Drama Alert! Another YTber is calling us a cult! 😈☦️

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

It's too bad that Invision haven't allowed for a hard ignore function, only this soft ignore BS

[Natasha Tori Maru]

17 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

It's too bad that Invision haven't allowed for a hard ignore function, only this soft ignore BS

Even I want this. But I cannot, as a mod 😢

Half the time I don't read replies when I know I'm going to read a torrent of incoherence 

[Wilhelm44]

2 hours ago, zurew said:

So whats the actual positive case for why he is not a cult leader or for why this place is not a cult?

I want to again - redirect some  attention back to the fact that no one has made a non-adhoc positive case for that yet, where you actually lay down your specific theory in length with evidence and with links and where you account for all the problematic data that was pointed out by me  [1 ,2 , 3, 4] and by other people in these threads [1 , 2, 3] . A case, where  you demonstrate that you are informed (that you actually read most of these threads and have the relevant context ,and you dont need to get walked through literally all the info). A case, where you open up yourself to get defintion and gradience raped by a bunch of users, who will use a bunch of rheotrical questions hidden as "im just questioning parts of your theory"  when in reality, they intend to spend a good chunk of time analyzing and making comments about your motivations   and they intend to spend a good chunk of time fishing for reasons so that they can attack your character and so that they can end up making a bunch of implications about your character and motivations  -rather than, again - directly focusing on and engaging with the overall substance of your theory in good faith and then making a good faith summary why they disagree with the overall case.

Give a comprehensive, holistic case, where you account for all the problematic data taken as a whole stack or as a big configuration of facts (and where you dont just account for just little  bits and pieces , while you also pretend and imply  that you managed to make a good positive overall case or that you managed to defend the positive side by simply asking a bunch of questions ).

I think you actually made some good points, especially those 3 main points that were highlighted.

The real question is, now what ?

[Wilhelm44]

9 hours ago, integral said:

Actualized.org Analyzer i just built in 30 seconds. (im posting as a joke, its incomplete)

@Natasha Tori Maru @Carl-Richard @zurew @Thought Art @Wilhelm44 @Joshe @Osaid @No1Here2c

 

It's completely wrong, but I just thought it was funny so I posted it. (if you can't read: right click -> open image in new tab + magnify)

I'd have to do a lot of work to get this to be accurate

Am I gonna get paid for my data being used in such an embarrassing way ?

(What happens when you put Trump in the machine ?)

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

The real question is, now what ?

1) Leo can respond

2) Other people can make their own comprehensive , overall cases (hopefully again, using as much relevant data as possible). After that, people can examine and compare and contrast these big cases and draw their own conclusions.

[Wilhelm44]

7 minutes ago, zurew said:

Other people can make their own comprehensive , overall cases (hopefully again, using as much relevant data as possible). After that, people can examine and compare and contrast these big cases and draw their own conclusions.

Yes, where are the mods (who don't agree with the cult accusations) that have some strong analytical debating skills ?