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

[Wurstbrot]

what fucking mongoloid thinks they need to repeat something 7-9 times fucking holy shit thats some premium autism

A repeating of wrong statements won't make them true, despite how smart they sound in the head. Maybe a rephrasing is necessary, or maybe the conclusion that the statement was wrong to begin with and the acrobatic leaps to come to the conclusion was actual bullshit. But sharpie can't come to this conclusion when other's opposing but still connected statements are getting ignored. In fact sharpie's criticizm is so wrong and invalid (already explained by everyone here at least 10 times) that discussing seems absolutely pointless. But the autism-button has really neat colors, mmh.

I just need to point to this part and throw my hands in the air like I just don't care (which I really don't *goatlaugh*):

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

Listen pal, I see what you're trying to say. And I had to write an essay of debunking till I understood what you're trying to convey (already deleted, this had no value).
But what I don't get is why you focus so hard on this hypocrisy thing. If we have a really bad apple, awful in everything, and you just focus on the texture we dislike, while we eat oranges with the same bad texture (WHY DO YOU EAT THAT? YOU ARE HYPOCRITES!) then there is no argument brought to the table, you just want to be right by punching a really questionable hole where none is needed.

Yes, we don't necessarily apply the same standard to Phil than to [Restreamer]. And this may also mean [Restreamer] is also unoriginal, if you really want to sit on this one last fence.
So what? Nobody watches [Restreamer] for their originality. Nobody expects them to be original because this is not the point of a restream, explained to you several times. We're not there to get a better streamer (then we could just go to any other streamer). But the most important part: It's not their job! It's Phil's job to create and improve the entertainment, get original, be creative, be a good service to his customers. He wants the money for that and - yeeees - he's the one who claims to be the best fucking honest gamer with a successful business who ever walked the planet! So we take him by the word and we as the customers aren't happy. But we sure can laugh in unison at the bad business in a central of chill and relaxation which doesn't claim to be creative and original: Restream. This is what groups of people with a similar hobby do, they do it together.

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[Cyber Bowling]

Attempt 5. I'll try to strip it down even further

Detractors: Phil is unoriginal. Unoriginal is bad.

Restreamers: stream phil's exact content

Detractors: restream content is good.

I might be talking out of my ass because I haven't actually watched any of the restreams and am just going off context clues, so someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.

As far as I know, there's only one restream that is just a straight up mirror of Phil's. Dark Dave's Mirror, I think. Not sure if that's the actual name or just what it is jokingly referred to it as. Now, viewers aren't watching it because that content is good while Phil's isn't. Like you said, it's the exact same thing. The reason people watch it is to make fun of it in a way they can't do in Phil's chat because they'd be banned. It's like how the farms has bad movie night, or how MST3K/Rifftrax make fun of movies. The movies are still bad, but listening to the commentary (or in this case, providing it with the chat) is the fun part. Tangentially related, but both MST3K and Rifftrax have 24/7 Twitch channels that cycle through the movies/shorts, and you can go in there and make jokes with whoever else is watching. There's also at least one other TV channel that does dedicated MST3K days. Just mentioning that specifically to show this isn't a new phenomenon or anything, or a detractor specific thing.

Now, there are some detractors that make edited content of Phil's stream, usually just clipping the "good" moments, sometimes throwing in a bit of editing to make it more interesting. I guess if we're being really generous, Phil is technically the entertaining one in these examples, but only in the sense people are watching specifically to laugh at him for getting angry or saying something dumb or whatever the clip in question is. The "goodness" of those videos is someone being generous enough to get the juicy bits to spare everyone else from jumping around in an hour long prestream to find the few seconds of funny.

As for other restreamers...eh, if we're being generous, let's say they're hit or miss. I might be way off, but I was always under the impression they were either fairly unpopular among a lot of the farmers, or completely irrelevant. There was actually a time where pretty much every other post was getting derailed discussing how annoying Tevin's restream was because of notification sounds and other nonsense I can't remember right now. There's also the odd post of someone asking for a critique on some kinda Phil related video they made, with the responses usually boiling down to "needs improvement." Then there's groups like SoK, and I think the fact they have a thread here speaks to how well received they were.

