People do not have roles and, therefore, do not need to be modeled. Insults and
anger don't somehow magically inflate my viewership. At least no more than "Work hard hustle culture rhetoric" inflates the viewership of these
fucking work-salesmen infotainment guys. The Youtube algorithm
mills that shit out almost exclusively. All manner of things "Could hypothetically cause abstract
harm." But I could likely find an INVERSE CORRELATION between THIS and any hypothetical "Harm" being done. What constitutes abstract harm varies. The
truth could be considered harmful situationally. Additionally, benign things could be conflated with "abstract harm" to justify canceling people. This has actually already happened on several occasions.
Hym "
Hey, how many subscribers did you get after I referred to you? You know what? I don't actually care. I never claim to be a role model nor should I be required to be a good one to justify success. What makes you think I don't put thought into this? Just because it's not a
fucking youtube video it somehow doesn't count? You bought a
fucking camera. That's your 'higher quality of production.' The Joker is based on a hypothetical I wrote about Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson in response to the proposition that men were being kept in check by the threat of physical violence and I wrote some of the dialogue. I wrote quite a few
joke for the highest rated season of Solar Opposites. And this is the framework for a dozen different shows, movies, and
anime. But YOU want to talk to me about not focusing enough on the production value? Get the fuck out of here with that. Now... I'm debating whether or not to insult you... Hmm... No... No. I'll save it for next time. How about this? If the correlation between 'insults and anger' and views is higher than the correlation between fat cocks and success with women... I
will grant YOU and only you 1 request. Anything you want."