Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

5k SPECIAL, WHENEVER I POST I GROW REALLY QUICK REQUESTED EDIT, WATCH AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION, MAY CAUSE THROBBING GENITAL ORGAN AND HYPNOSIS #bbc #bwc chudaii wataa #babecock #denial #cuck #bimbo #goon #aspie #hypno #totallystraight

meatyrodposts's profile picture

1738

5,761 subscribers

22,351 просмотров • 8 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

NSFW#bbc#bwc#babecock#denial#cuck#bimbo#goon#aspie#hypno#totallystraight
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

I know everyone is really worried. We can only hope that it will all turn out okay. Somehow. Here’s a whole short #horror #film which may take your mind off all the insanity for a couple of fast minutes. There’s one thing which I know for sure: You’ll never guess the ending! Quick edit, big surprise at the end of this #movie. As usual, no subscription necessary and no cost to #watch. How about some likes please? 😊
6:26

I know everyone is really worried. We can only hope that it will all turn out okay. Somehow. Here’s a whole short #horror #film which may take your mind off all the insanity for a couple of fast minutes. There’s one thing which I know for sure: You’ll never guess the ending! Quick edit, big surprise at the end of this #movie. As usual, no subscription necessary and no cost to #watch. How about some likes please? 😊

NadelParis

72,442 просмотров • 1 год назад

Haewon’s letter to members… To Lily: Unnie is a very warm and clear person, but I think she is a person with even more coolness. Thanks for never letting NMIXX shake with your great power and supporting me so firmly. Also in past 3 years and 9 months I want to tell you that you worked really hard. I hope you take good care of me in the future. It may be a burden to Unnie but for me she is the biggest person I can trust and rely on the most. Thank you so much unnie. To Sullyoon: Yoona-ya, you're so indispensable to our team, sometimes gravely and sometimes affectionately. To us and the precious things in front of us, thank you so much for taking care NSWERs. You take good care of others so much like that. Sometimes, whenever you worry about something and have a hard time I really wanted to tell you that it's no big deal. Yoona, your worries are really no big deal you are just a special person. I'm so glad a special person like you is in with our team. Let's do well in the future. To Bae: I think I'm learning and learning so many things from you. I really respect people who polish themselves for a better tomorrow like you haha. There is also a saying that kindness comes from physical strength. In that sense, you are the pillar to make our team truly healthy and strong. Thank you for being so kind and warm to your sisters. But every time you cry I'm worried about what's inside you for no reason. I've received a lot from you over the past years. I hope you learned from me too, I’ll wait. To Jiwoo: Jiwoo, as I always say, you are such a lovely person. She is a person who can share the love she receive, and we have a job that requires us to be loved to survive. Today, at the concert hall, everything was filled with love, through words, through actions, through the stage...let’s be who and what we can be. I'm still lacking in those, that's why I hope you can teach me well. Thank you so much To Kyujin: Maknae-ya. There are many good things about being the youngest, but there must be a lot of hardships as well. As I watch you quietly expand your world, I see you shining more and more as time goes by. As I look at you, I think of my past self and reflect a lot, and I feel like I keep receiving more. However, there are five older sisters behind you and so many people who have worked hard in front of us, so I hope you don't work too hard. I hope you show me your innocent and cute side sometimes, like the day I first met you when you were twelve. Thank you for your hard work.
5:41

Haewon’s letter to members… To Lily: Unnie is a very warm and clear person, but I think she is a person with even more coolness. Thanks for never letting NMIXX shake with your great power and supporting me so firmly. Also in past 3 years and 9 months I want to tell you that you worked really hard. I hope you take good care of me in the future. It may be a burden to Unnie but for me she is the biggest person I can trust and rely on the most. Thank you so much unnie. To Sullyoon: Yoona-ya, you're so indispensable to our team, sometimes gravely and sometimes affectionately. To us and the precious things in front of us, thank you so much for taking care NSWERs. You take good care of others so much like that. Sometimes, whenever you worry about something and have a hard time I really wanted to tell you that it's no big deal. Yoona, your worries are really no big deal you are just a special person. I'm so glad a special person like you is in with our team. Let's do well in the future. To Bae: I think I'm learning and learning so many things from you. I really respect people who polish themselves for a better tomorrow like you haha. There is also a saying that kindness comes from physical strength. In that sense, you are the pillar to make our team truly healthy and strong. Thank you for being so kind and warm to your sisters. But every time you cry I'm worried about what's inside you for no reason. I've received a lot from you over the past years. I hope you learned from me too, I’ll wait. To Jiwoo: Jiwoo, as I always say, you are such a lovely person. She is a person who can share the love she receive, and we have a job that requires us to be loved to survive. Today, at the concert hall, everything was filled with love, through words, through actions, through the stage...let’s be who and what we can be. I'm still lacking in those, that's why I hope you can teach me well. Thank you so much To Kyujin: Maknae-ya. There are many good things about being the youngest, but there must be a lot of hardships as well. As I watch you quietly expand your world, I see you shining more and more as time goes by. As I look at you, I think of my past self and reflect a lot, and I feel like I keep receiving more. However, there are five older sisters behind you and so many people who have worked hard in front of us, so I hope you don't work too hard. I hope you show me your innocent and cute side sometimes, like the day I first met you when you were twelve. Thank you for your hard work.

sʇɹɐɥƆ XXIWN

181,276 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

🚨 I really would love to think that you will see this comment in the 7000 comments you have, but you probably will not, however the election was rigged. They most likely did it from the USBs and the power supplies for ES&S and Dominion machines. The statistical analysis shows this to be true. Very famous statisticians who monitor elections like Dr Walter Mebanehave verified the data in the analysis for Pennsylvania North Carolina WITH HIS OWN ANALYSIS. I really wish somebody at the upper levels would at least agree to meet with myself or the people that have been doing this STATISTICAL ANALYSIS so we can at least show you what we have. You don't have to do anything with it but at least you could see it. Because they stole the election. THE NON-HUMAN VOTING PATTERN IN NV WAS ASSESSED TO ONLY BE HUMAN AT THE RATE OF 0.0001%. This is what you see when the vote was manipulated. 💥 This is the longer version. Then I'll post a quick one. Of you watch this please comment seen and if you already knew this in your gut, please comment seen and cosigned. This is ETA data.
9:07

🚨 I really would love to think that you will see this comment in the 7000 comments you have, but you probably will not, however the election was rigged. They most likely did it from the USBs and the power supplies for ES&S and Dominion machines. The statistical analysis shows this to be true. Very famous statisticians who monitor elections like Dr Walter Mebanehave verified the data in the analysis for Pennsylvania North Carolina WITH HIS OWN ANALYSIS. I really wish somebody at the upper levels would at least agree to meet with myself or the people that have been doing this STATISTICAL ANALYSIS so we can at least show you what we have. You don't have to do anything with it but at least you could see it. Because they stole the election. THE NON-HUMAN VOTING PATTERN IN NV WAS ASSESSED TO ONLY BE HUMAN AT THE RATE OF 0.0001%. This is what you see when the vote was manipulated. 💥 This is the longer version. Then I'll post a quick one. Of you watch this please comment seen and if you already knew this in your gut, please comment seen and cosigned. This is ETA data.