Even LSB, who is generally well received (though I think he does edited clips and not restreams?) is sometimes criticized for lackluster content. Dragonkiller, who used to do Twitter commentary of Phil/also used to be fairly well received, eventually got called out when he got it wrong. It was actually for exaggerating/trying to pass off his hyperbole quotes as legit Phil quotes, if I'm remembering right. And I think some unrelated Nintendo sperging? Anyway, the point is restreamers don't automatically equal good. Hell, even restreamer chatrooms don't automatically equal good. Going back to the Tevin example, there used to be (and still is?) a running theory that a lot of the "troll" tips came from people in that chatroom donating on Phil's stream to try and get attention from Tevin, which was rightly pointed out as being retarded. And, amusingly enough, those types of detractors are often mocked here for being hypocrites, because they claim to hate Phil and want to see him fail, yet are supporting and rewarding his behavior. And if any of them come here bragging about how they "trolled" Phil by throwing quarters at him, the majority of posters call them stupid. There was actually a thread about it at one point, but I think it just died out due to general interest/the topic being discussed to death.

 

[DarkSoulsPhil]

Ok, clearly there is some confusion about what I think about Phil, so I'm going to write it very clearly here exactly what I think about Phil.

I do not like Phil. I say that deliberately. I do not like him meaning I am not a fan of his. I lean more towards disliking him. The reasons I dislike him are:
1) he insults his viewers, occasionally even legit fans
2) He talks about tips way more than I've seen other streamers do
3) he sometimes says really gross and crude things, burping included
4) I'm not a fan of watching people play video games in general unless it's someone I find entertaining or a game I find entertaining
5) The community of hatred around him is exhausting and occasionally makes the streams not fun to watch

Not liking phil does not mean I automatically hate Phil. I don't hate Phil because the things he does do not affect me personally. I do watch Phil's streams (albeit less now) but I'm usually looking at other stuff or just reading/writing in chat. Participating in chat does not make me a fan of Phil.

The reason I am posting here is the same reason you guys are posting here. I am giving my thoughts and responding to others. That provides entertainment for me. Beyond giving my perspective on things, I don't have an agenda. I don't have a desire to comb through 500 pages of material on someone I don't care about. It's a waste of my time. If my opinion on something was mentioned and debunked in a previous portion of the thread, that's fine. Feel free to say so and move on.

I said I think detractors are mean. I said this specifically because I've seen many detractors wishing harm on Phil and trying to ruin his life. My personal opinion is that it is cruel to wish harm on someone and it is cruel to try to ruin someone's life, especially if that person did nothing to you personally. I don't care about detractors beyond this except when the detractor shit in chat gets so bad that it makes the stream annoying to watch. FWIW, I found Phil through detractor content. I saw him through mighty d's videos and that's 100% a lie. I found these videos funny and entertaining. I don't think all detractors are entertaining, I find some legitimately annoying, and I think it's hypocritical to say someone is unoriginal and boring when you are watching that person's content through a restreamer. You don't have to agree. Beyond that I don't care about detractors.

Again, I am not a fan of Phil. I do not have an agenda beyond interacting with people in the thread and giving my thoughts. In fact, @Cyber Bowling calmly responded to one of my posts, and I told him he brought up good points and I agreed with certain things he said. I am here for entertainment value, just like I watch Phil streams for entertainment value, just like you watch restreamers/Tevin/post here for entertainment value. There is nothing beyond that.

Wordswordswordswordswords

 

[Anime Waifu NFT collector]

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.

JULAAAY!!!

