1 sure looks like him activating a shock collar because he doesn't want her allowed to do anything other than sit in one designated spot while he's doing his stream
Did Hasan teach you this trick, of just repeating over and over again the same statement (after someone provides a video of the abuse, has a lengthy discussion about the plausibility of theories like "it's a GPS collar" and goes through individual frames to show what they're talking about or timelapses of a longer amount of the stream), as if whoever simply refuses to shut up for the longest automatically wins the disagreement? Obviously you're not trying to make a factual point, since this whole thread is basically me providing evidence. I think the thing you are trying to do doesn't really work in a format like this, I'm sure it is better if you can say "You have no credibility and no evidence. Goodbye." and then kick the person from your stream or something, but that's not what we are doing.
I honestly don't have much more to say. Like I said, I thought about showing some of the freeze frames blown up from the video, showing that she definitely didn't catch her dewclaw on the metal bar next to her for example, but what would be the point. Anyone who cares enough can put the clip through mpv and see it for themselves (and being able to watch in context and flip around is better than the freeze frames anyway). Honestly as a broader point if you don't have the emotional intelligence to see what is clearly present in Hasan's and Kaya's behavior just in the original clips, I don't know what to tell you, and I don't really feel like you and me talking further to each other about it is productive in any way at this point.
after someone provides a video of the abuse, has a lengthy discussion about the plausibility of theories like "it's a GPS collar" and goes through individual frames to show what they're talking about or timelapses of a longer amount of the stream
This is an awful lot of effort for someone to go to just to convince me of how i should feel about a political commentator interacting with his dog.
As soon as you stop yourself to ask "is this really worth thinking this hard about," it becomes pretty clear that you're talking to someone a little too invested with the life of this public figure.
I care about what is true and often I want to dig to the bottom of it.
You could say it's not a good way to be, and depending on the triviality of the subject matter you might be right. But I definitely don't think it's the worst thing in the world to have that mindset.
Also, just because everyone talked to me about Ethan Klein and he showed up in my YouTube anyway, I am now watching him for the first time, talking about this controversy.
Edit: WHAT THE FUCK HAVE I DONE now half my YouTube recommendations is streamer bullshit
The topics and people we choose to spend time and effort on speak quite a bit about what matters to us. It means something that this story captured this much of your attention, it isn't neutral truth seeking.
I dont think it's healthy to be this invested in a stranger's relationship with their dog. That it involves a public figure you've had strong reactions to before makes me think this is just parasocial indulgence.
Didn't you just post a bunch of pure bullying videos about Ethan Kline?
I tried to watch Ethan Kline today for the first time, and it was too much bullshit for me to even want to be a part of for more than a few minutes. The man looks like a sickly Victorian orphan. A video about Ethan Kline and what a big poopy head he is, is not something I would ever consider watching let along posting. I tried to watch your video and all I can say is, I don't think you should be giving advice to anyone along this particular axis.
Watching a video passively is one thing, it's another thing to do all this:
!after someone provides a video of the abuse, has a lengthy discussion about the plausibility of theories like "it's a GPS collar" and goes through individual frames to show what they're talking about or timelapses of a longer amount of the stream!<
Ultimately idgaf, im just telling you what it looks like to see someone go to this amount of trouble, especially for a public figure they've already shown distaste for, and especially since you've also previously elaborated at length about how you think about your contributions to online spaces through a political lense.
You have no credibility and no evidence
Did Hasan teach you this trick, of just repeating over and over again the same statement (after someone provides a video of the abuse, has a lengthy discussion about the plausibility of theories like "it's a GPS collar" and goes through individual frames to show what they're talking about or timelapses of a longer amount of the stream), as if whoever simply refuses to shut up for the longest automatically wins the disagreement? Obviously you're not trying to make a factual point, since this whole thread is basically me providing evidence. I think the thing you are trying to do doesn't really work in a format like this, I'm sure it is better if you can say "You have no credibility and no evidence. Goodbye." and then kick the person from your stream or something, but that's not what we are doing.
I honestly don't have much more to say. Like I said, I thought about showing some of the freeze frames blown up from the video, showing that she definitely didn't catch her dewclaw on the metal bar next to her for example, but what would be the point. Anyone who cares enough can put the clip through
mpv
and see it for themselves (and being able to watch in context and flip around is better than the freeze frames anyway). Honestly as a broader point if you don't have the emotional intelligence to see what is clearly present in Hasan's and Kaya's behavior just in the original clips, I don't know what to tell you, and I don't really feel like you and me talking further to each other about it is productive in any way at this point.This is an awful lot of effort for someone to go to just to convince me of how i should feel about a political commentator interacting with his dog.
As soon as you stop yourself to ask "is this really worth thinking this hard about," it becomes pretty clear that you're talking to someone a little too invested with the life of this public figure.
I care about what is true and often I want to dig to the bottom of it.
You could say it's not a good way to be, and depending on the triviality of the subject matter you might be right. But I definitely don't think it's the worst thing in the world to have that mindset.
Also, just because everyone talked to me about Ethan Klein and he showed up in my YouTube anyway, I am now watching him for the first time, talking about this controversy.
Edit: WHAT THE FUCK HAVE I DONE now half my YouTube recommendations is streamer bullshit
The topics and people we choose to spend time and effort on speak quite a bit about what matters to us. It means something that this story captured this much of your attention, it isn't neutral truth seeking.
I dont think it's healthy to be this invested in a stranger's relationship with their dog. That it involves a public figure you've had strong reactions to before makes me think this is just parasocial indulgence.
Fyi, this is called concern trolling.
no, it's not.
I agree.
Oh the old reddit switcheroo, nice!
Didn't you just post a bunch of pure bullying videos about Ethan Kline?
I tried to watch Ethan Kline today for the first time, and it was too much bullshit for me to even want to be a part of for more than a few minutes. The man looks like a sickly Victorian orphan. A video about Ethan Kline and what a big poopy head he is, is not something I would ever consider watching let along posting. I tried to watch your video and all I can say is, I don't think you should be giving advice to anyone along this particular axis.
Watching a video passively is one thing, it's another thing to do all this:
Ultimately idgaf, im just telling you what it looks like to see someone go to this amount of trouble, especially for a public figure they've already shown distaste for, and especially since you've also previously elaborated at length about how you think about your contributions to online spaces through a political lense.
You still have no credibility and no evidence