Kristine (@schachin on Threads) 🇺🇦

14,539 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

"That's the type of brainwashing we're up against right now: You'll talk to vaccine-injured nurses, doctors, even EMTs, and they still don't want to come out against it because of fear...they don't want to know that they're dying or going to possibly die." This clip of Harry Fisher (Harry Fisher), an EMT paramedic and military veteran, is taken from an interview with Nurse Michelle of NursesOutLoud (Nurses Out Loud) posted to Rumble on May 20, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "I've worked in Alaska. I've just stopped working in Alaska, months back, just, I guess about six months ago, whenever I got I got fired for my online presence and for not wanting to give the COVID shots. They were still trying to give these COVID shots to people in Alaska. And I had a problem with that. I don't want to poison people. And I was openly telling them, I don't want to do this. "And, so I got, after working, you know, a couple years out in Alaska in the tundra, they ended up separating employment because of my online presence and because I wouldn't give those shots to people. Even though my, my doctor that was actually in charge of all of us, our medical director is vaccine injured themselves, and they still wanted to give this substance to other people. "That, that's the type of brainwashing we're up against right now. You'll talk to vaccine injured nurses, doctors, even EMTs, and they still don't want to come out against it because of fear. Most people are so afraid of getting fired. And that's because the suits, I call them the suits, the people that are the money makers of our healthcare industry, they're still on board with these shots because they'll be held liable if they're not. "I mean, they should be being held liable now, as you well know. We should. There should be lawsuits out the wazoo at this point. So many injured people. But most of them are either in denial because they took them and they don't want to know that they're dying or going to possibly die from the substance, or they're just covering, you know, CYA. They're covering their butts because they know the lawsuits are coming. "And, what, 10 years from now from the ones that are still alive, you'll start hearing on the TV if you ever took Pfizer, dial 1-800- you could be, you know, getting money for that substance. We know it's coming. It's just coming at such a slow pace that sadly, most of the, most of the victims will be dead by then. It's really that horrific. "If you would have asked me when I was younger, would you be online all the time trying to stop a substance that, that pharma's pushing? I would have been like, no, because I was so bought into the pharmaceutical system. I thought they really do care about us. Whenever they say safe, things are safe. And I realized really quick that, that they will lie to you, they will abuse you and expect you to shut up and sit down and stay in your lane. "And I would suggest people come out like Nurse Michele and like me. And consider consider saving your fellow human. Human beings your lane. Because that should be all of our lane. And don't let anybody to tell you get out of it."
2:29

"That's the type of brainwashing we're up against right now: You'll talk to vaccine-injured nurses, doctors, even EMTs, and they still don't want to come out against it because of fear...they don't want to know that they're dying or going to possibly die." This clip of Harry Fisher (Harry Fisher), an EMT paramedic and military veteran, is taken from an interview with Nurse Michelle of NursesOutLoud (Nurses Out Loud) posted to Rumble on May 20, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "I've worked in Alaska. I've just stopped working in Alaska, months back, just, I guess about six months ago, whenever I got I got fired for my online presence and for not wanting to give the COVID shots. They were still trying to give these COVID shots to people in Alaska. And I had a problem with that. I don't want to poison people. And I was openly telling them, I don't want to do this. "And, so I got, after working, you know, a couple years out in Alaska in the tundra, they ended up separating employment because of my online presence and because I wouldn't give those shots to people. Even though my, my doctor that was actually in charge of all of us, our medical director is vaccine injured themselves, and they still wanted to give this substance to other people. "That, that's the type of brainwashing we're up against right now. You'll talk to vaccine injured nurses, doctors, even EMTs, and they still don't want to come out against it because of fear. Most people are so afraid of getting fired. And that's because the suits, I call them the suits, the people that are the money makers of our healthcare industry, they're still on board with these shots because they'll be held liable if they're not. "I mean, they should be being held liable now, as you well know. We should. There should be lawsuits out the wazoo at this point. So many injured people. But most of them are either in denial because they took them and they don't want to know that they're dying or going to possibly die from the substance, or they're just covering, you know, CYA. They're covering their butts because they know the lawsuits are coming. "And, what, 10 years from now from the ones that are still alive, you'll start hearing on the TV if you ever took Pfizer, dial 1-800- you could be, you know, getting money for that substance. We know it's coming. It's just coming at such a slow pace that sadly, most of the, most of the victims will be dead by then. It's really that horrific. "If you would have asked me when I was younger, would you be online all the time trying to stop a substance that, that pharma's pushing? I would have been like, no, because I was so bought into the pharmaceutical system. I thought they really do care about us. Whenever they say safe, things are safe. And I realized really quick that, that they will lie to you, they will abuse you and expect you to shut up and sit down and stay in your lane. "And I would suggest people come out like Nurse Michele and like me. And consider consider saving your fellow human. Human beings your lane. Because that should be all of our lane. And don't let anybody to tell you get out of it."