 

[DarkSoulsPhil]

@sharpie i have a question for you

Say you said something once and 'nobody listened'.
Normal person: 'Huh, maybe I need to explain it again'

Now lets say youve said it 6, 7, 8 times and people still tell you youre wrong or some variation. Do you think there is something wrong with how you were explaining or do you think that everyones a retard?
Normal person: 'hmmm, maybe I'm wrong. I should reflect on this'
You: 'hypocrisy (x7) '

Because boy have i got the story of a person told 109 times they were wrong and they still do the same shit over and over.

 

[Forbidden Math]

I might be talking out of my ass because I haven't actually watched any of the restreams and am just going off context clues, so someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.

As far as I know, there's only one restream that is just a straight up mirror of Phil's. Dark Dave's Mirror, I think. Not sure if that's the actual name or just what it is jokingly referred to it as. Now, viewers aren't watching it because that content is good while Phil's isn't. Like you said, it's the exact same thing. The reason people watch it is to make fun of it in a way they can't do in Phil's chat because they'd be banned. It's like how the farms has bad movie night, or how MST3K/Rifftrax make fun of movies. The movies are still bad, but listening to the commentary (or in this case, providing it with the chat) is the fun part. Tangentially related, but both MST3K and Rifftrax have 24/7 Twitch channels that cycle through the movies/shorts, and you can go in there and make jokes with whoever else is watching. There's also at least one other TV channel that does dedicated MST3K days. Just mentioning that specifically to show this isn't a new phenomenon or anything, or a detractor specific thing.

Now, there are some detractors that make edited content of Phil's stream, usually just clipping the "good" moments, sometimes throwing in a bit of editing to make it more interesting. I guess if we're being really generous, Phil is technically the entertaining one in these examples, but only in the sense people are watching specifically to laugh at him for getting angry or saying something dumb or whatever the clip in question is. The "goodness" of those videos is someone being generous enough to get the juicy bits to spare everyone else from jumping around in an hour long prestream to find the few seconds of funny.

As for other restreamers...eh, if we're being generous, let's say they're hit or miss. I might be way off, but I was always under the impression they were either fairly unpopular among a lot of the farmers, or completely irrelevant. There was actually a time where pretty much every other post was getting derailed discussing how annoying Tevin's restream was because of notification sounds and other nonsense I can't remember right now. There's also the odd post of someone asking for a critique on some kinda Phil related video they made, with the responses usually boiling down to "needs improvement." Then there's groups like SoK, and I think the fact they have a thread here speaks to how well received they were.

Even LSB, who is generally well received (though I think he does edited clips and not restreams?) is sometimes criticized for lackluster content. Dragonkiller, who used to do Twitter commentary of Phil/also used to be fairly well received, eventually got called out when he got it wrong. It was actually for exaggerating/trying to pass off his hyperbole quotes as legit Phil quotes, if I'm remembering right. And I think some unrelated Nintendo sperging? Anyway, the point is restreamers don't automatically equal good. Hell, even restreamer chatrooms don't automatically equal good. Going back to the Tevin example, there used to be (and still is?) a running theory that a lot of the "troll" tips came from people in that chatroom donating on Phil's stream to try and get attention from Tevin, which was rightly pointed out as being retarded. And, amusingly enough, those types of detractors are often mocked here for being hypocrites, because they claim to hate Phil and want to see him fail, yet are supporting and rewarding his behavior. And if any of them come here bragging about how they "trolled" Phil by throwing quarters at him, the majority of posters call them stupid. There was actually a thread about it at one point, but I think it just died out due to general interest/the topic being discussed to death.

Too much nuance, clearly every detractor loves restreamers who play lawnmower clips over DSP's amazing quality khantent. Because of this all detractors are hypocrites and as such all detractors shouldn't be taken seriously. Checkmate. Now go watch DSP's streams for real because that's the only way to be not a hypocrite. Also give DSP tips because that makes you the penultimate non-hypocrite.

 

[sharpie]

@sharpie i have a question for you

Say you said something once and 'nobody listened'.
Normal person: 'Huh, maybe I need to explain it again'

Now lets say youve said it 6, 7, 8 times and people still tell you youre wrong or some variation. Do you think there is something wrong with how you were explaining or do you think that everyones a retard?
Normal person: 'hmmm, maybe I'm wrong. I should reflect on this'
You: 'hypocrisy (x7) '

Because boy have i got the story of a person told 109 times they were wrong and they still do the same shit over and over.

