So I never really got this one. It seems like she is a polarizing figure here, but why is that? Also, what's the joke behind the "amber" bot?
So I never really got this one. It seems like she is a polarizing figure here, but why is that? Also, what's the joke behind the "amber" bot?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is the pattern I've seen the most of. She'll talk about touchy idpol topics without hesitation -- and usually in a way that's far from unreasonable -- and then people will play telephone with it until it turns into a vague accusation of her being bigoted somehow.
So are Amber stans just gonna pretend ep 435 never happened? lol that's fuckin hilarious
Amber.
This doesn't exist, at least not in a place where everyone routinely jokes about not even listening to the podcast. No idea what episode you're referring to, either, or what supposedly irredeemable thing she said on it.
If there's anything of value to be mined from a who-fucking-cares-about-this internet drama, it's that accusations aimed at anyone even broadly on the left should at the very least be specific.
Amber stans absolutely do exist, I should know, I was one of them, and I literally wrote Episode 435 so what do you mean "what episode I'm referring too?" and if you're so concerned with the non-"specificity" of accusations against left figures then maybe you should take a listen to the episode and judge for yourself instead of just reflexively defending some rich cocaine-addled hipster with dogshit politics
Amber.
Vague, ill-defined accusations of misconduct are cop shit. Period, full stop.
If someone's job was to wreck leftist groups, whisper campaigns like that would be high on their list. Anyone making such accusations should be aggressively pressed to state specifically what the problem conduct is, and should be shouted down if they keep reverting back to "no trust me bro it's really bad you wouldn't even believe it."
That conveys near zero information about what the supposed misconduct is. It doesn't even tell you where to find it; it just tells you where to start looking -- it's "sift through this 90-minute audio recording with no transcript for... something; trust me bro, it's there and you'll know it when you hear it."
A specific accusation would be "she said X, which you can find here at Y, and that's bad because Z." "Episode 435" is about half of that middle part, and the number alone doesn't even clue you in to the general topic of the episode.
Here's an example: "Felix said he'd have sex with his clone, which you can find in the first maybe 20 minutes of episode [whatever number, or give the topic], which is bad because being gay with your clone is a discount Cumtown bit." That's fine; vague accusations like "Felix has said some sus stuff about gay sex" is not.
"Shitting on me is akshually a cop move" is one of the dumbest debate tactics this forum has come up with.
good thing I said absolutely nothing like that
Or you can listen for yourself and make your own judgments....like a grown up
lol "cop shit" that's ironic considering 435 is famous for being the unironic 'pro-cop episode'
Yes, whisper campaigns -- which you keep doubling down on -- are cop shit. Make a specific accusation or shut the fuck up. This should be the way accusations are handled in leftist groups.
Amber.
it isn't a joke, the podcast is genuinely shit and i do not understand why anyone would listen to it
The point is that there's really no one here worth calling an Amber "stan," and the fewer people who listen to the podcast the more true that becomes.
Amber.
Amber.