Designated Whiner Shitting Street - General non DSP-specific discussion and stupid questions goes here

Who cares if that's not the only reason you dislike Phil? It's an example of hypocrisy. That's the point of the post.
My point is that you don't know what hypocrisy means. It is not hypocrisy. It would be hypocrisy if the only reason someone disliked Phil was that he's unoriginal, but they think it's okay for detractors to unoriginally restream his content. But as I said, that is not the only reason anyone dislikes Phil. It's the least offensive thing about Phil. You are being intentionally obtuse.
 
That sucks. Maybe we can all go watch some Tevin or a Neil Breen movie.

Neil Breen is fun with friends!
Wait wait wait, you don't like watching Neil Breen movies? But you like watching Neil Breen movies while making fun of them with other people?

Sounds pretty "hypocritical" to me.
 
My point is that you don't know what hypocrisy means. It is not hypocrisy. It would be hypocrisy if the only reason someone disliked Phil was that he's unoriginal, but they think it's okay for detractors to unoriginally restream his content. But as I said, that is not the only reason anyone dislikes Phil. It's the least offensive thing about Phil. You are being intentionally obtuse.

You clearly have a misunderstanding of what hypocrisy is. So here is the 6th attempt that I've had to explain the same thing to you, something a 5 year old would understand immediately. Keep that in mind before you insult my intelligence again.

Hypocrisy applies to an action or belief. The context of that action, or context of that belief is irrelevant. it doesn't matter if that's the reason you dislike Phil or don't dislike Phil. The belief I'm talking about here is the standard you are applying to Phil about his content. Hypocrisy in this case means applying a standard to Phil, that you do not apply to other people. If you say Phil is unoriginal, then by definition you have to think restreamers are unoriginal as well, since restreamers stream Phil's content. The only case in which restreamers would not be unoriginal, and thus you wouldn't be hypocritical, is if they are making transformative content, based on Phil's work.
 
You clearly have a misunderstanding of what hypocrisy is. So here is the 6th attempt that I've had to explain the same thing to you, something a 5 year old would understand immediately. Keep that in mind before you insult my intelligence again.

Hypocrisy applies to an action or belief. The context of that action, or context of that belief is irrelevant. it doesn't matter if that's the reason you dislike Phil or don't dislike Phil. The belief I'm talking about here is the standard you are applying to Phil about his content. Hypocrisy in this case means applying a standard to Phil, that you do not apply to other people. If you say Phil is unoriginal, then by definition you have to think restreamers are unoriginal as well, since restreamers stream Phil's content. The only case in which restreamers would not be unoriginal, and thus you wouldn't be hypocritical, is if they are making transformative content, based on Phil's work.
They are making transformative content. Phil's stream is about him playing video games. Restreamers streams are about laughing at Phil and their commentary changes the whole focus of the stream. It's no longer about a SERIOUS GAMER making MEANINGFUL content, it's about some DIRTY TROLLS getting their SICK KICKS laughing at a man's FAMILY. Totally transformative dood, explain how it's not -honk snort-

inb4 you conveniently ignore this post like you did my last one and all the ones before it. Honestly this is getting boring, you're either a troll or autistic as fuck.
 
They are making transformative content. Phil's stream is about him playing video games. Restreamers streams are about laughing at Phil and their commentary changes the whole focus of the stream. It's no longer about a SERIOUS GAMER making MEANINGFUL content, it's about some DIRTY TROLLS getting their SICK KICKS laughing at a man's FAMILY. Totally transformative dood, explain how it's not -honk snort-

inb4 you conveniently ignore this post like you did my last one and all the ones before it. Honestly this is getting boring, you're either a troll or autistic as fuck.

I ignored you cause I don't give a shit about you. You reacted to every single one of my posts, commented on my profile, and responded to my posts multiple times and talked about me when I wasn't even talking to you, in some pathetic cringey attempt to get me to notice you.