Why do you say that I should reflect on my behavior? I stated my point 8 times, continuously rephrasing my point so that he would understand. What specifically do I need to reflect on here? I'm not the one who started throwing insults first. Murmur called me all sorts of racist terms and called me a mongoloid. Despite that, the worst I said about him was that he flinged shit in a hypothetical scenario and attended an art gallery with a caretaker.

To answer your question, I don't mind explaining something to someone 7-8 times if they don't understand but are willing to listen. Murmur was the complete opposite. He stood with his hands on his ears so that he didn't have to listen to anything that didn't fellate what he already believed. He was completely unwilling to listen until the very end.

 

[Forbidden Math]

Why do you say that I should reflect on my behavior? I stated my point 8 times, continuously rephrasing my point so that he would understand. What specifically do I need to reflect on here? I'm not the one who started throwing insults first. Murmur called me all sorts of racist terms and called me a mongoloid. Despite that, the worst I said about him was that he flinged shit in a hypothetical scenario and attended an art gallery with a caretaker.

To answer your question, I don't mind explaining something to someone 7-8 times if they don't understand but are willing to listen. Murmur was the complete opposite. He stood with his hands on his ears so that he didn't have to listen to anything that didn't fellate what he already believed. He was completely unwilling to listen until the very end.

Ironic you talking about people not listening while you ignore all the people telling you that your views on both restreamers just being lawnmower noises and all detractors liking restreamers are wrong.

 

[Sparkletor 2.0]

Is there any way to play lawnmower sounds whenever I'm reading a post from Sharpie?

 

[DarkSoulsPhil]

Why do you say that I should reflect on my behavior? I stated my point 8 times, continuously rephrasing my point so that he would understand. What specifically do I need to reflect on here? I'm not the one who started throwing insults first. Murmur called me all sorts of racist terms and called me a mongoloid. Despite that, the worst I said about him was that he flinged shit in a hypothetical scenario and attended an art gallery with a caretaker.

To answer your question, I don't mind explaining something to someone 7-8 times if they don't understand but are willing to listen. Murmur was the complete opposite. He stood with his hands on his ears so that he didn't have to listen to anything that didn't fellate what he already believed. He was completely unwilling to listen until the very end.

Make that 110 times

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Why do you say that I should reflect on my behavior? I stated my point 8 times, continuously rephrasing my point so that he would understand. What specifically do I need to reflect on here? I'm not the one who started throwing insults first. Murmur called me all sorts of racist terms and called me a mongoloid. Despite that, the worst I said about him was that he flinged shit in a hypothetical scenario and attended an art gallery with a caretaker.

To answer your question, I don't mind explaining something to someone 7-8 times if they don't understand but are willing to listen. Murmur was the complete opposite. He stood with his hands on his ears so that he didn't have to listen to anything that didn't fellate what he already believed. He was completely unwilling to listen until the very end.

Listen you nigger faggot, I understood your point, I just thought you were wrong. And you, in all of your double digit IQ glory couldn't grasp the fact that someone else thought you were wrong (because you were). I'll stop calling you racist terms and/or a mongoloid if you stop replying to me and stop mentioning me. I have been operating under the assumption that you've been trolling this whole time and have been dealing with you appropriately in that context. If I'm wrong and you're not, then we can agree to disagree on your mental acuity and never have to interact with each other ever again.

 

[sharpie]

Listen you nigger faggot, I understood your point, I just thought you were wrong. And you, in all of your double digit IQ glory couldn't grasp the fact that someone else thought you were wrong (because you were). I'll stop calling you racist terms and/or a mongoloid if you stop replying to me and stop mentioning me. I have been operating under the assumption that you've been trolling this whole time and have been dealing with you appropriately in that context. If I'm wrong and you're not, then we can agree to disagree on your mental acuity and never have to interact with each other ever again.

