deleted
reply[flagged]
replySure, it's possible the serving was not done correctly. Even in that case, this does not imply, as you have claimed, that this is "just needless YouTube drama" (emphasis mine). There is clearly a lot going on beyond the obvious flashy setting which is chosen for the presentation.
replyArguably, no attention would have come to this matter if not for such presentation, and the perpetrators would have just gotten away with it easily, so it is in fact understandable that things were done in such a way.
Yet you choose to ignore the way more significant issues from B&M's side and focus only on the choices of dramatization of the events, which, if a problem at all, are only marginal in comparison. While further trying to use that a way to try to in fact discredit the more relevant issue.
I feel like I once heard a great word/phrase for this thing where people attack the "civility" of the messenger instead of the actual injustice being reported on, but I can't remember what it was now. It came up a lot during black lives matter protests.
replyIt's called "Tone policing"
reply[flagged]
replyHe's not doing any favors to a case that was essentially lost and dead by bringing tons of attention to it to the point where there's a chance it might actually see a positive outcome, plus a good amount of cash via GoFundMe? Sure...
reply>He is neither affiliated with the person who lost the legos
replyI haven't watched part 2 yet, but he absolutely is affiliated with the person who lost the LEGOs. He's explicitly working with the son, who was the previous person that was running point on trying to get the sets back until it ruined his life.
Diversity of thought enriches conversation. Are you uncomfortable with people holding opposing views? Are you inexperienced in debate?
reply