I do agree we’re going in circles and you’ve now backtracked significantly from “it’s irrefutable and conclusive, he’s an animal abuser” to “well, there’s a couple of circumstances where maybe this happened.” You went from nothing being inconclusive to a few circumstances that line up. There’s a legal distinction between evidence and circumstantial evidence for a reason.

There is no something. He claimed it was a “vibration collar”, which has been debunked already because people found the exact brand of the device he was using, and it’s a shock collar.

So, one thing which I’ve been hammering on. You’re now saying, again, we unequivocally know the exact model number of the shock collar. A claim without any proof. That’s my point and has been the whole time. People online can claim whatever they want. Sometimes it’s true. Most times it’s not. Meanwhile, we’ve got an entire anti-vax movement based on claims like this. But we also all know Trump is a co-conspirator in the Epstein files. These are circumstantial as you’ve said based on what we have, but I’d lean to the anti-vax level of assertion because we needs lots of assumptions, which is what I’ve been saying.

Again, if you have irrefutable proof of what collar it was, please, share it. A screenshot from Hasan’s stream with the model # visible, etc. (Though that also ignores the Ethan claim of it not being torturous like you claim, being mild at best) I’m sure you’d bring down Hasan at that point, similar to how actually credible accusations finally brought down Graham Platner. I’m willing to admit I’m wrong, but I won’t stand on faulty ground and claim facts based on assumptions. That was my whole point this entire time. And you’re right, based on what’s available, I don’t believe it. You do. That’s fine. I’m just pointing out how incredibly shaky your “irrefutable, evidence based judgement” really is and how you’ve retreated multiple times to more defensible positions.

So, if you’d like to pull out, feel free. My points stand solidly as I haven’t had to retreat this whole time.

Holy shit the only thing you’re trying to stand on is that you can’t know for sure what he did off camera?

Literally no. That is what your argument did and still does stand on. Plausibility, not fact. You’ve proven a remote existed. Which is consistent with Hasan’s testimony I shared (along with the clips you somehow refuse to admit that I referenced which are linked throughout the articles…mmmk).

Now how far fetched is it he used that remote, which in turn causes the dog yelp.

Anybody catch the licensce plate of those goalposts? That’s pretty far fetched from there being nothing “inonclusive.”

Not a single shred of evidence

The clips. The articles. The testimony. My whole point this entire time is that what you claim as inconclusive is not. You claim it is torture. You have no proof. You claim it was a shock collar. You have no proof. Get it through your skull. You’re working backwards from your conclusion, literally saying “well how far-fetched of an idea is it?” That means you have to make a logical leap to get there, literally inconclusive, my god.

Now, one might say I don’t have any evidence either, which is certainly true, however, I think that my version of events holds up better if compared to the video.

So you admit that I’m correct. You claim things as fact with no evidence. We got there. That’s pretty far from “Hasan is an irrefutable animal abuser.” Now it’s “well, I think he is, and I have no evidence to back it up, but come on, I believe it so that must mean it makes sense.”

You think the dog just yelped for fun at that point in time?

My dog has yelped for seeming no reason before. He’s also slipped on a step and yelped before. He’s also gotten his nail stuck on his kennel before and yelped. Again. Inconclusive. We cannot know. But I guess you do with no evidence?

testimony

Yeah, one by hassan himself

You’ve already admitted you’re a bad faith actor. You admitted previously that no matter what Hasan says you will discredit it. You then try to claim “conclusive” evidence. Those contradict, for any evidence to be conclusive, you’d have to weigh it against the testimony of the “perpetrator” and it would need to hold up. Not “but c’mon bro, it’s not that far fetched.” You forfeited being worth taking seriously with that earlier.

other by ethan klein, who’s just guessing and I’m not sure how he gets to his conclusion

So guessing is literally buying the collar you and others allege is doing the “torture” and testing it on himself. If you knew how to read, you’d be sure how he got there.

referenced completely irrelevant points on the side like my opinion on bodycams

Sorry, I didn’t realize it had to be spelled out explicitly. You see, when a camera films from a single frame of reference, there cam be an interpretation of events, but it is limited by what is in frame of reference and what is not. People have been imprisoned using bodycam footage, claimed to be “all you nees to reference, it’s clear as day” only to be exonerated later with further evidence or different angles that tell a completely different story. In this exact case, you would be the police alleging that this man tortued an animal. A remote is there, the dog yelps, it’s all connected. Then, something would come out, perhaps that the collar is not a shock collar for example, such as the testimony, which changes the story completely from what you believe and is equally as plausible. That is the definition of being inconclusive as both stories are plausible with all the evidence presented thus far. Does that help? A “but is it that far-fetched” doesn’t suddenly make one more conclusive than the other. And attempting to treat claims as verified fact while these remain inconclusive is bad faith.

Roughly 30 minutes I’d say, I’m just checking in every now and then during deadlock queue time.

So 23 minutes to easily educate yourself, or even attempt to refute what I put forth, but you can’t be bothered. That tracks. Half that on 2x. Same reasoning is used to “keep x country for x” currently around the world. Hence why we call you out as a rightoid which you’ve also not refuted.