You had to be explained the same point 10 times. And your response to your inability to understand something a 5 year old would've grasped in seconds was to call me a mongoloid and a slew of racist terms. Do you think you're in a position to judge someone's mental acuity?

Let's talk about intelligence. You were presented an argument. Rather than evaluate it like a normal person, realize that the argument was scoped to something very specific, and determine the validity of that scoped argument youre response was

1) Scream, tear your hair out, and cry
2) Shit on the floor
3) through your teary eyes and shit stained hands, type out an double digit iq explanation of how my scoped argument is invalid, because if you expand the scope, which is an entirely different argument, it somehow proves my scoped argument wrong

When I explained the same thing to you 7 more times, You were all out of hair to rip out, and your floor was so covered with shit even you couldn't bear it. So you decided to resort to name calling and racist mudslinging, because your brain literally couldn't come up with any better.

When you debunk an argument, you have to argue the soundness of the argument, as in could the conclusion be reasonably drawn from the given evidence, as well as the validity of the argument, meaning is the evidence that the argument is based on valid. Now, expanding the scope of the argument is an argument of validity, because you're trying to show there are more reasons to watch restreamers, but that doesn't debunk my argument, because my argument was scoped specifically to one of those reasons, and my argument was that that reason, in isolation is hypocritical.

 

[sharpie]

Yes. I didn't have to have it explained it to me 10 times, I got what you were saying the first time... you were just wrong. No amount of long winded redundant explanations will change the fact that you were and are wrong. I took you seriously one time, and pointed out how you were wrong using your own posts here but you chose to ignore it because you are being intentionally obtuse because you are trolling for your own amusement. And because you are trolling that is why I am calling you horrible racist terms, I too can be a complete retard for my own amusement, you don't have a monopoly on that despite your best efforts.

But, despite my own retardation, at least I'm not wrong.

So you linked me to the 8th attempt, after which you finally had a semblance of understanding, which means you failed to understand it 7 times prior.

In that 8th attempt, you referenced an out of the argument that I GAVE YOU. I told you that the only way it was not hypocritical, was if the content of the restreamer was transformative. You didn't think of that argument yourself. And you jumped on that. So, you, in your low iq delusions, thought that my argument was shit, yet you used my own argument to prove your point, and somehow believed that the same argument was good because you said it. I would say it's ironic, but im 100% confident you don't even understand what irony means.

Let's not pretend you think racist terms are "horrible". If you're comfortable saying racist shit 3 times in a row in a span of a few hours, you're not uncomfortable with it. You're a racist, and a low iq person, don't be a pussy as well.

 

[Malcolm Tucker]

Let's not pretend you think racist terms are "horrible". If you're comfortable saying racist shit 3 times in a row in a span of a few hours, you're not uncomfortable with it. You're a racist, and a low iq person, don't be a pussy as well.

I think you'll find that Murmer has matured and he doesn't make those comments anymore. But back when he did everyone loved it and everyone is just too sensitive now. And he was just copying Howard Stern.

 

[Forbidden Math]

So you linked me to the 8th attempt, after which you finally had a semblance of understanding, which means you failed to understand it 7 times prior.

In that 8th attempt, you referenced an out of the argument that I GAVE YOU. I told you that the only way it was not hypocritical, was if the content of the restreamer was transformative. You didn't think of that argument yourself. And you jumped on that. So, you, in your low iq delusions, thought that my argument was shit, yet you used my own argument to prove your point, and somehow believed that the same argument was good because you said it. I would say it's ironic, but im 100% confident you don't even understand what irony means.

Let's not pretend you think racist terms are "horrible". If you're comfortable saying racist shit 3 times in a row in a span of a few hours, you're not uncomfortable with it. You're a racist, and a low iq person, don't be a pussy as well.

You sure throw around the term "low iq" a lot, by the way it's "low IQ", IQ is an abbreviation. For someone with such a big brain you don't have a very deep vocabulary and you seem to like repeating buzzwords you barely understand a lot just like DSP.

