Google+ Integration: The harms outweigh the Benifits.

"If It isn't broke, don't fix it". This quote applies to the Google+ update as much as ever." Fixing and improving are two different things. This update has done the latter, not the former. 1. "...you would be stuck with it and not unlinkable." doesn't make sense. I'm assuming you were trying to say "...not able to unlink," Furthermore, you fail to show how a significant number of users is actually affected by this, nor do you make any attempt to prove that people didn't want this to happen. Lastly on this point, if I were to humor you and say that your aforementioned baseless statements have sources, why couldn't a user just make a new account, and have their subscribers redirect themselves to the new account? While you may want to state that this is an inconvenience in such a way that such an inconvenience is a "harm" (as asserted in the title) that outweighs the benefits of the new update, the truth is, is that users have changed their channels for various reasons over the years, and therefore this possible inconvenience doesn't apply as a "harm" [1]. 2. While it does appear that I missed part of your point, it is once again something that falls on the part of the user. Either way, you make no attempt to defend your position after I stated a rebuttal to your sources, and therefore it carries into the next round. 3. "Likes" have no meaning for this debate. It simply means that somebody had a positive view of that statement, and does not reflect whether or not they had problem, and therefore does not count as examples. Your third source simply states something vague about user-friendly photo albums. I see no relevance here. Your fourth source doesn't state whatsoever that notifications are lost, but simply describes the new system. 4. Ah, so YouTube allows users to report spammed posts, making any mention of this as a problem pretty much moot since the capability for you to see the ASCII art/spam is dependent on the users' responsibility. YouTube has already accounted for this, and allows users to report spam to (if need be) ban the spamming user (or bot). This is a plus for the update. It should also be noted that the infinite character spam is also a moot point as after a certain number of lines of text, it cuts off forcing a user to hit the "read x more lines" button. 5. Well, if a comment is marked as spam, it makes sense that it shouldn't be visible, since it is SPAM. Also, the reason why it doesn't do anything is due to the lack of grandfathering addressed in later points. 6. Again, this update isn't a bug fixing update, it is an update designed to enhance the comment system and combine Google+ with YouTube. That is an improvement and feature adding update, not a bugfixing one. 7&8. If that is so, then as pro you are to assert evidence to show that people don't join, comment negatively and do not cater to the user. I particularly disagree with that last point, as I have been looking forward to the new nested commenting. 9. Again, the use of hyperbole in the form of "near impossible". Secondly, this is a mere inconvenience and not a "harm" as asserted by the title. If you wish to click on a timestamp, you are still fully capable to just click-and-drag the slider for the time on the video to match the timestamp. No harm done. 10. Once again, you only show a small percentage of users and not a significant portion of them. I can say just the opposite as I have had YouTube open for multiple hours at a time, and have not once ever had YouTube crash on me since the update. 11. Not a harm, but an inconvenience. Vote con. 1.http://www.youtube.com...=