Jump to content
The King of Hate Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The old forum got nuked, idiot. You can't say you've been here since before the TIHYDP videos when it took you 3 years to migrate from the old forum to here after it was created. And to add,

This whole thread is the classic: "Whoever smelt it, dealt it" Those who quick to call others trolls and detractors are the ones who are undercover trolls themselves. 

The job of the mods got a lot harder. Now they have to monitor 3 chats and check if people are subbed to certain streamers.   People (losers) go to other streamers just to report what o

Posted Images

16 hours ago, babymngaming456 said:

Found this. It's scary how it fits.

It fits for certain people, just like with a lot of other fanbases. Obviously, if you only consider his to be comprised of the ones who donate no matter what & question nothing, then makes sense, but that's being selective. He also has a decent number of viewers that criticise & question him, but of course these people are not considered his fans, making it perfect for calling it a "cult".

(By the way, I know your argument might just be in relation to this new activity mods supposedly have to do now, (which I don't agree with), but since you're mentioning how the well the image fits, it's heavily implied, or sounds to me like you're talking about the fans in general. If not, then I'll be replying as if it were.)

So, taking out those who you'd consider mindless followers, who shows unquestioning commitment to Phil? Is the answer "whales" & some of the people on his Twitter responses? I more than often see viewers in the chat criticising some of Phil's ideas, in both constructive & mocking manners, but these can't be fans, they must be detractors. Also here in the Forums, but that's only a few people so doesn't count.

Is questioning & critique discouraged, ridiculed and mocked? To some degree, as an example I've heard & read Phil's "stop asking" that followed his argument I believe was faulty, so I replied back, (in several occasions). I haven't heard the act of questioning being ridiculed & mocked, if anything, when he did for the other person's views, but then he can get refuted, (E.g: Like sometimes here or in Twitter). It's part of the conversation, even though I don't agree with insulting them or what they say. He can improve on that, as well as when he doesn't answer to certain cheers, or ATK questions, but I think it doesn't compare to what you're suggesting.

Deception to suppress doubts: I don't agree with what he did about denying having a cat, or the red-vest, (as a couple of examples), or his arguments, and I'd love more transparency, just like other people. I don't know any example of that for his audience.

How is "the group", (term I don't really like to use), elitist, or the leader called "God/Emperor"? The "my lord" joke is used ironically by most of those who decide to type that nonsense, and the best argument for the other thing is people with bit-badges, which also get moderated. If there's some bias then he has to work or that, and personally, I'd more than likely question it if I saw it & knew what exactly happened.

The "us vs them" mentality is something I heavily dislike, but I haven't heard that much from Phil. If he does post something along those lines here, he's going to get criticised by me included. Irelevant to this, I've seen that mentality with other people, but that's never addressed.

People who might be preoccupied with contributing money are the few "whales", not all or even most of the viewers.

And what about people participating in unethical behaviours? Unless you're arguing that contributors are purposely donating to Phil so that he can continue some sort of actual fraud, and you prove it's a fraud, that would be unethical. Otherwise, can you give me a couple of examples of this, and how it applies to a significant number of fans?

The shame/guilt & peer pressure to control others is something I don't see. I personally have never felt like this, but that's just my experience. Have you?

About the "fear of reprisal" & "no other way to proceed", not sure what this might be, other than getting banned for unjustified causes & get unbanned through an email. But when and if that happens, the moderators usually unban the person if it was a mistake, right? I've also seen people who mock him not getting moderated. As a side note this can happen in a lot of places, I once got banned elsewhere for asking a polite question. In those cases it's probably ignorance or incompetence instead of cult-mentality, though.

"The leader" not being held accountable by authorities goes back to people in his fanbase criticising him, a lot do. If you feel he broke Twitch's TOS and was not suspended, it's a Twitch problem, has nothing to do with the fanbase, which is what the argument is about.


I don't think it can remotely be compared to a cult, if you take out the very few people who might act like this, (who exist in a lot of of fanbases). I believe most are rational enough, but when they display critical thinking, suddenly they're not fans anymore, which supports the cult-argument.

It's convenient when I can give the word "fan" whatever definition that I want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, babymngaming456 said:

Like that you should ask behind the scenes on a place where people can't get banned for such discussion. Not Wing's or you know who's chat though. :tongue:

Can you elaborate, ask what? People can do so to moderators on their PMs, why would they need to do it elsewhere.