Well, you definitely proved you couldn’t read for a 3rd time. You don’t even understand when you’ve been refuted.

I’ve not called you stupid either, just that you’re perpetuating right wing talking points which are, yes, stupid. I did call you a eurocuck betamale. Which, statistically, still holds and you didn’t refute it so 🤷‍♂️

But yes, at the point, if you can’t mount a response when you say shit like:

There’s nothing “inconclusive” about it.

In the same statement as

does something off camera with his hand

I can’t argue with stupid, you’re right.

I stood on information, evidence, testimony, and the same clips you tried to say “just go watch bro.” You’ve got nothing. Literally nothing.

Also, how much time have you wasted here? The video and articles contain much more information than what I’ve condensed down. But you’re still here. I’ve got time so 🤷‍♂️ This “LLM” is certainly more evidenced and principled than you, but interestingly it’s not giving in to your bs. Weird, how do you explain that one?

Provides no evidence, just says “lol bro no” as evidence and repeats unproved claims as fact.

Which is factually wrong - there are collars that offer interchangeable contacts so you can adjust it for different dog breeds.

And is that the model being used? Well? Cite your sources guy.

I have the original clip. You can find it on youtube aswell. He says: “Kaya, please, just fucking go back”, does something off camera with his hand and then the dog yelps and goes back on his bed. There’s nothing “inconclusive” about it.

Well, you proved you couldn’t read earlier, but my sources literally link all the clips dumbass. From one of them:

In a clip, Piker can be seen telling his dog to settle down and seemingly reaching off-screen when his dog suddenly yelps and then lies down.

Wow, that’s obviously torture, unequivocally, no denying it, adjudicated in the court of law. You, yourself even said “he does something off camera” too. What is something? It MUST be a torture device! Absolutely conclusive evidence. Probably one supplied by “Hamas” if we let unfounded claims like yours continue.

Like, c’mon

does something off camera with his hand

There’s nothing “inconclusive” about it.

And:

I’m not watching a 23 min video tho, sorry.

Can’t read or listen, makes sense. The videos show how the conclusions you get from cameras at specific angles don’t show the whole story.

If you can’t handle that, how could we ever trust you to look at any evidence and make any kind of objective conclusion?

You can’t. Classic rightoid behavior. Like, again, whether you watch him or not, it’s the same response Asmongold gives, saying he doesn’t need to read, he just knows he’s right. Like you. Not based on anything, you’re “just right.” “It’s torture.”

No need to engage further, you’ve got nothing to stand on. Move on with your life. Maybe do a little reflection and you’d find some friends who actually respect you.

That is a fucking WILD statement coming from you, who’s only defense is: “ITS A RIGHT WING TALKING POINT!!! PLEASE STOP SPREADING RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS!!!”

Brother, I said shock collars don’t work on breeds like that given that the contacts have trouble making contact.

Heck, even Ethan Klein, an avid enemy of Hasan, even came out and said the supposed collar in use was a very mild sensation, far from “torturous.”

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2571860/ethan-klein-investigates-shock-collar-controversy-surrounding-hasan-piker

You’ve got Hasan’s statement, which you obviously discredit entirely as you’ve determined he’s guilty already

https://www.out.com/voices/straight-nonsense-hasan-piker-s-dog-collar

And further, the pushing of this narrative has led to threats against Hasan himself as well as threats to kidnap Kaya.

https://www.documentarytube.com/blog/hasan-pikers-dog-shock-collar-controversy-explained/

All based on a couple of ambiguous clips.

If you trust video evidence infallibly, you probably trust police bodycam as it could never be interpreted or abused to support a narrative counter to what actually occured, right? Right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP4_2soVZe0

I’ve got the articles, reports, and clips that all leave this as inconclusive at best. But go on, what have you got? Where’s your smoking gun that this is abuse? That this alleged shock collar was designed for maximum pain? The burn marks on the dogs yet? What have you got that we don’t that allows you to make that judgement your honor?

Fucking Brandolini’s law in action which is how right wing slop, racial supremacists, and grifters all shove themselves into discourse when they should remain as the dregs of society.

This is why I will infinitely respect those who take the time to educate themselves, look at objective reality, and come to an informed conclusions as opposed to drivel like you who work backwards from a preconceived idea and make claims with no evidentiary backing because you know it’s easy, requires no effort on your part, and it’ll get a rise out of people. Hence: right wing slop.

It’s called inferring. Most of his audience are outside of the US. This is also where the shock collar conspiracy thrives.

Difference is my inference is based on logic and yours is based on a bunch of online people repeating the same false talking point, whether it be Destiny, Asmon, or whoever. Regardless if you do actually watch those streamers or not, you lack the intellectual capacity to actually do any research or fact finding yourself and just repeat the slop from these sources.

every human on the planet MUST be involved in the american culture war, right?

