Livestreamed Conversation - The value of a man with Yetineti

[yetineti]

You keep replacing the actual sequence with a more flattering story about your intentions.

You suggested the debate and explicitly let me choose the topic. I chose whether I possess meaningful worth as a man. You broadened that into a generic discussion of male value. I corrected you, and you answered, “Even better.”

Once I pointed out what that proposition requires you to defend, you redefined your claim from offering no value, to being “low value,” to failing your baseline for a “high-impact man,” to possibly being a “net drain.” Now you’re pretending that I demanded a public audit of myself when I merely held you to the topic you accepted.

I’m not asking to prove my worth to you. You repeatedly judged my value, competence, relationships, psychology, finances, and contribution while knowing almost nothing about my life. Therefore, you carry the burden of stating exactly what you claim and what evidence supports it.

Asking you to articulate your claim before I agree to a livestream is not “backtracking into forum essays.” It is determining whether there is even a coherent proposition to debate. So far, every time your position becomes defensible, its meaning changes.

Either state precisely what you claim about me and present the evidence that led you there, or acknowledge that your earlier judgments were unsupported provocations. I’m not appearing on your channel simply to audition for human worth under standards you invent as we go.

This is your last chance to prove this is worth my time.

Edited 45 minutes ago by yetineti

[Valach]

Maybe we all should focus on more important things than proving to our egos we are right and above some internet forum users.