The Internet Is Evil! WAKE UP!

[zeoevil]

Do you guys just hate Sam Hyde or is there something actually wrong with that video? I watched the whole thing. I can't speak to his other content because I don't watch it, but there is some good advice in that video. You may not understand it because it doesn't apply to you, but it speaks to a growingly disenfranchised group. Whatever. To each their own. *shrugs*

[NTFMTS]

Cmon now, I hope you're not blaming me with the way you worded that. Sure you could say I took the bait, but I have no tolerance for bigotry, especially on this forum which I've loved to visit for years. I guess if I had known Arvy better before all the spam, I could've in retrospect been more patient or polite about it.

Not at all! Any blame is entirely with him, he had the control of whether to post or not. But if he feeds on getting reactions out of people, he certainly got what he wanted, and notably from you.

I'm sure we can all agree on the content of his posts and that there were several pleas to him and the moderators to stop it. I noticed whenever you challenged him in the past on his off-topic and propaganda videos that it was rare to ever get any kind of response back from him.
It felt at points that he was posting to get a rise. I don't know how the phrase "don't feed the troll" fits into this particular context but I'm sure it does.

Totally agreed here!

[rodox_head]

Do you guys just hate Sam Hyde or is there something actually wrong with that video? I watched the whole thing. I can't speak to his other content because I don't watch it, but there is some good advice in that video. You may not understand it because it doesn't apply to you, but it speaks to a growingly disenfranchised group. Whatever. To each their own. *shrugs*

"I trust them damn YouTube talking heads 'bout as far as I can throw 'em, but I trust the viewers even less! In a situation like this, I can't afford to trust NOBODY!"

phpBB [media]

[Alvin]

phpBB [media]

On the irony epidemic, I agree with Fantano’s claim that the quality of discourse was better in comment sections 10+ years ago. Not that it was fantastic then or anything, but it seems to have deteriorated, trending toward surface-level exchange. This probably has something to do with the sheer volume of voices now participating and the dominance of attention-grabbing content.

I guess YouTube is the most mainstream of digital spaces. In real life, you wouldn’t expect to engage in a complex discussion about art with a random person on the street. Yet part of me feels compelled to push back on that assumption. A random passerby might actually have fascinating insights given the right opportunity. A modern-day Socrates would probably take to YouTube to ask probing questions, disrupting the cycles of irony and sarcasm with deeper inquiries that invite reflection over reaction.

Deep thinking is difficult and most people are on the internet in the down-time between more important tasks. So humour is clearly going to be a popular mode of engagement that keeps us on these platforms with little, fast-absorbing “sugar-hits”. But what about deep humour? The kind that resonates beyond the immediate laugh? Humour that doesn’t rely on shallow irony but instead provokes thought? It exists but feels rare in spaces where algorithms reward brevity over substance.

Then there’s the issue of sincerity, which can feel like a risky proposition. To express genuine opinions or engage thoughtfully is to open oneself up to ridicule or even lasting judgment. With digital surveillance, every stance we take becomes part of a permanent record that could be weaponized or misinterpreted. It must be even worse when you have a social credit score. It would nudge you toward a certain fluidity of interaction.

In response, many of us are drawn to a more enigmatic style of expression. One that thrives on ambiguity rather than carefully articulated beliefs. This approach allows us to sidestep the vulnerability of fixed opinions, embracing a kind of fluid identity where we’re harder to pin down. It’s about finding ways to remain adaptable, avoiding the trap of having our identities irrevocably tied to any particular belief. Irony and humour in this context are like protective mechanisms allowing us to engage while preserving a sense of distance.