Progressive Twitch streamer Hasan Piker filed a defamation lawsuit against conservative CNN commentator Scott Jennings on Tuesday, accusing him of falsely claiming Piker advocated for lynching Blac…
Yeah, my bad. I got the spelling of the names confused and then the wrong name stuck.
I’m aware that you’re talking about Dan Saltman, and that was also who I was thinking of at the time.
Eh, it’s a bit of a mix of mild dyslexia and previously alliteration for memory.
I’ve got some level of ADHD/ADD so I’ve had to build up some interesting ways to remember things, but sometimes it misfires.
I’ve corrected it where I saw it, but given that Saltman was irrelevant to the original points I made, I don’t really think misspelling his name has any bearing.
But it’s interesting if you consider misspelling an unrelated name enough reason to dismiss substantive points. That would indicate that you’re looking for a reason to dismiss without engaging with the substance.
It’s not misspelling, you mixed two very different people up multiple times even though I told you each time we weren’t talking about Sam Altman.
Considering your refusal to look into any of this yourself (playing dumb about the connection between Dan, Destiny, and Hasan makes this incredibly clear), I’m only here to banter. I don’t and won’t take you seriously anymore.
I mean, I already told you about my mild dyslexia, so I’m not sure why you’re fishing for a deeper meaning there.
I literally misplaced 2 letters of two very similar sounding and spelled names - that’s it.
I also read the write up you linked on him, so it’s not like I confused his person with Sam Altman.
It really feels like you’re just trying to discredit and dismiss me wholesale based on anything. Well, anything except any evidence or fully-formed argument.
I don’t really care about whatever rumours were spread, I saw Hasan’s own videos, I heard him change his story and I saw the modified collar he showed, and I linked an evidence-based little investigation based on Hasan’s own videos in another comment.
There’re no logical leaps or excuses involved or needed, and whatever rumours Saltman spread has nothing to do with the evidence I saw from Hasan’s own stream.
This is the exact game that DGG orbiters play and I wasn’t born yesterday. I told you I’m not going to take you seriously anymore, it’s pointless when you’re playing dumb. Trying to claim you have no idea what Hasan’s politics are while you are talking about Hasan in a political community is asinine. Claiming that you couldn’t find any link between Destiny and Hasan is similarly asinine. Having 0 sources for any of the bullshit you’re claiming is asinine. Claiming that it’s just too hard to source your claims is also asinine.
This is the exact game that DGG orbiters play and I wasn’t born yesterday.
What game do they play? I don’t know, but it would seem good if I could recognize it, so feel free to elaborate.
Currently I don’t see how they are relevant to the discussion at hand.
I don’t believe I’ve ever commented on anything relevant to Destiny, DGG, Dan Saltman or anything related to that.
They’ve come up during my own research into Hasan Piker, but my research has been isolated to him and his behaviour, so I’ve not really chased down any of these side-tracks. It seemed entirely irrelevant to what Hasan Piker does.
I told you I’m not going to take you seriously anymore, it’s pointless when you’re playing dumb.
I am not playing dumb - I have been upfront with what I do and do not know about.
Trying to claim you have no idea what Hasan’s politics are while you are talking about Hasan in a political community is asinine.
On a non-politics related post, related to Hasan Piker’s non-political lawsuit, in a reply-chain that started with someone asking about Hasan Piker, not his politics.
And I’ve admitted to not having dug enough into his political beliefs to comment directly on it, for better or for worse. That’s being forthcoming with the limits of my knowledge. I shouldn’t need to be an expert on a person’s political beliefs to comment on the non-political aspects of their life. That would be an unreasonable standard for participation and not one broadly supported by how the Fediverse (or any other social media) works.
Claiming that you couldn’t find any link between Destiny and Hasan is similarly asinine.
I didn’t claim that. I claimed that link was irrelevant to anything I was talking about.
Having 0 sources for any of the bullshit you’re claiming is asinine.
I bring sources when someone asks and engages with the substance of what I actually write.
When are you brining your sources, or engaging with what the words and points I am actually writing and making?
