This week, the gaming community on YouTube fought back against the business when several producers had their older content demonetized without explanation.

The company’s new policy, implemented in November to make some types of content more advertising friendly, is at fault. When YouTube made this adjustment to its advertiser-friendly content restrictions, it completely rethought its policy on offensive language and graphic violence.

The good news is that YouTube seems to be taking artists’ worries seriously, albeit we still don’t know what they’ll do.

The YouTube team has “heard from numerous artists about this move” in recent weeks, a representative told TechCrunch. We value your thoughts and are working to revise our policy to better accommodate your suggestions. As soon as we have additional information to give, we will get in touch with our creative community.

By adding “directed at a real named person or acts that are manufactured to create shocking experiences (such as brutal mass killing)” to its definition of violent content in November, YouTube broadened its definition of violence beyond depictions of violence in the real world to include violent content in video games. The firm said that “normal game play” might include graphic violence after the first eight seconds. There was a lot of wiggle area for good or bad interpretation in the entire passage.

There were more significant alterations to its profanity policy. YouTube recently stated that it would no longer consider the words “hell” and “damn” to be obscene, but that it would treat all other profanity equally regardless of its intensity. The new policy also states that videos with “profanity utilised in the title, thumbnails, or in the video’s opening 7 seconds or used regularly throughout the video” would not be eligible for ad income.

Films that begin using profanity after the first eight seconds are still eligible, but the modifications may have an enormous impact on a wide variety of videos, many of which were created before the announcement was made. Beginning at the end of December, creators began to see the effects of the new regulations, which include the imposition of new limits on some films that reduce their view count and ad eligibility.

YouTuber Daniel Condren, who operates the channel RTGame, made a video this week that has amassed over a million views in which he discussed the effects of the new policy on his own channel. After having around a dozen films demonetized and his request for appeals being denied, Condren has been struggling with the enforcement modifications in recent weeks.

Condren tweeted, “I really feel like my whole livelihood is at stake if this continues.” I feel helpless in the face of this problem, and it upsets me deeply that it exists at all.

We were interested whether YouTube might relax enforcement for older, already-published films that producers could depend on for revenue, but YouTube did not reply to our follow-up queries about how it intended to change the policy.

The corporation is obviously attempting to make its vast archive of films more age-appropriate in the wake of rising laws targeting social media’s interaction with younger users (and advertiser friendly). But it’s a fine line to walk when retrofitting age limits and new revenue rules into a network like YouTube, and in this instance, the changes were implemented rapidly and had far-reaching effects, leaving producers little time to react.