Then we're at stalemate: I have no interest in watching these videos, and you have no interest in discussion. So we'll never find out why you're posting them.
The most interesting thing being your unwillingness to watch the videos. Why?
Then we're at stalemate: I have no interest in watching these videos, and you have no interest in discussion. So we'll never find out why you're posting them.
Amazing. Conversation is officially futile.
The most interesting thing being your unwillingness to watch the videos. Why?
With you - always.
you getting paid by the fucking click?? why do you think you can dish out demands and not answer a single question put to you?The most interesting thing being your unwillingness to watch the videos. Why?
you getting paid by the fucking click?? why do you think you can dish out demands and not answer a single question put to you?
Why should I? What is there in them I might be interested in?The most interesting thing being your unwillingness to watch the videos. Why?
Answers from you? where?'Demands'? Where?
Which poses the question of where the hell you watch your videos. You're not one of those awful people that watches videos on Bing are you?Why should I? What is there in them I might be interested in?
As a matter of practicality, though, I don't like YouTube videos and I've never watched anything more than the shortest clip that way. It's not something I find comfortable.
No, I watch TV on TV.Which poses the question of where the hell you watch your videos. You're not one of those awful people that watches videos on Bing are you?
Peterson gets completely pinned here. Not by an academic or a journalist (and obviously not by any of the students whose useless protests are only succeeding in getting him more fame and success) but by a comedian:
He is a good fit for the “give him enough rope” treatment
Saw this but didn’t want to be pilloried as a bits and pieces Walt
I linked to it from Peterson’s twitter, where he seemed to give a shoulder shrugging “fair one” in response
I’d like to think that he arrogantly thought a light interview with a comedian wouldn’t require much thought and he was free styling a bit. Which if you look at any of his lectures you see he goes off piste when it’s not a short sharp question-answer format where he is attacked and defends
He is a good fit for the “give him enough rope” treatment
He really ties himself up in knots in this one.
it's not actually him