Claiming that it’s just too hard to source your claims is also asinine.
Are you going to keep riding that strawman?
That’s not what I said. I said it is too time-consuming and that it is also a different standard than the general standard of the place of conversation.
Hence I only bring sources when it seems worthwhile to me.
The quality of your engagement has not met my subjective threshold for using my limited time on re-finding my sources from weeks and moths ago That’s all.
You gave the game away.
I am still unsure what game it is you think I am playing.
I guess you think I am connected to Destiny or Dan Saltman?
Feel free to find any modicum of evidence, other than, what? vibes?
I don’t know much about them; I haven’t researched them; I don’t engage with them or their community/communities(? given that there’s several people); and I don’t spend a lot of time watching streamers at all, unless I am looking into something very specific and then I am focused on that specific thing, not all the rest of the noise.
I wasn’t expecting an actual debate, but since you’ve accused me of being bad faith:
You’re making huge leaps and assumptions of me based on nothing (non sequitur fallacy); You’re not engaging with the substance of anything I write (Ignoratio elenchi fallacy with a sprinking of a strawman or two); while simultaneously trying to dismiss me based on things like misspelling a name, and trying to paint my attempt at intellectual honestly about the limits of my knowledge of irrelevant subjects as as proof of bad faith (a few different ad hominems, including irrelevant ad hominem fallacy)
Based on this I can only conclude that you are arguing in bad faith.
It’s fine if you want to back away from the discussion.
At first I though that perhaps your passion/hostility on the subject was related to the veracity of any of the points in my posts, but it seems to me that you are Marge Simpsons and he’s your potato, and you just find him neat - no further thought needed.
But yes, I agree that both of our time would be wasted if that’s all you’ll do with it.
Just look at the length of this reply to me. LOOK AT IT.
Take a fraction of the time it took for you to play this “I don’t know what you’re talking about” game to actually research the topic.
It’s very clear to anyone reading our exchanges that you are playing dumb as an effort to continue this back and forth instead of actually providing any proof or sources to back up your claims.
It’s all a distraction so that your lies get pushed without any verification.
I’ve linked to you several sources. It’s not on me that you can’t comprehend the connections between these people despite clear evidence of things like the shock collar being completely made up.
One can lead a horse to water, but one cannot force the horse to drink the water.
No one is talking about Sam Altman.
Yeah, my bad. I got the spelling of the names confused and then the wrong name stuck. I’m aware that you’re talking about Dan Saltman, and that was also who I was thinking of at the time.
You called him Sam Altman like 4 or 5 times lol
I can’t take you seriously at all.
Eh, it’s a bit of a mix of mild dyslexia and previously alliteration for memory. I’ve got some level of ADHD/ADD so I’ve had to build up some interesting ways to remember things, but sometimes it misfires.
I’ve corrected it where I saw it, but given that Saltman was irrelevant to the original points I made, I don’t really think misspelling his name has any bearing.
But it’s interesting if you consider misspelling an unrelated name enough reason to dismiss substantive points. That would indicate that you’re looking for a reason to dismiss without engaging with the substance.
Is that true, and if so, why?
Saltman literally started the shock collar rumor.
It’s not misspelling, you mixed two very different people up multiple times even though I told you each time we weren’t talking about Sam Altman.
Considering your refusal to look into any of this yourself (playing dumb about the connection between Dan, Destiny, and Hasan makes this incredibly clear), I’m only here to banter. I don’t and won’t take you seriously anymore.
I mean, I already told you about my mild dyslexia, so I’m not sure why you’re fishing for a deeper meaning there. I literally misplaced 2 letters of two very similar sounding and spelled names - that’s it.
I also read the write up you linked on him, so it’s not like I confused his person with Sam Altman.
It really feels like you’re just trying to discredit and dismiss me wholesale based on anything. Well, anything except any evidence or fully-formed argument.
I don’t really care about whatever rumours were spread, I saw Hasan’s own videos, I heard him change his story and I saw the modified collar he showed, and I linked an evidence-based little investigation based on Hasan’s own videos in another comment. There’re no logical leaps or excuses involved or needed, and whatever rumours Saltman spread has nothing to do with the evidence I saw from Hasan’s own stream.
This is the exact game that DGG orbiters play and I wasn’t born yesterday. I told you I’m not going to take you seriously anymore, it’s pointless when you’re playing dumb. Trying to claim you have no idea what Hasan’s politics are while you are talking about Hasan in a political community is asinine. Claiming that you couldn’t find any link between Destiny and Hasan is similarly asinine. Having 0 sources for any of the bullshit you’re claiming is asinine. Claiming that it’s just too hard to source your claims is also asinine.
You gave the game away.
What game do they play? I don’t know, but it would seem good if I could recognize it, so feel free to elaborate.
Currently I don’t see how they are relevant to the discussion at hand. I don’t believe I’ve ever commented on anything relevant to Destiny, DGG, Dan Saltman or anything related to that. They’ve come up during my own research into Hasan Piker, but my research has been isolated to him and his behaviour, so I’ve not really chased down any of these side-tracks. It seemed entirely irrelevant to what Hasan Piker does.
I am not playing dumb - I have been upfront with what I do and do not know about.
On a non-politics related post, related to Hasan Piker’s non-political lawsuit, in a reply-chain that started with someone asking about Hasan Piker, not his politics. And I’ve admitted to not having dug enough into his political beliefs to comment directly on it, for better or for worse. That’s being forthcoming with the limits of my knowledge. I shouldn’t need to be an expert on a person’s political beliefs to comment on the non-political aspects of their life. That would be an unreasonable standard for participation and not one broadly supported by how the Fediverse (or any other social media) works.
I didn’t claim that. I claimed that link was irrelevant to anything I was talking about.
I bring sources when someone asks and engages with the substance of what I actually write. When are you brining your sources, or engaging with what the words and points I am actually writing and making?
Are you going to keep riding that strawman? That’s not what I said. I said it is too time-consuming and that it is also a different standard than the general standard of the place of conversation. Hence I only bring sources when it seems worthwhile to me. The quality of your engagement has not met my subjective threshold for using my limited time on re-finding my sources from weeks and moths ago That’s all.
I am still unsure what game it is you think I am playing. I guess you think I am connected to Destiny or Dan Saltman? Feel free to find any modicum of evidence, other than, what? vibes? I don’t know much about them; I haven’t researched them; I don’t engage with them or their community/communities(? given that there’s several people); and I don’t spend a lot of time watching streamers at all, unless I am looking into something very specific and then I am focused on that specific thing, not all the rest of the noise.
I wasn’t expecting an actual debate, but since you’ve accused me of being bad faith: You’re making huge leaps and assumptions of me based on nothing (non sequitur fallacy); You’re not engaging with the substance of anything I write (Ignoratio elenchi fallacy with a sprinking of a strawman or two); while simultaneously trying to dismiss me based on things like misspelling a name, and trying to paint my attempt at intellectual honestly about the limits of my knowledge of irrelevant subjects as as proof of bad faith (a few different ad hominems, including irrelevant ad hominem fallacy) Based on this I can only conclude that you are arguing in bad faith.
It’s fine if you want to back away from the discussion. At first I though that perhaps your passion/hostility on the subject was related to the veracity of any of the points in my posts, but it seems to me that you are Marge Simpsons and he’s your potato, and you just find him neat - no further thought needed.
But yes, I agree that both of our time would be wasted if that’s all you’ll do with it.
Just look at the length of this reply to me. LOOK AT IT.
Take a fraction of the time it took for you to play this “I don’t know what you’re talking about” game to actually research the topic.
It’s very clear to anyone reading our exchanges that you are playing dumb as an effort to continue this back and forth instead of actually providing any proof or sources to back up your claims.
It’s all a distraction so that your lies get pushed without any verification.
You used a Medium blog post as a source.
I’ve linked to you several sources. It’s not on me that you can’t comprehend the connections between these people despite clear evidence of things like the shock collar being completely made up.
One can lead a horse to water, but one cannot force the horse to drink the water.