- Joined
- May 17, 2021
They are impromptu narcissistic rants for him to vent and talk to his closest parasocials.
Not that he puts too much effort into the researching of actual shows, but based off the 2-3 I watched in the last month, it is somehow even more 'seat-of-your-pants' word vomit at the camera.
Isn't the point of a barrister to take care of the time sink if they cannot remove all the stress?
You are expecting Nick to:
1. Do research (read: work)
2. Actually cover topics his people are interested in.
Is this a law school conditioning that lawyers fail to ponder 'jury nullification' in their commentary? I know that in a trial, they cannot argue that offcially, but as an outside observer it should be fine, right? Shouldn't be an ethical violation.
They nail the 'you do not want to go to court' angle, but seem to spend so much time analysing the legal standard to make predictions that have about as much accuracy as a magic 8 ball when it is left to a jury.
One final comment on the broken promises, but I have seen much of thr newer crowd playing down those who ask about things as recent as the 5k gift being late and express dissatisfaction. There is, in general, an effort to shield Nick from actual criticism by those newer viewers who are unaffected to the same degree by his toxicity.
The almost wholesale turn over in his audience tells me that Nick is not adding value to their lives, but rather detracting. It just eventually reaches a point where they are fed up. That does not seem like a healthy cycle for relationships (even parasocial ones).
You SHOULD maintain some long-term relations in your life, but Nick really seems incapable of it even with internet acquantancies. Who does he have in his life that he has known for more than 20 years that he still has relationships with?
Discount family because of kids and obligations, but only Drexel comes to mind. Nick seems like a 'user' to me who cannot maintain healthy mutual relationships.