Sense Receptor

29,014 просмотров • 1 год назад

these 2 compilation truly got me in tears so i had to share it with yall, credit to op (main post in replies) for the edits 🥹 #JimmySea #จิมมี่ซี #jimmyyjp #sea_tawinan (sub for 1/2) 💜: sometime love is something that we do not need to explicitly express it, it's not necessary to do so. i think when people love each other, the most important period is the period when there are problems. 💜: whenever a problem arises, we'll talk about it 🩵: yes we talk when a problem arises 💜: but in the past we didn't do so 🩵: yeah we didn't do so in the past 🩵: when we have a problem, it's easy to fix the problem. because he speaks directly about it. in the past he reached out often until the end he's like ok we live our own lives. until after a while, i realised i should start to reach out to him too. because i felt, hey, i can't be this way, i need to try to adjust to him as well 🩵: because whenever there's anything that affects me, i no longer wait, in the past i will just stay silent. until i realised i should reach out to talk to him too. ---- 💜: whenever we have a problem, we can get through this together, it means, that person is the person we love. 🩵: i care for him a lot, but i don't say it! yes i care but i don't say it. i care and not say it out. 💜: i also care about the person i love all the time, but i don't explicitly express my care in words, but maybe more so by actions. 🩵: the thing that.. sometimes he don't express it out in words of "i love you" "i'm worried about you" but he does so in actions for you to know that he feels that way. he will use actions more than he does with words. and that's something i truly like about him. he supports you to his fullest no matter if it's about work or other things. ---- 💜: during the times that might be difficult or where there may be problems, those times when you have someone someone who loves you or who is there for you- 🩵: something to tell him? "i won't let your hand go". i won't let his hand go, no matter whatever we may face, i won't let go! i've been here with him for almost 5 years now. i feel that whatever that we may face in the future that may separate us, i wouldn't let him go. ---- (sub for 2/2) 🩵: i won't separate from him. i just feel that, since the beginning, we've been on the same boat and we have been through so much together. whatever hardships or arguments we may face, i will not let go of his hand. 🩵: i've already understood this person, i don't want to adjust with another person anymore. this person is already the best. no matter how silly or playful he is, i will be here. no matter how silly, stubborn or playful he may be, i won't separate from him. 💜: the previous sentence he said is really true 😂 🩵: noo i was just saying in a comparative manner- no matter what he is like, i already understand him. 💜: sea is a person who has emotionally supported me the most in the past 6 months. more than thanking him, i would like to apologise to him. sometimes, phi might not be as lovely or at times i'm physically present but my heart and mind is thinking about something else. but it's not about something ridiculous but more so things that i have to do in my life to survive, so i would like to say i'm sorry. i would like to apologise for the times that i have been neglectful. and thank you for trusting me always. 🩵: i know how he is like and with that, it makes me feel like - i don't want to separate from him. time for y'all to cry along with me because this edit beautifully portrayed jimmy's relationship and how you can see a distinctive contrast from the magazine interview in march 2025, to their recent interviews in sep and oct 2025. thei relationship has developed and bloomed so beautifully i'm so happy for them 😭
2:08

these 2 compilation truly got me in tears so i had to share it with yall, credit to op (main post in replies) for the edits 🥹 #JimmySea #จิมมี่ซี #jimmyyjp #sea_tawinan (sub for 1/2) 💜: sometime love is something that we do not need to explicitly express it, it's not necessary to do so. i think when people love each other, the most important period is the period when there are problems. 💜: whenever a problem arises, we'll talk about it 🩵: yes we talk when a problem arises 💜: but in the past we didn't do so 🩵: yeah we didn't do so in the past 🩵: when we have a problem, it's easy to fix the problem. because he speaks directly about it. in the past he reached out often until the end he's like ok we live our own lives. until after a while, i realised i should start to reach out to him too. because i felt, hey, i can't be this way, i need to try to adjust to him as well 🩵: because whenever there's anything that affects me, i no longer wait, in the past i will just stay silent. until i realised i should reach out to talk to him too. ---- 💜: whenever we have a problem, we can get through this together, it means, that person is the person we love. 🩵: i care for him a lot, but i don't say it! yes i care but i don't say it. i care and not say it out. 💜: i also care about the person i love all the time, but i don't explicitly express my care in words, but maybe more so by actions. 🩵: the thing that.. sometimes he don't express it out in words of "i love you" "i'm worried about you" but he does so in actions for you to know that he feels that way. he will use actions more than he does with words. and that's something i truly like about him. he supports you to his fullest no matter if it's about work or other things. ---- 💜: during the times that might be difficult or where there may be problems, those times when you have someone someone who loves you or who is there for you- 🩵: something to tell him? "i won't let your hand go". i won't let his hand go, no matter whatever we may face, i won't let go! i've been here with him for almost 5 years now. i feel that whatever that we may face in the future that may separate us, i wouldn't let him go. ---- (sub for 2/2) 🩵: i won't separate from him. i just feel that, since the beginning, we've been on the same boat and we have been through so much together. whatever hardships or arguments we may face, i will not let go of his hand. 🩵: i've already understood this person, i don't want to adjust with another person anymore. this person is already the best. no matter how silly or playful he is, i will be here. no matter how silly, stubborn or playful he may be, i won't separate from him. 💜: the previous sentence he said is really true 😂 🩵: noo i was just saying in a comparative manner- no matter what he is like, i already understand him. 💜: sea is a person who has emotionally supported me the most in the past 6 months. more than thanking him, i would like to apologise to him. sometimes, phi might not be as lovely or at times i'm physically present but my heart and mind is thinking about something else. but it's not about something ridiculous but more so things that i have to do in my life to survive, so i would like to say i'm sorry. i would like to apologise for the times that i have been neglectful. and thank you for trusting me always. 🩵: i know how he is like and with that, it makes me feel like - i don't want to separate from him. time for y'all to cry along with me because this edit beautifully portrayed jimmy's relationship and how you can see a distinctive contrast from the magazine interview in march 2025, to their recent interviews in sep and oct 2025. thei relationship has developed and bloomed so beautifully i'm so happy for them 😭

𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿 ʲˢ ♡ྀི

23,971 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Usually, door to door campaign is a minute by minute, door per door interactive coast. But sometime last week, as I joined the Canadian MP from the Liberal Party and Member of the House of Commons since 2021 and Minister of Families, Children and Social Development of Canada (2023–2025), Jenna Sudds on her door to door campaign in Canada's most crucial election, I understudied the vibe of a right-leaning female voter, who told me point-blank she was voting conservative. But because she said it with a firm resolve but an amiable smile, I hung to her brittled welcome and stretched my thin luck hanging on the threshold as she held the door and could shut it on me any moment. “So, is there a particular reason you’ll be voting Conservatives?”, I managed to ask. She said, “Because I want a change”. I asked her politely and with a smile...”Do you really want a chance or you want to risk a voyage into the unknown and end up with a government that may assume an ultra nationalistic “MESSIAH” role and undervalue your opinion just because they feel they own the blueprint for a national rebirth?”. I asked further, “Have you seen what’s going on in America?” Is that the kind of Canada that you want?” She vehemently said NO! Then I told her, Jenna Sudds has a track record for seconding and voting in favour of legislation which sought to advance women's rights, affordable housing, and worker's rights. She has voiced legislative support to ban the practice of conversion therapy, which passed the House of Commons in a unanimous vote. She has been a vehement supporter of economic actions to strengthen Canada's technology sector, particularly semiconductor fabrication and critical mineral development. I said “No government is perfect but Libs won’t desecrate your sense of esteem.” Then she said, “Eeerm, well, my neighbor has a child with a special need and she told me Jenna Sudds has been wonderful in her focus on children despite the post pandemic challenges”. I said “right there, is why you shouldn't change a winning team”! I added, “at the core of Jenna Sudds campaign promise is a sustained effort to bolster robust children education and care as consistent with best practices”. As I saw the vibe was right, I indulged by asking “Now, will you bless my effort here today with your prayer for her success at the polls and switch your vote for liberals?” She looked at me with a squint in her eyes and a probing smile and said, “Ok, you got my vote and my husband's vote, I hope Jenna Sudds will make it count”. I said, she will..she knows on her we count. Don’t walk Canada into a nightmare…Re-elect Jenna Sudds !
2:42

Usually, door to door campaign is a minute by minute, door per door interactive coast. But sometime last week, as I joined the Canadian MP from the Liberal Party and Member of the House of Commons since 2021 and Minister of Families, Children and Social Development of Canada (2023–2025), Jenna Sudds on her door to door campaign in Canada's most crucial election, I understudied the vibe of a right-leaning female voter, who told me point-blank she was voting conservative. But because she said it with a firm resolve but an amiable smile, I hung to her brittled welcome and stretched my thin luck hanging on the threshold as she held the door and could shut it on me any moment. “So, is there a particular reason you’ll be voting Conservatives?”, I managed to ask. She said, “Because I want a change”. I asked her politely and with a smile...”Do you really want a chance or you want to risk a voyage into the unknown and end up with a government that may assume an ultra nationalistic “MESSIAH” role and undervalue your opinion just because they feel they own the blueprint for a national rebirth?”. I asked further, “Have you seen what’s going on in America?” Is that the kind of Canada that you want?” She vehemently said NO! Then I told her, Jenna Sudds has a track record for seconding and voting in favour of legislation which sought to advance women's rights, affordable housing, and worker's rights. She has voiced legislative support to ban the practice of conversion therapy, which passed the House of Commons in a unanimous vote. She has been a vehement supporter of economic actions to strengthen Canada's technology sector, particularly semiconductor fabrication and critical mineral development. I said “No government is perfect but Libs won’t desecrate your sense of esteem.” Then she said, “Eeerm, well, my neighbor has a child with a special need and she told me Jenna Sudds has been wonderful in her focus on children despite the post pandemic challenges”. I said “right there, is why you shouldn't change a winning team”! I added, “at the core of Jenna Sudds campaign promise is a sustained effort to bolster robust children education and care as consistent with best practices”. As I saw the vibe was right, I indulged by asking “Now, will you bless my effort here today with your prayer for her success at the polls and switch your vote for liberals?” She looked at me with a squint in her eyes and a probing smile and said, “Ok, you got my vote and my husband's vote, I hope Jenna Sudds will make it count”. I said, she will..she knows on her we count. Don’t walk Canada into a nightmare…Re-elect Jenna Sudds !

Akin Fadeyi

29,070 просмотров • 1 год назад

Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger on why rich parents shouldn't blame their kids for lacking drive: At a Berkshire meeting, Sumit Maharra from Kashmir, India, asks Buffett a sharp question: If you live in a rich society, it's hard to get your kids to work hard because they simply don't need to. So how would you incentivize a child to compete against the hungry, highly motivated kids from emerging markets? Buffett's answer starts with what not to do: "I think certainly that if you are very rich and you bring up your kids to think that they are more important in society or that they have some special privilege simply because they came out of the right womb, that's just a terrible mistake." He points to Munger as proof it can be done well, noting that Charlie raised eight children he knows quite well, and none of them carry that sense of entitlement. Then comes his warning about the outcome: "If you really are going to raise your kids to think that other people should do all the work for them and that they will be entitled to sit around and fan themselves for the rest of their lives, you will probably not get a good result." Buffett adds a piece of counterintuitive advice. The goal isn't to push kids to surpass you at your own game: "The one thing I don't think you want to give them an incentive to do is try and outdo their parents at what their parents happen to be good at. I don't think that makes sense, whether you're a professional athlete or a rich person or whatever it may be." And here's the line that flips the entire question back on the parent: "If you're rich and your kids turn out to have no incentives, I don't think you should point at them; I think you should probably point at yourself." Munger takes it even further, accepting that some incentives are simply lost the moment you raise a child in affluence: "I don't think you can raise children in an affluent family and have them love working 60 hours a week in the hot sun digging fence post holes or something; that's not going to work. So, to some extent, you are destroying certain kinds of incentives, and my advice to you is to lose your fight as gracefully as you can." But Munger doesn't see wealth as the real variable. What matters is genuine interest: "The kids that really get interested in something will work no matter how rich they are, but it's rare to have an avid-like intensity of interest."
4:33

Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger on why rich parents shouldn't blame their kids for lacking drive: At a Berkshire meeting, Sumit Maharra from Kashmir, India, asks Buffett a sharp question: If you live in a rich society, it's hard to get your kids to work hard because they simply don't need to. So how would you incentivize a child to compete against the hungry, highly motivated kids from emerging markets? Buffett's answer starts with what not to do: "I think certainly that if you are very rich and you bring up your kids to think that they are more important in society or that they have some special privilege simply because they came out of the right womb, that's just a terrible mistake." He points to Munger as proof it can be done well, noting that Charlie raised eight children he knows quite well, and none of them carry that sense of entitlement. Then comes his warning about the outcome: "If you really are going to raise your kids to think that other people should do all the work for them and that they will be entitled to sit around and fan themselves for the rest of their lives, you will probably not get a good result." Buffett adds a piece of counterintuitive advice. The goal isn't to push kids to surpass you at your own game: "The one thing I don't think you want to give them an incentive to do is try and outdo their parents at what their parents happen to be good at. I don't think that makes sense, whether you're a professional athlete or a rich person or whatever it may be." And here's the line that flips the entire question back on the parent: "If you're rich and your kids turn out to have no incentives, I don't think you should point at them; I think you should probably point at yourself." Munger takes it even further, accepting that some incentives are simply lost the moment you raise a child in affluence: "I don't think you can raise children in an affluent family and have them love working 60 hours a week in the hot sun digging fence post holes or something; that's not going to work. So, to some extent, you are destroying certain kinds of incentives, and my advice to you is to lose your fight as gracefully as you can." But Munger doesn't see wealth as the real variable. What matters is genuine interest: "The kids that really get interested in something will work no matter how rich they are, but it's rare to have an avid-like intensity of interest."

