🐷 Ethan Oliver Ralph / TheRalphRetort / Rad Roberts / Jcaesar187 / Rage Pig / "Killstream" / "Tequila Sunrise" - 5'1'' fat alcoholic, owner of a gunt, convicted felon and revenge pornographer, property of the ugly failed tranny pornstar Lucas Roberts. Has quadruple titties.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gustav Schuchardt said:
LOL at the responses

https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1058520898775474177
http://archive.is/7AYmX
Click to expand...

Dat ratio is

perfection.gif


If this hashtag continues through the weekend, maybe they can get the WSJ social media manager to kill themselves.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Agree
Reactions: BuckBumble, sick_hypnotic, Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL and 6 others
Ma_Hooty said:
If there's any example to be made, it's right fucking now with the WSJ.
Click to expand...
Nope.

While this is the global deluge of PR disasters, this won't destroy the WSJ. All they need to do is fire Yoree Koh and run damage control and all will be forgotten. And besides, the media web is tight here. Yoree Koh's career will be over at the WSJ, but not anywhere else. The WSJ itself is financially protected (for lack of better terms). Everyone wins!

Except for the sick kids.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: AnotherPleb and tehpope
Yellow Yam Scam said:
You're catching on to what I'm saying.

Youtube does not want Ralph's content.
Youtube does not have a legitimate reason to delete Ralph's content (Once again, holocaust denial and the like is NOT grounds to getting removed from Youtube. You'll get delisted but NOT deleted.)
Youtube was given a reason to delete Ralph's content because of superchats which included things that actually ARE against Youtube's rules.
Youtube got rid of Ralph's content.

Superchats were the excuse used to delete Ralph's content. It was the mechanism that allows them get away with it in the eyes of the public and advertisers. Superchats legitimized their removal of Ralph's content. Without an excuse to delete his shit Ralph would be quietly plugging away in his own little corner of the internet, feeding money to Youtube and making a nice little chunk of cash for himself.
Click to expand...

What you're not understanding is that they could've just removed his ability to super chat. Which they did. They then took down the stream. When no super chats were going. If that is the case then the super chats are not the issue for removal. And like others said Zidan immediately following with the complete removal (he doesn't use super chats) then clearly some other reason for removal needed to occur.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: AnotherPleb, Dynamite Ninja, Ms. Cegination and 1 other person
Cinderblock said:
Hey, PR master, I've got your reasonable defence.

"We at St. Jude's Hospital, are apalled at the fact that organizations that promote hate have taken advantage of donating to our cause to promote their hate message masquerading as honest charity. St. Jude does not want any part of money used to promote hate and violence. Especially in the recent wake of attacks the nation suffered."
Click to expand...

the fact they didn't say that, haven't said that, and the fact you've got nothing but autistic ratings gives me the conclusion that you are autistic. sit down and let the adults talk, boy.
 
  • Autistic
  • Feels
Reactions: Oberspergfuhrer, zedkissed60, HarvurdChikee and 2 others
Yellow Yam Scam said:
You're catching on to what I'm saying.

Youtube does not want Ralph's content.
Youtube does not have a legitimate reason to delete Ralph's content (Once again, holocaust denial and the like is NOT grounds to getting removed from Youtube. You'll get delisted but NOT deleted.)
Youtube was given a reason to delete Ralph's content because of superchats which included things that actually ARE against Youtube's rules.
Youtube got rid of Ralph's content.

Superchats were the excuse used to delete Ralph's content. It was the mechanism that allows them get away with it in the eyes of the public and advertisers. Superchats legitimized their removal of Ralph's content. Without an excuse to delete his shit Ralph would be quietly plugging away in his own little corner of the internet, feeding money to Youtube and making a nice little chunk of cash for himself.
Click to expand...

Streetlight Stranger said:
What you're not understanding is that they could've just removed his ability to super chat. Which they did. They then took down the stream. When no super chats were going. If that is the case then the super chats are not the issue for removal. And like others said Zidan immediately following with the complete removal (he doesn't use super chats) then clearly some other reason for removal needed to occur.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. The content of the superchats don't matter. The point is that Ralph is a nazi and he's making money off of superchats. That's it. Content of them didn't matter. And again, Zidan had no superchat function and his channel was knocked out for no reason given.


Yellow Yam Scam said:
For sure, if they needed to. But it would have been much more difficult to do it without a clear and obvious paper trail (One that includes actual receipts, lmaooo all these morons are in a database now.) I think it's important for people in Ralph's shoes to work towards making sure they always get the benefit of the doubt but his fanbase's culture made that impossible.

Don't be surprised if they come for Metokur with this shit next since his full-proof defense of saying "I don't condone that superchat message" on mic won't show up in screenshots of his channel.
Click to expand...

Metekour could always disable superchats and solely use streamlabs. Not as much, but they can't really blame YouTube for that.
 
spoilered for readability.

