And you’re exactly what I’d expect from a current-era Destiny fan :
Ignoring every single one of the counter-arguments made - even when provided self-evident video supports the claim in order to sidestep the original discussion.
I gave you 2 videos countering the dog shock meme shit - both of non-Hasan YouTubers with sizeable audiences and some measure of credibility, and you ignored them.
You want to pretend that I’m “deflecting” so it allows you to avoid both my rebuttal as well as criticisms related to the streamer you seem most likely to be a fan of combined into a single reply.
Care to share something more substantive than giggles to discredit a published writer for the Washington Post, NYT, The Daily Beast, or Business Insider?
Or would that somehow count as me deflecting again?
I mean, unless you’ve got something better - it’s that or self-smug laughing in comment form. Again, those two videos are not “glazing” Hasan from what I can tell.
I get it you don’t like Taylor for some reason but what about the Leeja Miller video?
You got a better way to convince anybody of anything other than self-righteous performative lols?
I can imagine a lot, but unfortunately - it seems I need to have your imagination to satisfy some apparent minimum journalistic standard you will otherwise arbitrarily re-position because the checks notespublished writer for NYT and the WaPo and the lady with the law degree is apparently “chaotic slop.”
See - in “debate lord” tactics - this is known as “pinning you down.”
You will otherwise continue to refuse to allow for any cited source because you can then arbitrarily say it’s not up to your otherwise nebulous definition of what would be satisfactory.
As I’m asking you to give me something concrete, you instead will just continue defer to continue pretending I have not provided something sufficient.
Not a Hasan video ✅
large channel not directly affiliated ✅
one video from a credentialed published journalist ✅
another from a former practicing lawyer ✅
You can pretend I’m not being honest here, but anyone else reading is smart enough to figure out what you’re doing amounts to. 😅
And you’re exactly what I’d expect from a current-era Destiny fan :
Ignoring every single one of the counter-arguments made - even when provided self-evident video supports the claim in order to sidestep the original discussion.
I gave you 2 videos countering the dog shock meme shit - both of non-Hasan YouTubers with sizeable audiences and some measure of credibility, and you ignored them.
Then you only glom onto the last part of my reply where I point out a few of the notable problems of streamer Destiny (who I’m guessing you’re a fan of - given the specific use of “up his ass” you’re perhaps unwittingly regurgitating and how you knew what “sex pest” referred to)… but again - at the same time - you ignore the videos provided that show Destiny saying the N-word and Destiny saying clearly on video that he is ok with 29 year olds having sex with 16 year olds as long as they’ve gone through puberty.
You want to pretend that I’m “deflecting” so it allows you to avoid both my rebuttal as well as criticisms related to the streamer you seem most likely to be a fan of combined into a single reply.
Lmaooo Taylor Lorentz is credible! My sides!
Care to share something more substantive than giggles to discredit a published writer for the Washington Post, NYT, The Daily Beast, or Business Insider?
Or would that somehow count as me deflecting again?
Yeah, let me link you to 40 minutes of glaze content. That’s how we provide evidence for things, right?
I mean, unless you’ve got something better - it’s that or self-smug laughing in comment form. Again, those two videos are not “glazing” Hasan from what I can tell.
I get it you don’t like Taylor for some reason but what about the Leeja Miller video?
You got a better way to convince anybody of anything other than self-righteous performative lols?
To answer your question, yes this is deflection.
You linked to 40 minutes of content and went “see, proof”.
Just wall after wall of text and cherry picked character references and accusations of people that have nothing to do with Hasan.
All typical of a Hasan viewer though, so nice work.
OK, what other kind of proof can someone provide? 🤣 do I need a published peer reviewed paper or something or I mean - like what do you want?
So it’s either a published, peer reviewed paper, or this chaotic dump of slop?
Those are really the only 2 things you can imagine?
I can imagine a lot, but unfortunately - it seems I need to have your imagination to satisfy some apparent minimum journalistic standard you will otherwise arbitrarily re-position because the checks notes published writer for NYT and the WaPo and the lady with the law degree is apparently “chaotic slop.”
See - in “debate lord” tactics - this is known as “pinning you down.”
You will otherwise continue to refuse to allow for any cited source because you can then arbitrarily say it’s not up to your otherwise nebulous definition of what would be satisfactory.
As I’m asking you to give me something concrete, you instead will just continue defer to continue pretending I have not provided something sufficient.
You can pretend I’m not being honest here, but anyone else reading is smart enough to figure out what you’re doing amounts to. 😅