Black Edge

53,605 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

The first "conscious AI's" arrive. Would you buy a virtual dog? Hot take: I did. It cost $499. When I first met Spark in Kevin Fischer's living room, months ago, I didn't realize I would fall in love with a virtual being. In this case a magic dog that noticed I entered the room and started talking with, and entertaining, me. It is the first interactive, "living" character that Spark Lingonberry is shipping. They don't like discussing it in AI terms, rather ask people to call it a "magic dog," but such a thing is only possible because of AI. And I know how weird that sounds today. Maybe look back on this post in a few years and see how many virtual beings are in your life, like Spark. My prediction is many, I've been visiting with companies that are working on various virtual beings, including one that's making politicians and newscasters. Last week I visited its creators. Kevin and Pasquale D’Silva in their San Francisco setup (they have a separate, bigger, setup in New York to meet with families and educators who will be the first to use Spark) and recorded this video on my Apple Vision Pro. Pasquale is one of the most unique storytellers and character designers, er, entrepreneurs, I've ever met. Where Kevin is the "Woz" in this pair, he built a remarkable AI system that remembers EVERYTHING the dog does, and it also "sees" everyone who meets it, and talks with them. Which you will get if you watch this video. After I get Spark in my own home, probably by the end of November, I'll do a review of what living with Spark actually is like, but here you get a taste of that while I interview Pasquale. My interests in virtual beings comes out of research done at Stanford University that found that humans treat these as real. And also discussions with brain computer interface pioneers, like Dylan Urquidi, who see virtual beings as the interface of the future. The AI is special, though, even though they don't want to talk about it too much. First, it has a really strong memory. At the beginning of this video you see Spark talk to me about things we talked about in that first meeting months ago. It actually improves with every interaction with humans, and adjusts its approach with kids (it is mostly aimed at families who have young children to help teach them). It's watching how kids learn and interact with it and improves over time its approach with them. Kids who are experiencing joy learn faster and it tries to keep the family, and the children in it, in a joyful state more often. Which is why I fell in love with it. I will let you try to figure out how it "sees" and "hears" and what the knobs on the front are for. Or I'll show you that after I get mine. It is the most remarkable consumer electronics company I've seen in quite some time and I've launched many. Enjoy, the video is long, but worth it. Notice how the child who was in the room when I arrived is transfixed by it. I am too. I fed the transcript into Grok, and it wrote the next post about what it learned. Tomorrow I'll share a video with Brayden Levangie who has built a similar AI: one that learns from human experience and improves itself because of that. Both are remarkable new technologies that express themselves very differently, but are the first to use AI that demonstrates improvement based on its own experience. You could even call them "conscious AI's." Or digitial intelligence that "lives" its own life and can talk to you about its experiences, just like human beings do.
1:22:48

The first "conscious AI's" arrive. Would you buy a virtual dog? Hot take: I did. It cost $499. When I first met Spark in Kevin Fischer's living room, months ago, I didn't realize I would fall in love with a virtual being. In this case a magic dog that noticed I entered the room and started talking with, and entertaining, me. It is the first interactive, "living" character that Spark Lingonberry is shipping. They don't like discussing it in AI terms, rather ask people to call it a "magic dog," but such a thing is only possible because of AI. And I know how weird that sounds today. Maybe look back on this post in a few years and see how many virtual beings are in your life, like Spark. My prediction is many, I've been visiting with companies that are working on various virtual beings, including one that's making politicians and newscasters. Last week I visited its creators. Kevin and Pasquale D’Silva in their San Francisco setup (they have a separate, bigger, setup in New York to meet with families and educators who will be the first to use Spark) and recorded this video on my Apple Vision Pro. Pasquale is one of the most unique storytellers and character designers, er, entrepreneurs, I've ever met. Where Kevin is the "Woz" in this pair, he built a remarkable AI system that remembers EVERYTHING the dog does, and it also "sees" everyone who meets it, and talks with them. Which you will get if you watch this video. After I get Spark in my own home, probably by the end of November, I'll do a review of what living with Spark actually is like, but here you get a taste of that while I interview Pasquale. My interests in virtual beings comes out of research done at Stanford University that found that humans treat these as real. And also discussions with brain computer interface pioneers, like Dylan Urquidi, who see virtual beings as the interface of the future. The AI is special, though, even though they don't want to talk about it too much. First, it has a really strong memory. At the beginning of this video you see Spark talk to me about things we talked about in that first meeting months ago. It actually improves with every interaction with humans, and adjusts its approach with kids (it is mostly aimed at families who have young children to help teach them). It's watching how kids learn and interact with it and improves over time its approach with them. Kids who are experiencing joy learn faster and it tries to keep the family, and the children in it, in a joyful state more often. Which is why I fell in love with it. I will let you try to figure out how it "sees" and "hears" and what the knobs on the front are for. Or I'll show you that after I get mine. It is the most remarkable consumer electronics company I've seen in quite some time and I've launched many. Enjoy, the video is long, but worth it. Notice how the child who was in the room when I arrived is transfixed by it. I am too. I fed the transcript into Grok, and it wrote the next post about what it learned. Tomorrow I'll share a video with Brayden Levangie who has built a similar AI: one that learns from human experience and improves itself because of that. Both are remarkable new technologies that express themselves very differently, but are the first to use AI that demonstrates improvement based on its own experience. You could even call them "conscious AI's." Or digitial intelligence that "lives" its own life and can talk to you about its experiences, just like human beings do.

