FTFY: Youtube has decided to believe the multiple independent lines of evidence which came out of a four year investigation by multiple journalists across more than one organisation.

This is not currently a legal matter, but a matter that concerns a public figure's ethical standards. Multiple independent lines of evidence is a powerful thing.

I’m under no legal obligation either to deny the allegations until proven. And in this case I choice to believe the victims. And I will keep calling them victims until proven otherwise.

You are saying it is wrong of me to call the victims, victims, and should instead call them ‘accusers’. I’m saying I am under no legal obligations to do so. I believe their stories and I believe they are victims, so I am allowed to call them victims.

Now I think there might be slander to call the accused something like an abuser, so I don’t do that (yet). However there is no slander laws which disallow me from using words which indicate that I believe the victims, so I’m not calling them ‘accusers’, I call them victims, because that is what I believe they are.

Of course you're allowed - there's no parent enforcing things and you aren't a child, and shouldn't be thinking that way.

But this is a strange response: "It's not illegal for me to say this!" Would you accept that as a response from a flat earther if you challenged something they stated as fact?