>>16503368I think I would rather put my bet on that they just did it for fun. A part of how they change stuff up every month or so without anybody asking for it, just to feel like they're doing something. And just that their victim this time around was the "sort by oldest" option. Just take away this one to look to the higher-ups as if we're doing work, right? I don't know how things run at YouTube, obviously. But it's either that, or just that they think it's fun to fuck with people like this.
The thing with discussions tab leads me to think this, actually. They had that little text saying, "fuck you, this is gone now and you can't do anything about it" after all. Tells me enough about their attitude. How can you put it past them that they just enjoy stripping away options that find people convenient and fun, while they can't do anything about it and will use their site anyway? There's just a couple guys sitting over at YouTube HQ, trying to come up with ways in how they could annoy the ever living fuck out of random people that use their stuff. They go for little things like the discussion tab, annotations and "sort by oldest", because that's the stuff they can get away with removing. They won't have to answer for it. And these couple dudes are just laughing their ass off about it whenever they come up with these ideas, knowing they're being pieces of shit.
Or maybe that's being too much of a conspiracy nut. But I would buy it if somebody told me.
The more realistic option is, like before, they gotta just have some dumb quota that they have to meet, right? So, they remove the "sort by oldest", say that they "overhauled" the sorting for videos, and move on. Because nobody's going to notice anyway, right? But that's obviously not fair to do either, I mean, why not actually improve stuff instead if you had a quota to fill? Instead of just removing random shit?
No matter how you figure it, this is the most petty thing imaginable.