 

[Fascist Frederick]

So you linked me to the 8th attempt, after which you finally had a semblance of understanding, which means you failed to understand it 7 times prior.

In that 8th attempt, you referenced an out of the argument that I GAVE YOU. I told you that the only way it was not hypocritical, was if the content of the restreamer was transformative. You didn't think of that argument yourself. And you jumped on that. So, you, in your low iq delusions, thought that my argument was shit, yet you used my own argument to prove your point, and somehow believed that the same argument was good because you said it. I would say it's ironic, but im 100% confident you don't even understand what irony means.

Let's not pretend you think racist terms are "horrible". If you're comfortable saying racist shit 3 times in a row in a span of a few hours, you're not uncomfortable with it. You're a racist, and a low iq person, don't be a pussy as well.

I deleted my post because I wanted to reply to your new addition to the post you edited, but now you've fucked that all up. Oh well.

I used your own argument on the 8th attempt because you contradicted yourself. You didn't give me anything. You tried to say the restreamers aren't transformative and therefore unoriginal, while previously complaining that they were transformative. I was just pointing that out because that is another reason you are wrong, by your own standards.

My original argument was that you are declaring hypocrisy because of unoriginality, and my point was that you are the only person on earth that is judging Phil and the Restreamers solely on the basis of originality. The people who like the restreamers but not Phil have to be judged by the standard they use, not yours. If they only disliked Phil because he was unoriginal, but then approved of the restreamers, I would absolutely agree that they are hypocrites. But, as I have countlessly pointed out they have a multitude of reasons to dislike Phil, and enjoying the stream of someone who is mocking the target of their dislike, while sharing ONE negative trait of the person they dislike does not make them hypocritical. They are enjoying the mocking of Phil's content, not Phil's content fed to them from a different source.

To make this easy for you: Yes any detractor that hates Phil purely for his lack of originality but then watches a restreamer is, 100%, undeniably a hypocrite. Unfortunately nobody like that exists.

And, I never said I thought racist terms were horrible, not sure why you put that in quotes.

I think you'll find that Murmer has matured and he doesn't make those comments anymore. But back when he did everyone loved it and everyone is just too sensitive now. And he was just copying Howard Stern.

Nigger nigger nigger, kike kike spic. Somehow I can type these things without wanting to harm people who's skin color don't match my own. Must be magic.

You sure throw around the term "low iq" a lot, by the way it's "low IQ", IQ is an abbreviation. For someone with such a big brain you don't have a very deep vocabulary and you seem to like repeating buzzwords you barely understand a lot just like DSP.

He's just repeating my insults to his intelligence back to me because he is a mentally a child. It's the equivalent of: "NO YOU"

 

[sharpie]

I used your own argument on the 8th attempt because you contradicted yourself. You didn't give me anything. You tried to say the restreamers aren't transformative and therefore unoriginal, while previously complaining that they were transformative. I was just pointing that out because that is another reason you are wrong, by your own standards.

To make a contradiction you have be presented an argument. you didn't organically think of the transformation argument, although it was obvious. I gave you an out and then you realized "Oh I can say lawnmower noises are transformative". That doesn't change the fact you were still given the argument.

My original argument was that you are declaring hypocrisy because of unoriginality, and my point was that you are the only person on earth that is judging Phil and the Restreamers solely on the basis of originality. The people who like the restreamers but not Phil have to be judged by the standard they use, not yours. If they only disliked Phil because he was unoriginal, but then approved of the restreamers, I would absolutely agree that they are hypocrites. But, as I have countlessly pointed out they have a multitude of reasons to dislike Phil, and enjoying the stream of someone who is mocking the target of their dislike, while sharing ONE negative trait of the person they dislike does not make them hypocritical. They are enjoying the mocking of Phil's content, not Phil's content fed to them from a different source.

