Failed philosopher Stefan Molyneux kicked off YouTube

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

Literally lmao ?

This ban will give him more peace than suffering. He needs to do what he is good at and it is not philosophy or politics. 

Very uncharitable.

Molynuex actually has high integrity because he doesn't run ads. So him asking for donations is totally fair. I see no problem with that. A donations based model for funding one's work/channel is admirable.

[Epikur]

@StarStruck

Good find. He makes me guilty not donating him.

I thought he was an established entrepreneur and saved money because of his intelligence and work ethic. I guess he needs more money for the big projects. He might have wanted to become the Elon Musk of Philosophy a Philosophy King.

[StarStruck]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Very uncharitable.

Molynuex actually has high integrity because he doesn't run ads. So him asking for donations is totally fair. I see no problem with that. A donations based model for funding one's work/channel is admirable.

There are a lot of people who don't like him. I think he just build up that karma. If you are mean to others they will be mean to you. 

Also about donations. If you have almost 1 million followers and you have to ebeg to not go broke you are doing something wrong. 

The customer is never at fault. It is the business model. To get donations you need to provide value. If not, one has to ebeg and use passive aggressiveness. His channel was already dying. My theory is that he just put out race theory videos to get his channel band so he could leave the stage with the victim hat on. 

[Zak]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Very uncharitable.

Molynuex actually has high integrity because he doesn't run ads.

Was he full of integrity not running ads or his YouTube videos were demonitized already?

Edited July 5, 2020 by Zak

[Leo Gura]

14 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

Also about donations. If you have almost 1 million followers and you have to ebeg to not go broke you are doing something wrong.

A) He has NO ADS! Of course he must e-beg. That's his revenue model by choice. Wikipedia does the same thing. They e-beg every December. As do all charities and non-profits. My mailbox gets full of charities begging me for donations every winter.

B) His channel is about philosophy and politics. It's hard to make tons of cash from that, especially without ads.

Quote

The customer is never at fault. It is the business model. To get donations you need to provide value. If not, one has to ebeg and use passive aggressiveness. His channel was already dying. My theory is that he just put out race theory videos to get his channel band so he could leave the stage with the victim hat on. 

I don't think you're actually try to see his situation from his POV. You are looking at it from within your own biases.

No one is saying the customer is at fault. His viewers are free to support him or not. It's their choice and there's no problem with that. People will only donate to him if they feel his work is valuable.

[Epikur]

5 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

There are a lot of people who don't like him. I think he just build up that karma. If you are mean to others they will be mean to you. 

Also about donations. If you have almost 1 million followers and you have to ebeg to not go broke you are doing something wrong. 

The customer is never at fault. It is the business model. To get donations you need to provide value. If not, one has to ebeg and use passive aggressiveness. His channel was already dying. My theory is that he just put out race theory videos to get his channel band so he could leave the stage with the victim hat on. 

I am not shure but maybe his channel was dying because YT algorithm was treating him "unfair"

As he learned acting begging can be seen as a marketing tool I guess. I think he has the ability to cry on command too.

Yes maybe he didn't had much to say anyway. He doubled down as a payback and nothing new coming and he burned bridges in the process. 

[Lyubov]

What did he do to get the boot?

[StarStruck]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

A) He has NO ADS! Of course he must e-beg. That's his revenue model by choice. Wikipedia does the same thing. They e-beg every December.

B) He lost his entire fucking channel. Good luck surviving that.

C) His channel is about philosophy and politics. It's hard to make tons of cash from that, especially without ads.

I don't think you're actually try to see the situation from his POV.

I agree. He needed to ebeg............ but it wasn't working for him.   I'm not saying he shouldn't have ebegged. He ebegged and his channel majorly flopped regardless. His video "my brutal year" was a testament that his channel failed.

 

13 minutes ago, Epikur said:

I am not shure but maybe his channel was dying because YT algorithm was treating him "unfair"

As he learned acting begging can be seen as a marketing tool I guess. I think he has the ability to cry on command too.