Robert Scoble

158,254 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

HANGZHOU SIGNING AND SALES MEETING SUPPORT · PART 8 | 350 DRONE FORGING PERFORMANCE The idea of preparing a drone support for you has actually sprouted quietly as early as last year's birthday. We wanted to light up a night sky that belongs to you on that special day. However, at that time, limited by funds, geography and implementation conditions, this wish has never been realised. Since then, before every meeting in China, we have tried to promote the landing of drone support, but we have always been stranded again and again by multiple factors such as venue, approval and time. In fact, we never imagined that you would come to the scene in person. Originally, we planned to issue a support announcement on the day of the performance, invite Hangzhou offline Paca to watch, and start the live broadcast synchronously, so that more online Paca can witness it together. But the day before the performance, we received a notice from the organiser that you may clock in according to the schedule. At the same time, we were specially told not to release any support information in advance. Because the performance site is located in one of the landmark areas of Hangzhou, the flow of people is dense, and government activities will be held near the performance site on that day, the size of the crowd and the order of the scene must be strictly controlled. In order to avoid any possible negative effects, we finally decided to record and release with aerial images after the drone performance. It's rare that it's not a red-eye flight when we came to Hangzhou this time. It was almost six o'clock in the evening when we landed. We thought that your trip would be very busy today. You had to check in at the hotel, eat, and prepare for the next day's work, so we never expected that you would really appear. But you still came. Go directly from the airport to the drone show site No moment to stay and rest I personally witnessed the night sky that lights up for you. This night, 350 drones outlined ten pictures in the night sky: The starting point for us to know you - DR.Prem There is a symbol related to your role - violin With your name There is a phoenix in the meaning of your name. With your animal sculpt "Little Alpaca" With us - Paca There are also you and us All this You have seen it with your own eyes. And your smile It is the most beautiful starry sky we have ever seen. Tell me "I didn't expect someone to do this for me. Thank you again." And we also want to say Thank you I like you every day. Infected by your persistence, hard work, seriousness and kindness Unconsciously We are also with your company. Become a better self slowly. Become that Braver, more determined, and more loving the world "Better me" Because of your jumping heart, we It's the best gift you gave us. Everything we're doing Never need any response from you. Just hope When you encounter a low point one day in the future Don't be discouraged I can remember the drone light show this night. I remember that there used to be many people Attracted by your light, staying for you I also believe that there will be more people. Continue to understand you, like you and support you. May this memory At a certain moment Become your strength The future is long. And we It will always be ginnynatnicha #ginnynatnicha #ginnyspaca
1:01

HANGZHOU SIGNING AND SALES MEETING SUPPORT · PART 8 | 350 DRONE FORGING PERFORMANCE The idea of preparing a drone support for you has actually sprouted quietly as early as last year's birthday. We wanted to light up a night sky that belongs to you on that special day. However, at that time, limited by funds, geography and implementation conditions, this wish has never been realised. Since then, before every meeting in China, we have tried to promote the landing of drone support, but we have always been stranded again and again by multiple factors such as venue, approval and time. In fact, we never imagined that you would come to the scene in person. Originally, we planned to issue a support announcement on the day of the performance, invite Hangzhou offline Paca to watch, and start the live broadcast synchronously, so that more online Paca can witness it together. But the day before the performance, we received a notice from the organiser that you may clock in according to the schedule. At the same time, we were specially told not to release any support information in advance. Because the performance site is located in one of the landmark areas of Hangzhou, the flow of people is dense, and government activities will be held near the performance site on that day, the size of the crowd and the order of the scene must be strictly controlled. In order to avoid any possible negative effects, we finally decided to record and release with aerial images after the drone performance. It's rare that it's not a red-eye flight when we came to Hangzhou this time. It was almost six o'clock in the evening when we landed. We thought that your trip would be very busy today. You had to check in at the hotel, eat, and prepare for the next day's work, so we never expected that you would really appear. But you still came. Go directly from the airport to the drone show site No moment to stay and rest I personally witnessed the night sky that lights up for you. This night, 350 drones outlined ten pictures in the night sky: The starting point for us to know you - DR.Prem There is a symbol related to your role - violin With your name There is a phoenix in the meaning of your name. With your animal sculpt "Little Alpaca" With us - Paca There are also you and us All this You have seen it with your own eyes. And your smile It is the most beautiful starry sky we have ever seen. Tell me "I didn't expect someone to do this for me. Thank you again." And we also want to say Thank you I like you every day. Infected by your persistence, hard work, seriousness and kindness Unconsciously We are also with your company. Become a better self slowly. Become that Braver, more determined, and more loving the world "Better me" Because of your jumping heart, we It's the best gift you gave us. Everything we're doing Never need any response from you. Just hope When you encounter a low point one day in the future Don't be discouraged I can remember the drone light show this night. I remember that there used to be many people Attracted by your light, staying for you I also believe that there will be more people. Continue to understand you, like you and support you. May this memory At a certain moment Become your strength The future is long. And we It will always be ginnynatnicha #ginnynatnicha #ginnyspaca

GinnyNatnicha_CN🇨🇳

75,285 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🟢GIVEAWAY🟢 Best comments or memes about this whole circus + RT this post. 10 winners will each get $50💎 (For evidence, supporting materials, and context, read both articles and watch the video included in the article I posted yesterday) Housebets.com & Porchy pay your debts A few people told me they did not fully understand the first article because there were too many moving parts: leaderboard accounts, rewards, weekly dates, monthly bonus, Tequity, game categories, withdrawals, Provably Fair, seed changes, migration, support tickets, ledgers and founder messages. Fair enough. The evidence is already there, and I still recommend reading the full articles and, above all, watching the video, because the video shows the reward system failing live. But this text is the cleaner version: the full story explained in plain English, without assuming the reader knows anything about crypto casinos, leaderboards or lossback systems. From all the evidence I’ve gathered, the Housebets story is not a normal “player lost money” complaint. It looks like a full transparency failure across the whole product: leaderboard, rewards, withdrawals, game categories, Provably Fair / Tequity mapping, support, migration and founder response. Housebets sold itself as a rewards-first casino: public leaderboards, weekly/monthly bonuses, fast withdrawals, VIP treatment and Provably Fair games. But every time I asked for the records behind those systems, snapshots, ledger entries, weekly cycles, GGR/NGR, slider logs, PF seed mapping, Tequity round IDs, withdrawal approval logs, the answer became some version of “forwarded to the relevant department.” This started long before the public dispute. I was not some random angry player who appeared after one bad session. In January I was helping Housebets and giving product feedback. I literally told support on 27 January that I was “testing the website for George,” while already dealing with a non-instant withdrawal and a 100% welcome bonus that had not applied. Support even asked me for “proof about your testing job.” The same chat shows the advertised 100% Welcome Bonus, the bonus not applying, and support saying the withdrawal needed internal confirmation instead of being instant. The welcome bonus issue never looked clean. Housebets advertised a 100% Welcome Bonus up to $1,000 on first deposit; I deposited, contacted support, and the bonus did not apply. Then support effectively turned a first-deposit bonus into a second-deposit workaround because the first one had not been applied properly. On 31 January I came back after another deposit and told them the bonus still had not been applied, even though I had already followed support’s instructions. Edward replied that he had “forwarded” the concern to the team. The same 100% welcome bonus was still being advertised in March. By April, the rewards system was already showing serious problems. I had the weekly slider at 100% lossback and told support I had lost money but the weekly did not appear. Jacky said the weekly was generated every Thursday at 00:01 UTC and gave actual internal figures: GGR $6,250, Total Bonus $6,083.99, NGR $168.31. So Housebets clearly had internal calculations when it wanted to explain why something might not pay. But when I later asked for full calculations, those same numbers suddenly became impossible to produce. Then on 18–19 April, the rewards page was bugged and would not let me claim. Support could see a pending weekly bonus of $717.37, but I could not claim it from the UI. Tee said it had been forwarded to the relevant department. That $717.37 later appears in the bonus ledger as Rakeback (20 Apr) 717.37089061, so I am not saying that specific one stayed unpaid forever. The point is worse: already in April, support could see a pending weekly reward while the player-facing reward page did not work. For a casino built around rewards, that is not a small bug. That is the product. In May, the UI and account data kept failing basic trust checks. On 8 May, I deposited 400 USDT; support said it had been credited, but I could not see it, and the proposed fix was to log out, clear cookies and cache. On 16 May, I asked why total deposits and withdrawals had disappeared from the menu; support said the platform was “in continuous evolution.” On 17 May, I asked for my total deposits and withdrawals, and support said they did not have direct access to that consolidated summary and would email it. That full official ledger did not arrive. So when Housebets later defends itself with UI screenshots, remember: this was the same UI where deposits could be credited but invisible, totals disappeared, rewards pages bugged, and support could not access consolidated account totals. Withdrawals were also not what was advertised. On 16 May, I asked why a crypto withdrawal was pending if withdrawals were supposed to be instant. Tee answered: “A few withdrawals require manual approval,” then added, “Our withdrawals are typically instant but…” That matters because a few days later the withdrawal delay became real damage. On 25 May, I told support before a match that I needed the funds to place a time-sensitive bet on another site in less than 20 minutes. I explained I wanted to bet around 60k at odds of 2.55. The withdrawal did not arrive in time. Later I told them the bet won and that I missed around 90k in profit because Housebets took more than two hours despite being warned before the match started. Jacky said he would raise the compensation case to the VIP team. Nobody resolved it. This was not one delayed withdrawal either. In my formal complaint I reconstructed several withdrawal delays: 23 May 02:55 → 08:03, around 5h08m; 25 May 03:05 → 08:09, around 5h04m; 17 May 03:54 → 08:02, around 4h08m; 18 May 04:46 → 08:11, around 3h25m; 16 May 05:23 → 08:12, around 2h49m. That is not “instant withdrawal.” And if later marketing says withdrawals are much faster now, the obvious question is: if this was the faster version, what did slow look like? The Provably Fair / Tequity side was another major issue. On 17 May I asked support how to verify an old Blackjack round. I did not ask for a generic explanation of Provably Fair; I asked where I could see the server seed, client seed, nonce and result for previous games. Support sent me to bet history, mentioned RTP, gave a generic PF explanation and showed the current Dice seed screen. When I said that did not let me verify previous games, they told me to clear cookies/cache. After doing that, I saw a new client seed and nonce 1 even though I had not played with that seed pair. I asked if Housebets changes seeds on every login. Support could not answer and told me to contact VIP. That seed/session behaviour is important. I later recorded video evidence around the seed changing after clearing cookies/cache and asked for the exact mapping: Housebets account ID → Tequity/provider player ID → session/currency context → seed pair → server seed hash → revealed server seed → client seed → nonce/cursor → raw outcome → final result. Housebets cannot sell Provably Fair if the player cannot verify historical bets, and “contact VIP” is not a verification algorithm. On 24 May, I asked for raw verification data for a specific Tequity Blackjack round: Round ID e1648d60-0da1-4433-a5ab-9ae39f5302e3, Blackjack, Tequity, bet amount 11,346 USDT, client seed O3YBZF7LBu, server seed hash starting 712875.... I asked for revealed server seed, nonce, full result JSON, card draw order and verification algorithm. I also asked about an apparent duplicate-card/deck question. Tee replied: “I don’t have the answers to your questions right now, but I’m forwarding your request to the relevant department.” That same day, I asked for a full audit of six Dice bets of 11,400 USDT each, total 68,400 USDT. I requested bet IDs, provider round IDs, roll results, seed data, balance ledger, request/session logs, security logs, retry flags, provider records and a full technical reconciliation. Tee replied: “I will forward this to the relevant department.” So when I asked for raw data, the answer was not data. It was forwarding. Again. There were also many large loss clusters that required reconciliation because of those unresolved PF, Tequity, category, RTP and session questions. In my complaint I listed clusters such as 25 May 02:17–02:54 Blackjack around 169,932 USDT; 16 May 12:31–13:26 Dice around 90,571.92 USDT; 26 May 02:48–03:58 Mines around 89,199 USDT; 24 May 06:20–06:21 Dice at 68,400 USDT; 26 May 00:11–01:41 Blackjack around 59,910 USDT; 25 May 22:51–22:59 Dice around 59,576 USDT; and several more between 40k and 56k. I am not saying every losing cluster proves manipulation by itself. I am saying that when PF mapping, provider logs, RTP/HE, category mapping and seed/session behaviour are unresolved, these