I understood that. My argument the whole time was that expanding the scope of my argument doesn't debunk it. If you praise the originality of the detractor streams, but insult Phil for his unoriginality, that is hypocrisy. it doesn't matter if there are other reasons you insult phil, it doesn't matter that there are other reasons you like the restreamers. Those other reasons were out of scope to me. My whole point was that I find the trolls to be hypocritical, and this was just one example.

I admit that this argument alone does not make detractors hypocrites. If I said that I was wrong. In my head, all I was saying is that calling phil unoriginal, but saying detractors are original, is an example of hypocrisy coming from the detractors.

To make this easy for you: Yes any detractor that hates Phil purely for his lack of originality but then watches a restreamer is, 100%, undeniably a hypocrite. Unfortunately nobody like that exists.

Unoriginality is part of the argument I've seen detractors make against Phil. I'll say this again, clearly: it is PART, not the WHOLE argument I've seen detractors make. Nevertheless, that PART is hypocritical.

And, I never said I thought racist terms were horrible, not sure why you put that in quotes.

Your original post that was deleted: "...And because you are trolling that is why I am calling you horrible racist term"

He's just repeating my insults to his intelligence back to me because he is a mentally a child. It's the equivalent of: "NO YOU"

Nah, I would never call someone "a swarthy jungle money, a literal n*****". You have to be a special kind of person to have that phrase even go through your head. you're going to try hide this fact among your army of sycophants, so I'll state it here explicitly: You were the one who started the insults. After you said I was being intentionally obtuse, only then did I insult your intelligence. You already knew that, you just wanted to lie because that's the only way you can win an argument.

Edit: just went back and checked. You were the one who insulted me first by first asking "Are you functionally retarded?" and then following up later on with "You are basically retarded"

https://kiwifarms.pa/threads/designated-whiner-shitting-street.37975/post-7946291

Also by going back, I saw that I said that "when you do hypocritical things, that makes you a hypocrite". I was wrong about that. Yes, doing hypocritical things makes you a hypocrite, but clearly this one example of unoriginality doesn't make all detractors hypocrites, because there might be people who watch the restreamers who don't care about originality/unoriginality but rather just want a place to chat without getting banned, or just enjoy the restreamer content. So I was wrong about saying that.

 

[Forbidden Math]

I understood that. My argument the whole time was that expanding the scope of my argument doesn't debunk it. If you praise the originality of the detractor streams, but insult Phil for his unoriginality, that is hypocrisy. it doesn't matter if there are other reasons you insult phil, it doesn't matter that there are other reasons you like the restreamers. Those other reasons were out of scope to me. My whole point was that I find the trolls to be hypocritical, and this was just one example.

This is the most autistic shit I have ever read. Who gives the slightest of fucks if on the tiny very specific battle ground in your head you found "hypocrisy"? Like Murmur said, there isn't anyone in the world who only dislikes DSP because he is unoriginal and there aren't any fans of restreamers who like them because they're unoriginal.

You're so fucking autistic holy shit. No one cares about these little battlegrounds you're building in your mind where you can call yourself right, the rest of us live in the real fucking world where you're just a tard no one listens to. What was that you said? Sorry I couldn't hear you over this lawnmower clip I'm playing.

 

[Fascist Frederick]

To make a contradiction you have be presented an argument. you didn't organically think of the transformation argument, although it was obvious. I gave you an out and then you realized "Oh I can say lawnmower noises are transformative". That doesn't change the fact you were still given the argument.



I understood that. My argument the whole time was that expanding the scope of my argument doesn't debunk it. If you praise the originality of the detractor streams, but insult Phil for his unoriginality, that is hypocrisy. it doesn't matter if there are other reasons you insult phil, it doesn't matter that there are other reasons you like the restreamers. Those other reasons were out of scope to me. My whole point was that I find the trolls to be hypocritical, and this was just one example.

I admit that this argument alone does not make detractors hypocrites. If I said that I was wrong. In my head, all I was saying is that calling phil unoriginal, but saying detractors are original, is an example of hypocrisy coming from the detractors.