As for having discussions in other places outside Phil's streams, we already know that, or what, are you talking about like some sort of secret cool-club only accessible to vetted members? How does this help the argument that Phil's fanbase resembles a cult anyways?

Might be the words you're using, but to me your post can be interpreted in several ways, so can you clarify?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

Can you elaborate, ask what?

Ask to explain those points to you and why they fit. Or wait for someone with enough sock accounts to explain it here. :sad:

5 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

As for having discussions in other places outside Phil's streams, we already know that, or what, are you talking about like some sort of secret cool-club only accessible to vetted members?

Reddit

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, babymngaming456 said:

Reddit

I've already been to Reddit and even posted a thread in the DSP-Discussion, although for other purposes. What does it have to do whith the idea that the entire fanbase supposedly acts like a cult?

40 minutes ago, babymngaming456 said:

Ask to explain those points to you and why they fit. Or wait for someone with enough sock accounts to explain it here. :sad:

You're worried that you might get banned for replying to my comment? Sure, I've already posted my argument that I think covers the people you might be thinking of, but that doesn't mean that is a fair comparison to the fans in general.

How about this then? Let's say you consider me a DSP-fan, tell me in which way I act like a cult member. Let's hope there's no straw-mans of my reasoning & what I've said.

Edited by MoraMoria
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MoraMoria said:

Let's say you consider me a DSP-fan, tell me in which way I act like a cult member.

Typing whole essays about DSP. Reading what you've said, I don't thing you're a real DSP fan. I think you know DSP hotbed for argument and you relish into having back in forth's for entertainment until you lose the argument. Like when I asked why do you follow obvious bots and you had no explanation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MoraMoria said:

I've already been to Reddit and even posted a thread in the DSP-Discussion, although for other purposes. What does it have to do whith the idea that the entire fanbase supposedly acts like a cult?

You're worried that you might get banned for replying to my comment? Sure, I've already posted my argument that I think covers the people you might be thinking of, but that doesn't mean that is a fair comparison to the fans in general.

How about this then? Let's say you consider me a DSP-fan, tell me in which way I act like a cult member. Let's hope there's no straw-mans of my reasoning & what I've said.

I'll take a crack at how you are like a cult member. Unlike the ones who directly praise him or feed into his ego (many references to himself as King, which is why the kiddos call him Lord occasionally) you exist to obfuscate his poor decision making by trying to play like you're a rationally thinking person who can logic out why DSP does things that generate disgust/distrust/etc. or placate people by telling them that it's ok to feel the way they feel and you totally have questioned DSP too, just don't do anything to disrupt the pahsitive vibe of the collective. You could have walked away at any point, a rational person who didn't have some connection to a cult mentality would have if even one of the things that you call up to placate is something that actually bothers you (DSP paywalling his cat, after everyone already knew it was the cat and called him out for the cat and he decided to lie and say it wasn't the cat till the tips goal was hit by a pre planned tip that he had discussed prior to the stream) yet you stay to defend his website that he has all but forgotten about. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@nobodycares is right. I didn't want to explain it to you @MoraMoria because there's nothing to explain. You just need to look at Twitter or watch a stream to realize it, it's way too obvious at this point. If you can't see it yourself, then there's no point trying to explain it.

I turn on the stream and this nonsense is the first thing I hear. I quickly turn the stream off. I'm tired of listening to this bullshit over and over. If someone can't see it yourself from listening to such things daily, then there's no help for him.

This one was also good. Special highlight at 53:08.

19 hours ago, MoraMoria said:

that the entire fanbase supposedly acts like a cult

No one ever said the entire fanbase. It's people like Derich, Yoshinolover who's every tweet can be translated to "praise the lord".

Edited by babymngaming456
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TrayUpperdeck said:

Typing whole essays about DSP. Reading what you've said, I don't thing you're a real DSP fan. I think you know DSP hotbed for argument and you relish into having back in forth's for entertainment until you lose the argument. Like when I asked why do you follow obvious bots and you had no explanation.

Can you provide an example of me losing the argument? (It's fine to lose an argument, you can learn from it)

And the answer was because I like, that's the explanation. I also added that I don't have to post my entire thinking process about why is that, this doesn't mean that there's no explanation. I'm not obligated to answer in depth why I've decided to do things I like, that have no relevance to any argument.

