Idubbz has hurt channels massively though

Contrary to popular belief he never actually did anything to leafy

So did Jim have anything outside this guy talked to this one?

Guy named EmpLemon actually did a really good analysis on the death of Leafy and what kind of impact Content Cop has

I just saw on a site a literal copy/paste of the original nyt article, so I tried to Google for source and it seems like every other "news" site is referencing the NYT article which doesn't have any citations so like

do we actually have any evidence of this

Of the 18 or so he's done Content Cops on, like two have died, and usually for reasons unrelated

And no, there's basically no evidence

Death by youtube video

Give me a break lol

may as well get a hand to pop through the screen with a gun

bang

**Clutches pearls so hard he dies**

id like to allah akbar when i die

and im not even muslim

This is rather pointless. I agree a lot of skeptic youtubers (Matt) can act like total faggots, but why is he so hyper focused on them?

oh, we're still talking Jim?

Well do you remember about half a year ago when Sargon wanted to go into politics?

And he invited Jim to come help him?

Jim said it'd be a failure and waste of time.

Because he tried to pick a fight with Sargon and now he has to follow through or else it'll hurt his ego

Funny how that turned rather agressive.

It's got to fail for Jim

Because Jim -HAS- to be right

The two things with Jim he won't admit are a) he's a gigantic moralfag and b) he has an insatiable ego

Did Jim have anything Ironclad in his stream? @What Would Jack Conte Do?

Nope

Just coincidential non-evidence really.

Isn't he a Protestant? Way to kill that stereotype Jim... Really helping your religion out there buddy

```The memo, which the Times reported has been circulating since last Spring, asserts that agencies need to define gender “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.”```A) why wait so long to mention it
B) where is this supposed memo????

Okay, heres a thing that annoys me.

So Jim's philosophy is everything is doomed to fail.

Where as Sargons is the opposite.

Yet surely Jim would -want- his ideal to be wrong.

Why would anyone want that kind of philosophy to ring true?

Because Jim is a legit sociopath who wants to see the world burn

That's litterally my conclusion.

If there is one thing I have to criticise sargon for it's this.

Banking on E-Drama

Surely he's reasonable enough to identify Jim as this kind of character- even way before all this shit kicked off.

He keeps his main channel out of it at leasy