same.

---

Finally! That is true.