"This is getting boring" Sure, and you'll still react to all my posts and comments and still talk about me with some desperate hope you'll get that red notification with me replying to you.
 
You clearly have a misunderstanding of what hypocrisy is. So here is the 6th attempt that I've had to explain the same thing to you, something a 5 year old would understand immediately. Keep that in mind before you insult my intelligence again.

Hypocrisy applies to an action or belief. The context of that action, or context of that belief is irrelevant. it doesn't matter if that's the reason you dislike Phil or don't dislike Phil. The belief I'm talking about here is the standard you are applying to Phil about his content. Hypocrisy in this case means applying a standard to Phil, that you do not apply to other people. If you say Phil is unoriginal, then by definition you have to think restreamers are unoriginal as well, since restreamers stream Phil's content. The only case in which restreamers would not be unoriginal, and thus you wouldn't be hypocritical, is if they are making transformative content, based on Phil's work.
You have zero reading comprehension, you swarthy jungle monkey, you literal nigger. I apply the same standard to Phil as the restreamers. The restreamers do not snort, burp, fart, masturbate, threaten children, commit perjury, commit bankruptcy fraud, and lie, all live on stream, but Phil does. That's the standard. They are rebroadcasting his shit in a mocking manner. The lawnmower noises you mentioned earlier and referring to Phil as "Paul" is transformative. You may not think it's funny, I may not think it's funny, that's completely irrelevant. You citing definitions doesn't change anything because you obviously can't understand what you read. I'm not insulting your intelligence because you have none.
 
You have zero reading comprehension, you swarthy jungle monkey, you literal nigger. I apply the same standard to Phil as the restreamers. The restreamers do not snort, burp, fart, masturbate, threaten children, commit perjury, commit bankruptcy fraud, and lie, all live on stream, but Phil does. That's the standard. They are rebroadcasting his shit in a mocking manner. The lawnmower noises you mentioned earlier and referring to Phil as "Paul" is transformative. You may not think it's funny, I may not think it's funny, that's completely irrelevant. You citing definitions doesn't change anything because you obviously can't understand what you read. I'm not insulting your intelligence because you have none.
Attempt 7.

The standard of hypocrisy I've applied is specifically for unoriginality. Bringing in irrelevant bullshit like the bankruptcy, snorting, burping, etc is just that, irrelevant. Because the standard of hypocrisy that is applied is specifically about originality/unoriginality.

Bob makes a painting and presents it at a gallery. Murmur insults Bob's painting and flings his own shit at it as Murmur can't articulate or understand basic thoughts. Jeff takes Bob's painting and presents it at his own gallery. Murmur, with the company of his caretaker, attends Jeff's gallery, and claps his hands in praise for Bob's painting.

that is the hypocrisy. See you again in attempt 8.
 
Attempt 7.

The standard of hypocrisy I've applied is specifically for unoriginality. Bringing in irrelevant bullshit like the bankruptcy, snorting, burping, etc is just that, irrelevant. Because the standard of hypocrisy that is applied is specifically about originality/unoriginality.

Bob makes a painting and presents it at a gallery. Murmur insults Bob's painting and flings his own shit at it as Murmur can't articulate or understand basic thoughts. Jeff takes Bob's painting and presents it at his own gallery. Murmur, with the company of his caretaker, attends Jeff's gallery, and claps his hands in praise for Bob's painting.

that is the hypocrisy. See you again in attempt 8.
Your standard of hypocrisy is invalid because you're the only one judging solely by unoriginality. Nobody else gives a shit. You're narrowing it down to only unoriginality just because you want to be right. The irrelevant bullshit you mention is not irrelevant, it's the reason nobody likes Phil but they tolerate the detractors. If you strip all other reasons away it would be hypocritical, but as I've said, you are the only one stripping everything else away, because you are an actual retard.

And about your shitty art scenario: Me flinging my shit on the painting has now transformed the painting. The painting in Jeff's gallery was Bob's terrible painting, but with the addition of my fecal matter it is now something worth displaying.

