Dear Onision, (Regarding The âfactsâ in your âDocumentaryâ)
First, let me say those were not âfactsâ nor was a ââdocumentaryâ. That was simply you taking clips of Shane (often out of context) & interpreting his thoughts/intentions in a way that benefited your agenda. The fact that you started the video off by claiming you donât tell people you âhardly knowâ that you âloveâ them, was a pretty good indicator this wasnât going to be an honest portrayal of you or Shane. Telling people that you âloveâ them, before you know them is something youâre infamous for. You literally told the 19 year old you âbetrayedâ your spouse with, that you loved her, the SECOND TIME you met her & youâve even admitted that one of your exâs broke up with you because you told her you loved her, even though youâd only been dating her a little while.Â
Now back to that dishonest mess you call a âdocumentaryâ. To put it simply, a documentary is something that provides a factual record or report. The key word there is ââfactualâ, as in âfactsâ & youâre interpretation or opinions, (regardless of how much you believe them or how âlogicalâ they seem to you) are not facts or factual. You canât play a clip of Shane saying/doing something, then provide your opinion of his true intentions or what YOU think he was âreallyâ doing & then call THAT a âfactâ. Just because your video was short on actual facts, doesnât mean you cab invent them. The only thing that was factual about those clips where that it was a clip of Shane saying words on video, once you started to give your interpretation or belief as to what his actual intentions were for doing/saying those things, it ceased to be a fact & became your opinion. You had to add in your opinions of each clip in order to get the clip to fit your need.Â
Another early indicator that demonstrated your bias & dishonesty was the way you took the clips out of context in order to support your biased perception of Shane. You took a clip of him talking about a strategy he would hypothetically employ if he was in a reality show (similar to Survivor or Big Brother), but with other youtubers & presented it as him talking about the âstatusâ of your relationship a few years ago. The fact that you tried take a clip of him discussing how he would play a âgameâ like that & presented it as though he was taking about ââreal lifeâ,  especially in the beginning of your ââdocumentaryâ, illustrates your own lack of honesty & integrity. I was actually surprised you were being THAT blatantly dishonest, so early in the video. Considering that you had to be dishonest in order to get people to buy into your perception of Shane, demonstrates that you didnât have enough evidence to achieve it honestly. Â
You used that same clip to try to discredit Shane by taking an obviously sarcastic comment he made (re: the amount of times you bring his name up in videos) & presenting it as being serious. When he said you mentioned him in âevery videoâ, it was clear he was using a sarcastic exaggeration & was simply pointing out that you talk about him a lot. Rather than addressing his actual point (you make a lot of videos about him), which you had no defence for & couldnât deny, you took the obvious exaggeration (you mention him in every video) & âprovedâ you didnât talk about him in every video you made, stating âfactâ after each point. Congratulations Greg, you proved you didnât talk about Shane in every video, too bad you couldnât present an argument refuting his actual point.Â
That fact that you thought this was an effective way to prove his dishonesty, only illustrates your own. This isnât anything new for you though, ignoring valid arguments & only addressing the obvious jokes used to make those arguments is your way of avoiding the actual argument. Itâs just like the time Blaire said you had an IQ in the negative numbers, as a way to say ââyouâre an idiotâ. In response you made a video triying to make it seem that she seriously thought that IQ could be measured in negative numbers. You may be adumbass, but youâre not dumb enough to believe thatâs what she said
The criteria you used to help âproveâ your point that Shane could be a sexual predator, came from an online article on â20 manipulation techniques used by predatorsâ further demonstrates your lack of understanding in this area. Instead of actually doing the research a decent âdocumentaryâ would require, you simply found some article online that was so basic, it literally only offered one or two sentences to explain each ââtacticâ, which is extremely inadequate considering the complexity of this issue. There was one tactic you didnât even understand or bother research in order to understand it. All you did was find an example (often a significantly weak example), of Shaneâs behaviour that you could somehow twist fit to the tactic listed & then concluded it met the criteria. Do you really think finding one example of a behaviour that remotely fit the criteria is all you need? No wonder you finished the documentary so quickly & a head of schedule, you barely did any research.
 As someone whoâs had to evaluate the risk to re-offend of both adolescents & young adults whoâve sexually offended (in court, for judges, probation/parole officers & child protection official), I can assure you, itâs not that simple. Even the author of that article would tell you that article is not meant to diagnose or even remotely be used in the manner you used it. The fact that you thought you could take an online article that basic, simplistic & incomplete & then try to fit examples of Shaneâs behavior to it & that would prove your premise about Shane is absurd. You literally showed a clip of Shane talking about an emotional topic & swearing, as âproofâ of his âmoodswingsâ as though that alone was adequate evidence to verify he meets that criteria. Even Lainey, with their B.A in psychology should know how utterly ridiculous your strategy/methodology was & that the article you used was so vague & incomplete, that fact you used it as the backbone of your criteria shows both your ignorance & laziness.Â
The ironic part of all this is that I actually expected something a bit smarter from you, both in strategy & in subject matter. The level of dishonesty & ignorance, the lack of research & grasp of the subject matter & the cheap & desperate tactics were even surprising for you. The fact that you came out from the start, taking clips & comments out of context in such a blatantly dishonest manner, then using some pop-psychology article that was so simplistic & lacking in detail, it wouldnât even be adequate for a pamphlet was surprising, even for you. Either you got lazy or I actually overestimated your intellect, willingness to be somewhat honest & your ability to research the subject matter. I figured the bitterness & resentment you have for Shane & the fact that a lot of people might see this, would have fueled you & you wouldâve really put some effort into it & been very cautious with your dishonesty. All you showed in the end is what most adults have been saying about you for years. Itâs kind of sad & pathetic, even for you.
izzy806
gummygunk
jbbartram-illu
snowghoul