4 hours ago, nobodycares said:

I'll take a crack at how you are like a cult member. Unlike the ones who directly praise him or feed into his ego (many references to himself as King, which is why the kiddos call him Lord occasionally) you exist to obfuscate his poor decision making by trying to play like you're a rationally thinking person who can logic out why DSP does things that generate disgust/distrust/etc. or placate people by telling them that it's ok to feel the way they feel and you totally have questioned DSP too, just don't do anything to disrupt the pahsitive vibe of the collective. You could have walked away at any point, a rational person who didn't have some connection to a cult mentality would have if even one of the things that you call up to placate is something that actually bothers you (DSP paywalling his cat, after everyone already knew it was the cat and called him out for the cat and he decided to lie and say it wasn't the cat till the tips goal was hit by a pre planned tip that he had discussed prior to the stream) yet you stay to defend his website that he has all but forgotten about. 

If I'm correct, all started because one person supposedly called Phil: "My Lord" while being unironically, then other people started doing so as what appeared to be a joke. Which "kiddos" call him that while being serious? What do you base this on?

You say that I "obfuscate his poor decision making", then you clearly haven't done your research. I've posted in numerous occasions ways for him to improve or act in a different way, that went against his preference. Not only here in the Forums, but on personal conversations as well. I've questioned him directly more than a lot of the people that talk about him regularly. This is just a fact.

When have I said to anyone to not do anything to disrupt the "positive vibe of the collective"? Give me an example.

I don't agree with what he did with the cat-reveal, but me staying in the Forum doesn't contradict that. Go ahead and post your opinion about Jasper, I'm not going to "placate" anything.

16 minutes ago, babymngaming456 said:

@nobodycares is right. I didn't want to explain it to you @MoraMoria because there's nothing to explain. You just need to look at Twitter or watch a stream to realize it, it's way too obvious at this point. If you can't see it yourself, then there's no point trying to explain it.

No one ever said the entire fanbase. It's people like Derich, Yoshinolover who's every tweet can be translated to "praise the lord".

No one ever said that? I think I've heard people comparing his fanbase to a cult, maybe not you, but I'm responding to the "argument" of the ones who do say that.

I can see for myself that some people may act like this, but that doesn't justify the generalization.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

If I'm correct, all started because one person supposedly called Phil: "My Lord" while being unironically, then other people started doing so as what appeared to be a joke. Which "kiddos" call him that while being serious? What do you base this on?

You say that I "obfuscate his poor decision making", then you clearly haven't done your research. I've posted in numerous occasions ways for him to improve or act in a different way, that went against his preference. Not only here in the Forums, but on personal conversations as well. I've questioned him directly more than a lot of the people that talk about him regularly. This is just a fact.

When have I said to anyone to not do anything to disrupt the "positive vibe of the collective"? Give me an example.

I don't agree with what he did with the cat-reveal, but me staying in the Forum doesn't contradict that. Go ahead and post your opinion about Jasper, I'm not going to "placate" anything.

L oh fuckin L. First, DSP calls himself the King constantly, you are really going to ignore that it was this that was the origin of this "Lord" talk? Trying to separate who amongst his cult is being serious or not is neither here nor there, it's meant to feed his ego either way.

You obfuscate yes. But funnier is the point that you jump to trying to placate that you are indeed critical of Phil so how could you possibly be determined to be so far gone into his web of lies? "I'm like you brother! I once questioned our magnificent Lord and thought to turn away! But he shall bring us glory yet brother! Just you wait!" This doesn't take away from the fact that you will adamantly fence ride or defend Phil's poor actions if you can find even the poorest reasoning he needs to or should have done the thing he did, and defend that point to the death on these forums. That is the fun of the duality of what you are doing, you are trying to look ever so slightly critical of Phil with one hand while defending him with the other, placation and obfuscation depending on the situation. You are being far too literal which is an absolutely annoying trait, you see an obvious hyperbole and you want to use it as a gotcha moment which you have to be Phil levels of dense to ignore flavorful language. This is how he loves to lie to you all, and here you are doing the same thing trying to pinpoint one possible scenario where a statement that wasn't meant to be entirely factual was surprise not entirely factual so you could squirm out of the weight of what you actually are. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

If I'm correct, all started because one person supposedly called Phil: "My Lord"

It has nothing to do with that. It's that the behavior perfectly fits the meaning of a cult. How can you not understand that?