Phil is the artist. Phil makes awful art. The detractors fling shit on Phil's art (text to speech, annoying noises) and display the shit covered art in their own gallery. It is now no longer only Phil's art, but now a foundation of Phil, with detractor shit all over it. Thus transformative.
 
Your standard of hypocrisy is invalid because you're the only one judging solely by unoriginality. Nobody else gives a shit. You're narrowing it down to only hypocrisy just because you want to be right. The irrelevant bullshit you mention is not irrelevant, it's the reason nobody likes Phil but they tolerate the detractors. If you strip all other reasons away it would be hypocritical, but as I've said, you are the only one stripping everything else away, because you are an actual retard.

And about your shitty art scenario: Me flinging my shit on the painting has now transformed the painting. The painting in Jeff's gallery was Bob's terrible painting, but with the addition of my fecal matter it is now something worth displaying.

Phil is the artist. Phil makes awful art. The detractors fling shit on Phil's art (text to speech, annoying noises) and display the shit covered art in their own gallery. It is now no longer only Phil's art, but now a foundation of Phil, with detractor shit all over it. Thus transformative.

Attempt 8. I'm narrowing it down to the hypocrisy of unoriginality because that was one of my original points on hypocrisy: the fact that people shit on phil for asking for tips, and that he is unoriginal.


People shit on Phil for being unoriginal, but will go and praise detractor restreams, which are the epitome of unoriginality. The argument for the restreaming is "it makes phil's streams more bearable" but from what I have seen that is simply not true, just by the fact that the restreamer will constantly interrupt in some way. If you are watching a video and i come in and talk every 3 seconds in your ear, make an annoying noise, play a lawnmower noise, talk to you while the person in the video youre listening to is talking, it doesn't matter if you hate the video, you will find my antics more annoying simply because you can't even concentrate on the source material.

See you in attempt 9.
 
Última edición:
Attempt 8. I'm narrowing it down to the hypocrisy of unoriginality because that was what my original point on hypocrisy was




See you in attempt 9.
Okay then:
The only case in which restreamers would not be unoriginal, and thus you wouldn't be hypocritical, is if they are making transformative content, based on Phil's work.
...the restreamer will constantly interrupt in some way. If you are watching a video and i come in and talk every 3 seconds in your ear, make an annoying noise, play a lawnmower noise, talk to you while the person in the video youre listening to is talking...
Sounds pretty transformative to me, just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not transformative.

EDIT: Sorry I forgot to call you retarded, you goddamn fucking mongoloid nigger.
 
I ignored you cause I don't give a shit about you. You reacted to every single one of my posts, commented on my profile, and responded to my posts multiple times and talked about me when I wasn't even talking to you, in some pathetic cringey attempt to get me to notice you.

"This is getting boring" Sure, and you'll still react to all my posts and comments and still talk about me with some desperate hope you'll get that red notification with me replying to you.
Nice dodge. Focus on me instead of what I said. How dare I rate your posts autistic, what an evil man I am, MUWAHAHAHA! You've uncovered my plan, I'm deeply in love with you and want you to notice me senpai. This whole posing for years on Kiwi Farms detracting Phil was all just because I was tsundere for you. Very perceptive.

Are we sure this guy isn't Phil?
 
Are we sure this guy isn't Phil?
It's definitely not Phil. earlier he listed 5 things he claims he doesn't like about Phil. Now he's obviously lying, he loves everything about Phil and he's come here to defend his honor, but Phil wouldn't be able to come up with even one thing that someone might not like about him. He's done nothing wrong after all. He's done everything correct.

I think it may be Kat. Kat came here to argue about Phil's WWE Champions spending because she doesn't want to believe that there's 50k that could have been spent on her instead of a shitty WWE game. Plus, they are an obvious retard, and we all know that Kat has aspergers.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo