The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

Fana: "public figures get harrased, men more than woman, what does that have to do with thunderfoot again?"

I dunno. Lith keeps trying to make this all about Thunderf00t. All I pointed out is that his attack pieces lead to spikes in the harassment Sark receives.




Erronius: "Tanoomba, graduate of the "I can't lose an argument as long as I refuse to concede a point" school of thought."

This might actually mean something if you could find me a single example of somebody conceding one of MY points. Heck, I can't even get people to admit that I didn't redefine "harassment" after providing nine definitions that mean exactly what I said.




Lith: "Every other poster clarified why you were an idiot."

Translation: "Yes, I was grasping at straws and I'm too much of a goddamned pussy to admit it, lest I lose face in front of my circle jerk buddies."
Got it.





Lith: "Some of that sure is harassment."

Thank you. Jesus, it's like pulling teeth.




Lith: "If you isolate ONLY harassment, and then say "holy shit, this is ALL harassment, no just disagreement here!" that is idiocy Tan; you don't have to be a researcher to know you shouldn't base an opinion on pre-selected data."

Sure, but you (and Cad) seem to be under the impression that Sark considers criticism or people that disagree with her "harassment". I'm just saying she receives more than enough actual harassment not to have to include legitimate criticism under that umbrella.




Lith: "If those mean and abusive tweets, lets say there is 100 of them (It's less)"

I counted 157. It also seems like these are being presented as a "typical" week, in that they don't seem to be very topical (the timing doesn't seem to coincide with the release of any of her videos), just vague insults and personal attacks from people who hate her. I would certainly like to see a comparison between that week and the week following a TF video, but unfortunately we don't have that data.




Lith: "Were in a sea of 100,000 tweets (Not uncommon for her traffic). Than the "harassment" ratio would be 1/10th of 1 percent."

I'd like to see that data too.




Lith: "These people generate harassment, they do--but it is not due to her being critiqued anymore than Palin's was due to Stewart making fun of her...Understand?"

Heh heh... "Critiqued". Sneaky little bitch, ain't you?
I mean, you're partially right: Assholes don't need a reason to be assholes. Having said that, there are absolutely assholes who LOVE being given a reason, and TF profits from doing just that.




Lith: "Over 1 week she got less than 100 tweets, out of traffic from over 100k+ people EASILY. That is not a high amount of harassment for a public figure with a viewing audience in the millions."

In what seems to be a typical week, she got 150+ harassing Tweets. How many Tweets did @femfreq get in total that week? We don't know. Seems like you're just making a bunch of assumptions here.



Lith: "However, the fact that you even attempt to correlate any of this to her being critiqued?"

Dude. TF or one of the other popular YouTubers makes an attack piece, Sark gets a spike in harassment, often referencing these YouTubers by name. If you want to argue that they shouldn't be held responsible, fine. But don't tell me there's no connection. Also, LOL at "critiqued". Sneaky bitch. Do you not understand there is a difference between being critiqued and being attacked? The fact that you consider these one and the same clearly demonstrates how out of touch you are and how unwilling you are to consider a topic with logic and reason if it doesn't suit your ideology.



By the way, I know you're a childish and immature narcissist, but ending your posts with completely irrelevant and outdated jabs about moon landings is pathetic as shit. If you can't make a point by sticking to the topic, then don't try to cover that up with junior high posturing.

Lith: "Evidence? Show me evidence, Tan."

Like I said, I ain't got none. Heck, is there even a way to search through Tweets efficiently? Your word against Sark's until then.




Lith: "Was right after the uproar about her 25 benefits of gaming male, and she was giving major national interviews at the time due to GG...But yeah, nothing topical."

Wait a second, wait a second... "HER" benefits of gaming male? The video written by and featuring Macintosh? The ONE TIME Mac gets full credit but, somehow, this would lead to a spike in HER harassment? Incidentally, do ANY of those Tweets mention either the "25 Benefits" video OR the national interviews? Wow, dude. Confirmation bias much?




Lith: "The thing is, these aren't "attacks", people who label them as that are usually sycophants totally loyal to the target--for everyone else it's only somewhat harsh criticism and ridicule."

The thing is, these are "attacks", people who claim they aren't are usually self-deluded busybodies committed to "exposing" the target--for everyone else they're petty and exploitative personal attacks that ignore the actual points being made in order to generate controversy and clicks.




Lith: "You really are looking dumb here Tan, probably worse than the moon landing argument. However, how does referencing that make me a narcissist? Like what does that have to do with narcissism? And how is that outdated? It speaks so highly of your inability to reasonably judge standards and evidence, it is VERY pertinent to the current climate where you're trying to label mildly harsh critical pieces as harassment as "attacks". Surely you can see that, right?"

Lithose confirmed troll.

Agraza: "nothing is absurd for tan"

Would that were true, Agraz. Would that were true. Rerolled has shown me that absurdity not only exist, it has no limits.