10 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

I think I've heard people comparing his fanbase to a cult

They obviously don't mean everyone. No one ever takes statements like that literally. They obviously mean the try hard fanboys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nobodycares said:

L oh fuckin L. First, DSP calls himself the King constantly, you are really going to ignore that it was this that was the origin of this "Lord" talk? Trying to separate who amongst his cult is being serious or not is neither here nor there, it's meant to feed his ego either way.


You obfuscate yes. But funnier is the point that you jump to trying to placate that you are indeed critical of Phil so how could you possibly be determined to be so far gone into his web of lies? "I'm like you brother! I once questioned our magnificent Lord and thought to turn away! But he shall bring us glory yet brother! Just you wait!" This doesn't take away from the fact that you will adamantly fence ride or defend Phil's poor actions if you can find even the poorest reasoning he needs to or should have done the thing he did, and defend that point to the death on these forums. That is the fun of the duality of what you are doing, you are trying to look ever so slightly critical of Phil with one hand while defending him with the other, placation and obfuscation depending on the situation. You are being far too literal which is an absolutely annoying trait, you see an obvious hyperbole and you want to use it as a gotcha moment which you have to be Phil levels of dense to ignore flavorful language. This is how he loves to lie to you all, and here you are doing the same thing trying to pinpoint one possible scenario where a statement that wasn't meant to be entirely factual was surprise not entirely factual so you could squirm out of the weight of what you actually are. 

What are you talking about, that's just a moniker. If you think it's designed to feed his ego that's fine, but doesn't support your claim that supposedly "kiddos" say that unironically. Also, irrelevant, but I've never addressed him as such.

I'm not "placating" anything, I've stated a fact, which is that I've been fairly critical to him, by being direct to him as well, not just with passing by comments. The argument is not that becasue I've been critical of something then must mean that I don't believe any possible lies, I've never made that point. So give an example of me blindly believing something he said that is a lie.

You have not answered my questions: When have I said to anyone to not do anything to disrupt the "positive vibe of the collective"? Give me an example; In what do you base your claim that kids are calling him "My Lord" unironically. And also, it's not "flavorful language" to state, for example, that "DSP fans are retarded", or that he declawed his cat without proper evidence.

29 minutes ago, babymngaming456 said:

It has nothing to do with that. It's that the behavior perfectly fits the meaning of a cult. How can you not understand that?

They obviously don't mean everyone. No one ever takes statements like that literally. They obviously mean the try hard fanboys.

Behaviour seen on few people.

You're right, there's no need to differentiate, I'm taking things too literally. Some "try-hard fanboys" act irrational, therefore DSP's fanbase is a cult. Statements like this cannot be criticised neither, because you know, it's not literal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to explain it in simple terms. The main issue isn't that the people act like it's a cult, but that they are actively led into it. That's why I posted those videos as examples. Anyone with common sense can see it. That's why those people fall for it so easily, they have no common sense. Even their tweets sound like written by a bot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

What are you talking about, that's just a moniker. If you think it's designed to feed his ego that's fine, but doesn't support your claim that supposedly "kiddos" say that unironically. Also, irrelevant, but I've never addressed him as such.

I'm not "placating" anything, I've stated a fact, which is that I've been fairly critical to him, by being direct to him as well, not just with passing by comments. The argument is not that becasue I've been critical of something then must mean that I don't believe any possible lies, I've never made that point. So give an example of me blindly believing something he said that is a lie.

You have not answered my questions: When have I said to anyone to not do anything to disrupt the "positive vibe of the collective"? Give me an example; In what do you base your claim that kids are calling him "My Lord" unironically. And also, it's not "flavorful language" to state, for example, that "DSP fans are retarded", or that he declawed his cat without proper evidence.

It's a moniker HE CHOSE FOR HIMSELF BECAUSE HE THINKS HE IS GREAT. You are trying to get me to prove something that can't be proved you absolute nonce. Why bring up something irrelevant? Oh right, obfuscation, because if all the people don't do it then none of the people do it right? That's the black and white thinking that gets supported here right?

You are absolutely placating. "Dude I've been fairly critical and I'm still here! It's ok to be critical!" That lame tired narrative of it's ok what he does but it'd be nice if he didn't, unless it's something you agree with then you'll defend it.