Unoriginality is part of the argument I've seen detractors make against Phil. I'll say this again, clearly: it is PART, not the WHOLE argument I've seen detractors make. Nevertheless, that PART is hypocritical.



Your original post that was deleted: "...And because you are trolling that is why I am calling you horrible racist term"



Nah, I would never call someone "a swarthy jungle money, a literal n*****". You have to be a special kind of person to have that phrase even go through your head. you're going to try hide this fact among your army of sycophants, so I'll state it here explicitly: You were the one who started the insults. After about 3 times of you hurling racist insults and calling me a mongoloid, only then did I insult your intelligence, by using the hypothetical example of you in an art gallery with your caretaker. You already knew that, you just wanted to lie because that's the only way you can win an argument.

You had stated that the restreamers make annoying interruptions in like your very first post. In one of my first replies I said that the detractors watch the restreamers for the mocking of Phil. I didn't use the exact term "transformative", I thought it was mutually understood that mocking is transformative. Fair use dictates that parody is absolutely fair use, because it is transformative. I only brought up the "transformative" thing again when you referenced your own post and I realized you didn't get it.

I understood you and you understood me. We disagree about the argument itself. You consider looking at the big picture of why people dislike Phil as "expanding the scope" but I feel you had to narrow the scope in the first place to get to your position. And I feel you did that because simply want to be able to say the detractors are hypocrites.

Actually you are right that I did technically say "horrible racist terms", I meant that from your point of view since you brought it up, but that was unclear. You win that one. Nice job.

And finally, the "swarthy jungle monkey, literal nigger" thing is part of a well known copy-pasta. If you didn't get the reference then okay. Most people here would get it. I assumed you would since you are here. Yes I started with the insults, because that's what we do here. We say horrible, inflammatory things to eachother. If you can't handle it then this isn't the place for you.

I haven't insulted you at all in this post. We are not going to agree. If you continue, then I am going to continue with the insults and racism. Not because I feel I have lost an argument, not because I have nothing else to say, but only because it is funny.

 

[sharpie]

You had stated that the restreamers make annoying interruptions in like your very first post. In one of my first replies I said that the detractors watch the restreamers for the mocking of Phil. I didn't use the exact term "transformative", I thought it was mutually understood that mocking is transformative. Fair use dictates that parody is absolutely fair use, because it is transformative. I only brought up the "transformative" thing again when you referenced your own post and I realized you didn't get it.

I understood you and you understood me. We disagree about the argument itself. You consider looking at the big picture of why people dislike Phil as "expanding the scope" but I feel you had to narrow the scope in the first place to get to your position. And I feel you did that because simply want to be able to say the detractors are hypocrites.

Actually you are right that I did technically say "horrible racist terms", I meant that from your point of view since you brought it up, but that was unclear. You win that one. Nice job.

And finally, the "swarthy jungle monkey, literal nigger" thing is part of a well known copy-pasta. If you didn't get the reference then okay. Most people here would get it. I assumed you would since you are here. Yes I started with the insults, because that's what we do here. We say horrible, inflammatory things to eachother. If you can't handle it then this isn't the place for you.

I haven't insulted you at all in this post. We are not going to agree. If you continue, then I am going to continue with the insults and racism. Not because I feel I have lost an argument, not because I have nothing else to say, but only because it is funny.

Ok, you're right, I should have made my point very clear. I was wrong to say detractors are complete hypocrites based off of that one point on unoriginality. Yes, you are right, I was trying to point out that detractors are hypocrites. Originally, I believe someone has asked me that if I had found Phil through detractor content, then why did I not trust what the detractors say, and amongst other things, I said they are hypocrites. Also, as I mentioned earlier, I find the constant haranguing of Phil even over minor things annoying. So I was trying to say that detractors are hypocrites. But I am wrong about detractors being hypocrites based on that one point of unoriginality. There are multiple reasons people can watch a restreamer, and I'm sure that there are detractors who either don't care about originality/unoriginality but watch the restreamers because they find them entertaining.