zurew

It has a hard problem deciding between giving a creative response vs giving a factual response, because frankly, its a really compilcated problem to solve, especially if you want to combine the two (for instance you want it to do a roleplay as a scientist and explain complex things to you).

Because you can get easily addicted to it, and after a while lose all your savings. Maybe not from trying out once, but there are very very few people who can do gambling relatively frequently and stop any time if they wanted to. Its almost similar to say "why don't you try heroin?" Are you willing to risk getting addicted to it for a few hour of pleasure once in your life? Not with a person who has moral considerations only for himself.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210117143958/https://www.cobratate.com/phd-program/ - this was on his website in the past.

I can guarantee you that a large partion of them are like that. Whatever advice you see someoneis giving, you can automatically predict what kind of audience will go for it, its all logical. If you are a sexually frustrated incel, you will go seek advice from people who tell you how to get laid (for example pickup artist, redpill). If you are depressed with no purpose and maybe mentally unstable you will seek advice from people who can at least promise to lower your suffering or can completely uplift from it (spiritual teachings, religious teachings).

You definitely can. All spirituality and purpose kind of teaching brings a ton of vulnerable , weak,mentally unstable people, together because all of these people are thirsty for advice to get out from their own hell.

I think its definitely problematic for mentally unstable people, but he either do the big reach kind of broadcasting type of teaching or an exclusive cult type of teaching method (where he could screen for mentally ill people), which one is better?

Thats totally irrelevant what my definition is. What he did was this: when you say that I will pay the taxes for you, when in reality you don't pay any taxes. If that doesn't scummy or criminal activity to you, then I don't know what is. There is plenty of material in this thread, you can look through for all of the videos and twitter links:

Logs of him doing it. He literally described that in his own videos multiple times. He desrcibed it himself and told that pimping is not that bad and that he did pimping.

Sex traffiking, grooming children, hitting women, stealing money? Go ahead and show where and when leo did those things, or where did he get accused of those things? Also when did Leo got rich by manipulating 70+ women into doing sex work for him and stealing most of their money, lying about taxes to them? When did Leo create money with doing casino business and by that fucking over a lot of people and make them addicted to it? Yeah for sure, I can know with a very high probability from the words you are using, from the thiking process you are using , and from the fact that you are autistically defending him from stuff that he already agreed to doing.

He literally did his own self snitching and he literally described his pimping process, how he stole money from the girls, how he lied about taxes, how he had a criminal past and he had to flush his phone down the toilet. He literally marketed and bragged about not just in youtube videos but on his own website how to manipulate women and how he doesn't give a fuck about women, that he doesn't really care what women goes through as long as he can achieve his success and money goals. At this point you not knowing about any of these things, just demonstrates that you actually doesn't care about honestly evaluating Tate's character. We wouldn't expect you who's entire life is dictated and determined by Andrew Tate's ideology to think for yourself or to ever care about entertaining the possibility that your God could have done anything bad.

I definitely won't play the proving game with you, because I super don't care about your approval. I want to hear it again: So in your head no one can critisize anyone ,without critisizing 100 people at the same time? Is that a thing you want to go with?

I have been critcising Leo for a while now, probably more than most of you. The idea that one can't critisize someone without critisizing 100 people at the same time is just dumb.

No, they definitely wouldn't. Tate has a very naive, one way, linear kind of thinking and advice to achieve things. He is giving the same very basic advice to everyone, that everyone already knows.He is a very one dimensional guy very far from a system thinker and his advice on most stuff shouldn't be taken seriously especially on mental health, because he has no fucking idea on anything regarding to mental health and psychology.

Probably a lot more than to Leo. So much wise advice from Tate: "depression doesn't exist bro, just get better" , "Hold all your negative feelings to yourself, man up"

For a guy who think of himself as the most macho and masculine man on Earth, he is whining a lot and he is incapable to take accountability for his own actions (even though he always brags about to man up and to take accountability for your own actions). This guy who also think of himself as someone who broke out from the matrix and as a someone who can do whatever the fuck he wants, it seems that all of the cases that he considers bad, he is very keen to give away all his power and responsibility to the matrix and it seems that he often likes to play the role of a victim. Remember guys we can learn a lot from Andrew Tate: If something bad happens to you, just pull out the victim card. Even if all the accusations are false, he literally created all this shit for himself, by making a ton of effort to become the most searched person on google with the method of making a ton of controversial statements including statements that are easily chargeable.

His cult followers are crazy and embarrassingly stupid. Its insane what people are willing to do for one guy,who they have never met in their life.

Unfortunately, I don't think so.

Yes. Those are bots, so be careful with them and simpy ignore them, they just want to scam you and they pretend that they are the original youtubers. Sometimes they can get very sophisticated with it and if the original youtuber has an O or multiple O in their name, these scammers can swith that to number 0, and sometimes its hard to recognize that, especially if you are not assuming every time that someone wants to scam you. But generally speaking, it should be obvious in 99% of the cases from the narrative they try to sell you, that they are not the original ones, and that these are bots and they just want to scam you. I have seen cases, where half of the comment section under a video was made by bots trying to sell you a product or a story that this service/item is really good, and they liked each other's comments, so it looks like that 100+ like on every bot comment + they can leave a comment under each other's comment (so under a bot's comment that has at least 100 like, there can be another 30+ reassuring comment all from other bots with random names and profile pictures ), so it can get really crazy.

What unique solutions Islam can provide for what problems that no other ideology or religion could? That guy likes to tear down straw man arguments pretending that those were the real arguments.

top G(roomer)?

Because this way he can always hide behind the "I was just playing a character" whenever someone wants to hold him accountable to the things he say and at the same time virtue signal that he is actually a respectful and good guy in reality.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210117143958/https://www.cobratate.com/phd-program/ His phd program:

Wonder why don't they say that in all of the videos , where Tate did his self snitching were also created by deepfake. That would be even more hilarious.

what are you talking about? He admitted to most of the things himself , he did his own self snitching. At this point to suggest that him being innocent is as likely as him being guilty is just dishonest.

That was hilarious. "Okay, fair enough" ?