First before I get into the rest, nice moving of goal posts all over to where you would like them, Phil would be proud. His biggest fans are autistic, proven. Cat is declawed, proven. You can't prove someone's intent, irrelevant. You are trying to fight tooth and nail this idea that you aren't part of a personality cult, proven. Anything else you would like? Where will those goal posts move next?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, nobodycares said:

It's a moniker HE CHOSE FOR HIMSELF BECAUSE HE THINKS HE IS GREAT. You are trying to get me to prove something that can't be proved you absolute nonce. Why bring up something irrelevant? Oh right, obfuscation, because if all the people don't do it then none of the people do it right? That's the black and white thinking that gets supported here right?

You are absolutely placating. "Dude I've been fairly critical and I'm still here! It's ok to be critical!" That lame tired narrative of it's ok what he does but it'd be nice if he didn't, unless it's something you agree with then you'll defend it.

First before I get into the rest, nice moving of goal posts all over to where you would like them, Phil would be proud. His biggest fans are autistic, proven. Cat is declawed, proven. You can't prove someone's intent, irrelevant. You are trying to fight tooth and nail this idea that you aren't part of a personality cult, proven. Anything else you would like? Where will those goal posts move next?

Maybe he did, but that's not the point: You claimed that kids call him "My Lord" unironically. I'm simply asking you in what evidence you rely to believe that. I'm not trying to make you prove something that can't be proved out of the blue, you made the statement. It may be irrelevant, but you brought it up, and then when I ask you for your reasoning, then I "obfuscate".

What black & white thinking? No, maybe people say that seriously, but your statement doesn't seem to be supported. This is not obfuscation.

Then you mention that I hold the idea of "it's ok what he does, but it'd be nice if he didn't" which doesn't make sense. I'm telling you he has done things that are not ok. Can I even be more clear after this?

I haven't moved any goalposts, how have I done that? You're not answering my questions.

I'm trying to have a conversation with you, despite your insults which are fine, I don't mind. Yeah, you can't prove someone's intent, but you sure are saying what the intent of others are, which is why I was asking you about it.

Edited by MoraMoria
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

Maybe he did, but that's not the point: You claimed that kids call him "My Lord" unironically. I'm simply asking you in what evidence you rely to believe that. I'm not trying to make you prove something that can't be proved out of the blue, you made the statement. It may be irrelevant, but you brought it up, and then when I ask you for your reasoning, then I "obfuscate".

What black & white thinking? No, maybe people say that seriously, but your statement doesn't seem to be supported. This is not obfuscation.

Then you mention that I hold the idea of "it's ok what he does, but it'd be nice if he didn't" which doesn't make sense. I'm telling you he has done things that are not ok. Can I even be more clear after this?

I haven't moved any goalposts, how have I done that? You're not answering my questions.

I'm trying to have a conversation with you, despite your insults which are fine, I don't mind. Yeah, you can't prove someone's intent, but you sure are saying what the intent of others are, which is why I was asking you about it.

I claimed only that people call him Lord. Whatever the motivation is will never be fully known, but it is used with reverence whether that is sarcastic or not and Phil calls himself King. I did not say you were specifically obfuscating this particular issue, which funny enough is obfuscating the subject of your obfuscating nature which proves my point perfectly. Can I be even more clear after this?

Doesn't seem to be supported? Can you claim otherwise? No, so we're stuck not knowing what exactly the intent, but the verbatim is always reverence. You are obfuscating your obfuscating nature again to put it on to this particular issue. Can I even be more clear after this?

If things he has done are not ok, why do you in any way shape or form continue to support him? Being here proves you don't approve of what he does but you're compliant with what he has done enough that he still has your support. Can I even be more clear after this? 

You did move the goalposts, if you can't tell that you did let me explain. My comment about "flavorful language" was specifically in reference to you trying to trap me into a specific scenario utilizing an obvious hyperbolic statement. You moved that to something I never brought up, declawing his cat and his autistic audience, which is goalposts being moved. Can I even be more clear after this?

You aren't trying to have a conversation, you are using logical fallacy after logical fallacy to try to poke holes in my statements and failing, which just further proves the part you play in Phil's personality cult. You are here to obfuscate or placate the people with concerns so that they remain part of your personality cult. You may not be intending to do this, but you can't deny your actions in just this conversation alone. Can I even be more clear after this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...