> False. I said that a 3rd party traveling across the country to serve papers himself and then sitting in front of the house while police are called 4 times is needless YouTube drama.
Notice how you ignore the second quote? Anyone can literally search these comments see what you said.
I guess there's not much you can do to try to argue that you're not defending the company, when you're claiming the people exposing them are just creating "drama" and are not trustworthy, so you default to just pretending you didn't say it.
This is not pancakes and waffles. This is someone putting out a video saying a corporation is poisoning pancakes, and you at the same time say "the video is not trustworthy" while trying to claim you are not defending the corporation.
> You are awfully obsessed with stalking my comment history and then misquoting what I said.
I'm not stalking your "comment history", I'm just replying to comments in this post. Again, are you incapable of factual accuracy?
> False. I said that a 3rd party traveling across the country to serve papers himself and then sitting in front of the house while police are called 4 times is needless YouTube drama.
Genuine question, how do you think serving papers works?
> I'm not defending the company at all. My comment was about the YouTuber who got involved as a 3rd party for content production.
You have claimed the story is "just needless YouTube drama" and that you "wouldn't really trust the YouTube influencers for the whole story".
Unless you are completely incapable of understanding basic human communication, this obviously amounts to defending the company.
[flagged]
> False. I said that a 3rd party traveling across the country to serve papers himself and then sitting in front of the house while police are called 4 times is needless YouTube drama.
Notice how you ignore the second quote? Anyone can literally search these comments see what you said.
I guess there's not much you can do to try to argue that you're not defending the company, when you're claiming the people exposing them are just creating "drama" and are not trustworthy, so you default to just pretending you didn't say it.
This is not pancakes and waffles. This is someone putting out a video saying a corporation is poisoning pancakes, and you at the same time say "the video is not trustworthy" while trying to claim you are not defending the corporation.
> You are awfully obsessed with stalking my comment history and then misquoting what I said.
I'm not stalking your "comment history", I'm just replying to comments in this post. Again, are you incapable of factual accuracy?
> False. I said that a 3rd party traveling across the country to serve papers himself and then sitting in front of the house while police are called 4 times is needless YouTube drama.
Genuine question, how do you think serving papers works?
1 reply →
> That account is reminding me why I switched to using an anonymous handle on HN, though.
Because you can't ever admit being wrong?
You’ve posted EIGHT comments defending this company with what ifs.
ONE comment admitting you haven’t actually got any understanding of the facts.
If you were genuinely trying to get to the bottom of it every single comment wouldn’t be defending the thieves.
Are you Mormon too?