Yes maybe he didn't had much to say anyway. He doubled down as a payback and nothing new coming and he burned bridges in the process. 

He wasn't coming up with new stuff. Just rehashing the old anti-statists and anti-family stuff. Stefan was even tired of himself. It is easy to point fingers at others.

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, StarStruck said:

He ebegged and his channel majorly flopped regardless. His video "my brutal year" was a testament that his channel failed.

I think he should have just switched to an ads/sponsorship model. That would have been enough for him to thrive.

He could also have created and sold some kind of digital product that would have been helpful to his viewers.

Monetizing 1,000,000 subscribers is not so hard. The hard part is getting them in the first place, which is a serious accomplishment and success -- and I give him credit for doing that. That's really amazing for a philosophy channel.

Molynuex just needed a bit more biz savvy.

[Epikur]

34 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I think he should have just switched to an ads/sponsorship model. That would have been enough for him to thrive.

He could also have created and sold some kind of digital product that would have been helpful to his viewers.

Monetizing 1,000,000 subscribers is not so hard. The hard part is getting them in the first place, which is a serious accomplishment and success -- and I give him credit for doing that. That's really amazing for a philosophy channel.

Molynuex just needed a bit more biz savvy.

I think his "extremist" positions made him so popular. That on the other hand put him at risk to be banned.

[Extreme Z7]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

People call me a cult leader all the time. It's all too easy to call someone whose worldview you disagree with a cult leader.

That's not why people are calling him a cult leader, though. This is different.

Again, from his own Wikipedia entry. . .

"It was reported that, of the estimated 50,000 users of the website, about 20 (0.04%) FDR members had also disassociated from their families-of-origin, and that many parents chose not to speak to the media in an effort to avoid alienating their children further. The British Cult Information Centre (CIC) has described Freedomain Radio as a cult. A representative of the CIC said they were following FDR, and said that one sign of cults was that they cut people off from their families. Molyneux responded by saying, "If I advised a wife to leave an abusive husband, there would not be articles about how I am a cult leader"."

[StarStruck]

53 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I think he should have just switched to an ads/sponsorship model. That would have been enough for him to thrive.

He could also have created and sold some kind of digital product that would have been helpful to his viewers.

Monetizing 1,000,000 subscribers is not so hard. The hard part is getting them in the first place, which is a serious accomplishment and success -- and I give him credit for doing that. That's really amazing for a philosophy channel.

Molynuex just needed a bit more biz savvy.

He had almost 1 million subs but nobody was watching his videos because he is so long-winded and weird. Downward spiral started 5 years ago. Almost 3 years ago he went alt right and borderline racist(because he thought that was a smart career move) and that created a bigger downward spiral.

From time to time, I would peak at his channel, and from what I could see, is that his videos were never about philosophy. He used philosophy as a cloak to dish out his political videos. He got only 10-30k views although he had approx 1 million subs.

He created some digital products like some documentaries and that was a major flop. Nobody bought it and he made a loss on the projects. His lousy books are not good, nobody was buying them, they got bad reviews, so he gave them away for free. He can't monetize books that he already gave away.

Edited July 6, 2020 by StarStruck

[Epikur]

@StarStruck

Good insight

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Extreme Z7 said:

That's not why people are calling him a cult leader, though. This is different.

Again, from his own Wikipedia entry. . .

"It was reported that, of the estimated 50,000 users of the website, about 20 (0.04%) FDR members had also disassociated from their families-of-origin, and that many parents chose not to speak to the media in an effort to avoid alienating their children further. The British Cult Information Centre (CIC) has described Freedomain Radio as a cult. A representative of the CIC said they were following FDR, and said that one sign of cults was that they cut people off from their families. Molyneux responded by saying, "If I advised a wife to leave an abusive husband, there would not be articles about how I am a cult leader"."

Cult is not a binary. It's a matter of degree. There are dozens of factors that go into making a proper cult. One red flag does not a cult make.

You could call it "cultish" if you want to be more accurate.

I explain all this in my 2 part series, Cult Psychology.

[Onemanwolfpac]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

 

 

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I find him sincere.

I don't see why you must call him a failed philosopher or insincere. You simply have a different worldview than his.

His show was about as successful as you could expect it to be and it seems like he earned his success through hard work on his show. Why begrudge him for that?

Thank you. 

I would love thread starter to call into FDR and have a intellectual conversation on "failed." he would look stupid. 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Onemanwolfpac

[Onemanwolfpac]

3 hours ago, StarStruck said:

He had almost 1 million subs but nobody was watching his videos because he is so long-winded and weird. Downward spiral started 5 years ago. Almost 3 years ago he went alt right and borderline racist(because he thought that was a smart career move) and that created a bigger downward spiral.

From time to time, I would peak at his channel, and from what I could see, is that his videos were never about philosophy. He used philosophy as a cloak to dish out his political videos. He got only 10-30k views although he had approx 1 million subs.

He created some digital products like some documentaries and that was a major flop. Nobody bought it and he made a loss on the projects. His lousy books are not good, nobody was buying them, they got bad reviews, so he gave them away for free. He can't monetize books that he already gave away.

Nobody watches your vids. You have zero subs and you failed to articulate a argument. You failed in your first sentence in dramatic fashion. 

Celebrating cancel culture is a cowardly way to go through life. Its a common theme among people who have never accomplished anything nor added value. 

Leo is not celebrating this recognising the life's work he's put in himself and at any given time, it can be undone. Only a loser would celebrate that.

Welcome to my block list. 

/thread 

[Epikur]

33 minutes ago, Onemanwolfpac said:

Nobody watches your vids. You have zero subs and you failed to articulate a argument. You failed in your first sentence in dramatic fashion. 

Celebrating cancel culture is a cowardly way to go through life. Its a common theme among people who have never accomplished anything nor added value. 

Leo is not celebrating this recognising the life's work he's put in himself and at any given time, it can be undone. Only a loser would celebrate that.

Welcome to my block list. 

/thread 

Relax

[Parththakkar12]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Very uncharitable.

Molynuex actually has high integrity because he doesn't run ads. So him asking for donations is totally fair. I see no problem with that. A donations based model for funding one's work/channel is admirable.

Not impressed by the business model. I'd prefer someone running ads and doing business properly than relying on donations.

If you're a philosopher, you can develop yourself to have a credible perspective. In the business of being an intellectual, credibility is power. This is monetizable. Now if you have a morality that says you shouldn't, well...... I'm sorry, that's your problem.

Now if you're a conservative, the issue you'll run into is that you're not solving anyone's problems, i.e. you're not wanting change, rather you're wanting to defend the status-quo. That isn't very profitable as you're not doing anything! In fact, you're actively trying to hurt the cause of people who are doing something to solve society's problems. Conservatism makes it very hard to have a life purpose for this reason.

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, Parththakkar12 said:

Now if you're a conservative, the issue you'll run into is that you're not solving anyone's problems, i.e. you're not wanting change, rather you're wanting to defend the status-quo. That isn't very profitable as you're not doing anything! In fact, you're actively trying to hurt the cause of people who are doing something to solve society's problems.

Well, your theory is instantly debunked by the existence of Fox News and people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones who rake in millions.

There is an enormous market for conservative opinions and ideology.

But it does require some business savvy.

[Parththakkar12]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Well, your theory is instantly debunked by the existence of Fox News and people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones who rake in millions.

There is an enormous market for conservative opinions and ideology.

But it does require some business savvy.

I did say it's monetizable! What I also said is that you'll have trouble doing it because you're not contributing something that's useful to society. You'll have trouble turning it into a life purpose. Even if there is opportunity there today, that market will die long term.

Would you rather be a shadowy capitalist who works in the shadows, exploiting people's fears for profits? Or would you be someone who has a life purpose contributing something meaningful to mankind, solving real problems of society? My claim is that the latter will competitively beat the former long term.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Parththakkar12