Brother, you’re the one perpetuating a culture war between streamers with this shock collar conspiracy. We wouldn’t be talking about this if you did any research that didn’t come from right wing spheres of influence. And you’re getting defensive about it as you’re rightfully attacked for not doing the bare minimum of fact checking literally anything.

You didn’t have to confirm it for me via reading comprehension, but go on.

Might be hard for you to understand, but not everyone is american.

eurocuck

And when did this become litigated fact?

However, what I do see is that you are supporting a dog torturer

Because there was no torture nor shock collar. And you’re the one arguing that shock collars “have their uses.” Except not in this instance, now it’s torture because the online echo chamber says it is and because a bunch of people say it’s a shock collar, it must be. A bunch of people say the earth is flat too, or that vaccines “don’t work” and cause autism, are you a subscriber of those too?

C’mon man, nobody believes your slop.

How many animals have you rescued from shelters? How have you been protesting shock collar manufacturers?

They brought politics in because it’s a smear you’re furthering as you ignore the facts and you couldn’t give 2 shits about animals let alone other humans.

We found the eurocuck betamale Asmeinkampf watcher.

Even if that was true (ignoring the fact that shock collars don’t work on dog breeds with such thick fur and neck folds and the fact that the dog regularly leaves and is not on stream), if you’re so angry about it, why aren’t you protesting the companies that make shock collars? Or adopting animals from shelters that are overflowing right now because of the depression most of us are in?

Because it’s not about the animal or the care it gets for you. It’s pushing a narrative.

The fingers tho

What’s the problem? I thought privacy was a small price to pay for “safety?”

Sounds like that Kirk guy on guns.

CEOs are narcissistic unempathic mentally deficient pieces of filth. Exactly what capitalism rewards the most. Those willing to exploit others and the planet the most.

They have the ideology of rapists. Of course no one asked for it. Your consent was never a consideration. But don’t yell at the billionaire, you terrorists are hurting their property and the bottom line, boohoo, they’re the victim. Literal DARVO.

Yup, and I asked him at least 5 times if he believes that why is he not only on Lemmy, but moderates his own community on what he calls “commie garbage.”

He ran away every single time.

Dude tried to argue with me that ECC memory is why windows is better.

Yes, he’s that stupid.

He kept trying to argue that anything open source is “commie garbarge.”

You can see me completely destroy all of his arguments and he runs away like the MAGA bitch he is. Pathetic.

some are still hoping to find jobs elsewhere at the WMF

American translation: what happens here is you’re officially laid off. You then have to find an open position within the company and apply for it just like anyone else would. In theory, you’re supposed to have an easier time and the company will say they’ll help you. In theory. You still don’t have a job though and none of that is a guarantee. Most of us have sent out 2,000+ applications and get rejected regularly even from within our own companies. This can also succeed in firing you for a higher salary and hiring you back for less because that’s all there is. Or as we’ve seen, switching you from a full time position to a contract one, which does not require the employer to provide you with benefits like healthcare.

That paragraph I don’t understand. Why is union busting the only explanation?

Similar to what may have occurred at Rockstar games, to form a union we need to reach a certain percentage of employees to sign on and form it. If that number was being approached (all of this is normally done outside the company and in secret which makes it all the harder to organize) then, if suddenly 100 employees were laid off and don’t technically work at the company anymore, then they can’t sign on to form the union anymore. Especially if they’re able to lay off the leaders and organizers of the burgeoning union, this is incredibly damaging to organization efforts. So the paragraph is saying that an actual re-org doesn’t make sense, but it makes sense if the layoffs were attempting to remove individuals to prevent the official formation of the union. Which, while the company might say they’ll help you find a role within the company, if they suspect they were part of the union, itçs relatively easy to blacklist them.

the union was apparently formed exactly 90 days prior to the layoff announcement; under california state law (where they are located) “a termination within 90 days of protected union activity creates a rebuttable presumption that the termination was illegal retaliation”

Another reason it feels likely that the goal was preventing the union rather than a reorg. And while potentially true, it would have to be argued in court. And here in America, we don’t have public civil defenders to automatically be assigned if someone doesn’t have one or anything (ThAt WoUlD bE sOcIaLiSm!), so the “wrongful termination” suit would need lawyers, which are very expensive. And people without jobs receiving severance typically don’t have lots of money to pay lawyers, which I’m sure a corporation with lawyers on retainer, especially union busting ones, are aware of this.

Hope that helps explain our capitalist shithole a bit better.

We also have the right to vote, but Trump wants to restrict that too. So…yes, it’s entirely possible in the US. No one has the political will so far to do it. Gun lobbies are too strong and money is above human life, especially our children’s.

I love the irony that they do this but hide all of their info and want privacy, calling the police on anyone that comes close and claiming they’re armed lunatics. Classic police collusion, trust the CEO over normal people. Always protect capital

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3MQLlMbS-Y

Wouldn’t lose money if they weren’t stupid. How did all of us peasant folk see what was coming, but the savvy investors couldn’t?

But they’d never admit that we’re intelligent. That would ruin their savvy investor persona. Instead, we’re just too woke or have Musk Derangement Syndrome.

This is the real answer. Community.