After seeing the comments on Ian's video & the new ones on Sam's, I'm kind of surprised how many people are open to the trolling on display. It's pretty cool that Ian framed the video so as not to spoil it. He took his viewers on the same ride he went on, so credit is due there. Sam's version didn't really showcase how invested Ian was in Dani & it wasn't obvious how much he was buying into the whole charade in general. Good on Ian for admitting he fell for it. Some people are blaming what seems to be a perceived failure of the doc on Ian not getting exactly what he wanted from Sam for not being genuine. Sam may have been in character 90% of the time, but there were moments when he expressed honestly to Ian that he was just trying to make the funniest product possible, so I would argue you can say he actually was being real in the end.
I don't think Ian approached this in good faith & here's a few reasons why:
The little lecture Ian gave on the "Circle of Irony" essentially explained that meta-irony is saying something you really mean, but the
context making it seem like an ironic statement.
He also explained during the video that it wasn't intended to be a hit-piece. When Sam asks during the interview if he's being punked, Ian says "You're getting punked, I'm gonna make you look like an asshole, which isn't hard" while playing it off as a joke & shows the meta-irony slide from his lecture onscreen for a split second. He does the same after saying he turned his hate for Sam into a passion for film-making.
He basically ends up contradicting & exposing himself, going by his own definitions.
Lighting from Sam's POV
Lighting from Ian's POV

It might seem insignificant, but to me it's a reminder of how subtle manipulation can be. Also how important it is to have your own receipts.
Most relevant to the discussion, is it shows a level of deceit which isn't zero. Based on Sam's footage Ian also excluded some of Sam's more articulate answers during the interview.
Another funny thing is that Ian presented his reason for bringing up their first interaction during the interview as a "reveal" during the one-on-one, and described it as something Sam "didn't know" when alone with his camera & expressing his reasons to his audience for waiting to bring it up until the interview. Just seems like an inconsistent narrative. Oh and even if all that is inconsequential, all it takes is Ian showing Sam donated to the daily stormer to nail him in a coffin. I'm sure Ian is fully aware of this. Either way for me this has been a pretty interesting, if moot event.