Yellow Yam Scam said:
It doesn't make any sense, I agree. But that's how the system works. This is all a PR game and Youtube knows that actually banning entire human beings or arguments is thought of as indefensible by an amount of the population that they arbitrarily have decided is too high, so they avoid doing that and try to eliminate that content with quarantines and algorithms. That shit is shocking and strange to people. But they've also decided that the amount of people who see banning people for writing "hatespeech" in comments is much smaller, so they calculate that it is an acceptable thing to do. No one blinks an eye at that and they have PLENTY of examples of threats of violence and racial slurs to work with from Ralph's stream, many of which are from people who were stupid enough to link their comments with a credit card number.
Nope, I'm fully aware that globalist censorship is constantly changing and morphing threat. I'm just speaking about what happened in this particular instance. Ralph, himself, has material that is mundane enough to survive Youtube's censors at the moment. He's not the one saying outrageous shit, even when Spencer was on his show, nothing that was said that was that wild. But that doesn't mean that Youtube wanted it on their website and wasn't going to jump at a chance to delete it. The same thing will happen to Metokur and maybe even Rekeita if people don't figure out that they are making these content creators look bad.
Consider this: If someone who hated Ralph wanted to get him deplatformed and decided to try to do so via the chat, what would they say, and how would it look any different from the way that the chat usually looks? I'd argue that it wouldn't look different at all.
Click to expand...

You're giving ex post facto arguments for a deplatforming that you increasingly seem to agree with. The fact that they said it was the monetary income provided via private citizens with their own fucking money ought to tell you enough about how idiotic your current stance of "everything is fine, there's nothing wrong with this" is.

Iwasamwillbe said:
And now the WSJ is saying that yes, it's fucking super chats.
Click to expand...

It's an excuse that sounds spooky to the jackasses who'll lap this up.

Cinderblock said:
Hey, PR master, I've got your reasonable defence.

"We at St. Jude's Hospital, are apalled at the fact that organizations that promote hate have taken advantage of donating to our cause to promote their hate message masquerading as honest charity. St. Jude does not want any part of money used to promote hate and violence. Especially in the recent wake of attacks the nation suffered."
Click to expand...

That doesn't change the fact that twenty-seven thousand dollars have been refunded automatically due to mindless censorship.

Yellow Yam Scam said:
LMAO did this just go up? It's exactly what I've been saying re: the super chats. Ralph would still be streaming if his fans spent even one second considering if they really needed to use their credit card to recycle A. Wyatt Mann jokes in the superchat box.

It's just another example of the children having their play-doh taken away because a few exceptional individuals won't stop trying to eat it.
Click to expand...

You're still saying "Don't say what you want on the internet. You don't have the right to say what you want. If you do, the shows that you like will be taken down and the people making said shows will be - correctly - put into poverty"

What the fuck is wrong with you that you can't see what's going to come of a societal acceptance of such a statement? Are you really so short-sighted that you can't see what the ultimate outcome of such a policy is?

Yellow Yam Scam said:
You're catching on to what I'm saying.

Youtube does not want Ralph's content.
Youtube does not have a legitimate reason to delete Ralph's content (Once again, holocaust denial and the like is NOT grounds to getting removed from Youtube. You'll get delisted but NOT deleted.)
Youtube was given a reason to delete Ralph's content because of superchats which included things that actually ARE against Youtube's rules.
Youtube got rid of Ralph's content.

Superchats were the excuse used to delete Ralph's content. It was the mechanism that allows them get away with it in the eyes of the public and advertisers. Superchats legitimized their removal of Ralph's content. Without an excuse to delete his shit Ralph would be quietly plugging away in his own little corner of the internet, feeding money to Youtube and making a nice little chunk of cash for himself.
Click to expand...

Here you do nothing but reinforce the idea that you're perfectly fine with this. I wonder how you'd find yourself feeling if it was someone being censored who's opinions you like to hear.

Yellow Yam Scam said:
For sure, if they needed to. But it would have been much more difficult to do it without a clear and obvious paper trail (One that includes actual receipts, lmaooo all these morons are in a database now.) I think it's important for people in Ralph's shoes to work towards making sure they always get the benefit of the doubt but his fanbase's culture made that impossible.

Don't be surprised if they come for Metokur with this shit next since his full-proof defense of saying "I don't condone that superchat message" on mic won't show up in screenshots of his channel.
Click to expand...

You come off as someone who is unbelievably salty at the fact that some of this guy's fanbase made jokes at your race's expense at best, and at worst someone who's all for the wave of censorship at this point in time because it's not your, or people you like to hear from's neck on the chopping block.

I'd respect your opinion a bit more if you didn't try to couch it (poorly) in ambiguous language.

Streetlight Stranger said:
What you're not understanding is that they could've just removed his ability to super chat. Which they did. They then took down the stream. When no super chats were going. If that is the case then the super chats are not the issue for removal. And like others said Zidan immediately following with the complete removal (he doesn't use super chats) then clearly some other reason for removal needed to occur.
Click to expand...

No, they understand that just fine. It's just okay when it's icky people they don't like having it done to them.
 
  • Agree
  • Disagree
Reactions: Done, Garth, The Reaper and 1 other person
Cinderblock said:
Lol imagine stop trying to be yourself to conform to internet speds and their ratings.
Click to expand...

except i'm not?

i'm just using the available data to show why your argument is stupid as hell. my question now is, how long are we going to exchange pleasantries until you decide to either go away, or do something stupid to get thread banned?
 
  • Agree
  • Autistic
Reactions: Jill Kews, Garth, zedkissed60 and 1 other person
boulderblundermatt said:
except i'm not?

i'm just using the available data to show why your argument is stupid as hell. my question now is, how long are we going to exchange pleasantries until you decide to either go away, or do something stupid to get thread banned?
Click to expand...

I was talking about myself. I also disagree that my argument is stupid as hell. I think your is. It's better we leave it at that before we get the luchador masks.
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
  • DRINK!
Reactions: xX_rAcE_wAr_420_Xx, Dirt McGirt, hakuna matata and 4 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back