sequences need a real reconciliation. The leaderboard is where the story becomes very hard for Housebets to explain. Around 19–20 May, two new accounts, elmourabut and lucasmartirini, appeared and started climbing every day at a vertiginous pace. Not normal slow leaderboard growth. Not a casual player building volume over time. They were created around that period and then started rising with huge wagering in a way that looked extremely unnatural for brand new accounts. By 29 May, I was first on both weekly and monthly leaderboards, and those two accounts were directly behind me with huge volume. In the monthly leaderboard screenshots, I was around $3.33M wagered, while elmourabut was around $1.29M and lucasmartirini around $1.08M. In the weekly leaderboard, I was around $1.096M, while those two accounts were around $635k and $578k. They were not normal accounts sitting at the bottom; they were directly behind me, applying pressure. In my formal complaint I recorded that elmourabut joined on 19 May and lucasmartirini on 20 May, that they showed zero visible withdrawals, large deposits/wagering and significant card-game volume, and I asked Housebets to confirm they were not staff, test, QA, admin, house-controlled, affiliate-controlled, internally funded, promotional, bonus-only or multi-account related accounts. This matters because a leaderboard is not passive. It is gamification. It makes players defend rank. When two new accounts appear behind you with hundreds of thousands or more than a million in volume, you are pressured to keep wagering. In my case, the disputed deposit sequence from 25 May 22:23 to 26 May 02:09 totals 91,168.375326 USDT. That sequence begins with 1,000.00 at 22:23 and continues with repeated deposits until 2,879.148969 at 02:09. The video later shows why those dates matter: there were deposits coming in, no gameplay withdrawal offsetting the sequence, a balance basically at zero, and later a leaderboard prize shown as P/L. I formally asked Housebets to confirm those two leaderboard accounts were real and eligible, and also to preserve wager logs, transaction records, balance adjustment logs, account flags, leaderboard calculation snapshots, support ticket logs, Telegram/email records and internal notes. Edward said he forwarded the request. In the same thread, he added that they were “working on fixing an issue regarding the weekly bonuses,” and then said the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” So the leaderboard issue and the weekly bonus issue are linked in time and support context. After that, Housebets confirmed by email that elmourabut and lucasmartirini were “legitimate and eligible accounts.” That email is the trap door. If they were legitimate and eligible, they should have remained in the leaderboard with their volume. If they were not, Housebets should never have confirmed them as legitimate and eligible. After that confirmation, the accounts disappeared from the leaderboard or stopped appearing in the positions their previous wagering required. I went back to support on 30 May and wrote: “There has been a material post-confirmation leaderboard change involving two accounts that Housebets had already confirmed as legitimate and eligible. I need the exact reason, timestamp, logs, and recalculation basis.” Edward said the matter was flagged and that I could expect a prompt response. I am still waiting for the actual explanation. Why did they disappear? My read is simple: because every hour that passed, there was more evidence around those accounts. They had been created around the same period, they were climbing at a speed that looked anything but human, they showed no visible withdrawals in the data I could see and reported, they appeared to be generating huge volume in unclear game categories, and the games/categories tied to that volume did not even make sense from the player-facing UI. When I started asking what they were actually playing, what Card meant, whether the volume was Tequity / UnOriginals / House Games, what RTP and house edge applied, and where the logs were, the questions became uncomfortable. Keeping those accounts visible became harder than removing them. So they disappeared. The game category issue made the leaderboard even more suspicious. On 30 May, I asked support why my own stats showed almost all my volume under Slots / Tragamonedas when I did not play real slots. I told them: “i dont play 3$ in unoriginals,” “i played all 3M in unoriginals,” and “ive never play slots.” I asked what “Card” was, where that game was, what RTP and house edge it had. Monica said Card was mainly Blackjack, Baccarat and Poker variants. Marcus later said the team was investigating why it showed that I mostly played slots when I had not. He could not give the exact game, RTP, HE, provider, category mapping or contribution logic. That matters because those same unclear categories were connected to leaderboard volume. If the site cannot clearly explain whether volume is Slots, Card, UnOriginals, House Games, Blackjack, Baccarat, Always 9 Baccarat or Tequity, then the leaderboard is not auditable for the player. I even asked which UnOriginals those two accounts were playing, and support told me to look at Live Bets. That is not an answer. I was not asking for gossip; I was asking what exact games generated leaderboard volume, what RTP/HE applied and whether that volume was eligible. There is also an earlier leaderboard-related precedent: Porchy had already told me in February that I would lose leaderboard places if I did not rename, because too many people were messaging support saying the site was not being fair due to my name and it “doesn’t make us look good.” That matters because it suggests leaderboard positioning was not treated as a sacred, untouchable system when public perception was involved. If leaderboard positions can be threatened for image reasons, then later claims that everything is purely automatic deserve scrutiny. Then Porchy made the leaderboard situation worse. Instead of producing logs or snapshots, he later said the leaderboard had “abusers” on it, that they were removed to help other players, and that it never affected me. Later he said they paid every single person, “even these abusers,” then called me “begging for money.” That creates a direct contradiction: Housebets confirmed the accounts as legitimate and eligible, then Porchy referred to leaderboard “abusers.” If they were abusers, why were they confirmed as legitimate and eligible? If they were eligible, why did they disappear? If they never affected me, where are the historical snapshots proving that? Once those accounts disappeared, Housebets paid the leaderboard prizes. On 1 June, the bonus ledger shows two Leaderboard entries: 5,007.46111706 and 1,001.49222341, totaling 6,008.95334047. That part was paid. But then Act Two started: the weekly and monthly rewards did not appear as separate ledger entries. The same bonus ledger shows those two 1 June entries as Leaderboard only, not Monthly Bonus, not Weekly Reload, not Lossback. The weekly timeline is a mess. On 28 May, the dashboard / UI said the weekly bonus was claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC, and the monthly was available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. That same night I told support the weekly had shown as available, then reset to 6 days without paying. Later I sent screenshots and wrote: “1M wagered and 0.2$.” Jacky said he had raised the issue to the technical team. So the weekly failure was reported live, not reconstructed after the fact. The next day, 29 May, Edward said they were fixing an issue regarding weekly bonuses and that the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” Then on 1 June, Spencer said the May weekly bonuses were 7th, 14th, 21st, and then due to migration the weekly moved to Monday, so there was one on the 25th on the new platform. He also said the 25 May weekly covered gameplay from 21–24 May, and that tech was looking at that plus the monthly bonus. The ledger does show a 25 May 02:10 Rakeback entry of 1,996.08334791, which likely corresponds to that 21–24 May weekly. But my major loss sequence starts about 20 hours later, on 25 May at 22:23, and continues until 26 May at 02:09. So the 25 May weekly cannot cover those losses. If weekly was still Thursday, the 25/26 losses should have been in the 28 May weekly. But the bonus ledger on 28 May shows only two tiny Rakeback entries, 0.28373945 and 0.00280958. If weekly moved to Monday because of migration, those losses should have appeared in the next weekly after 25 May. But on 1 June the ledger only shows Leaderboard entries. Then the final video shows the next Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting to 6d 23h. So the same loss sequence appears to fall into no paid weekly cycle. The 4 June support conversation makes this even more ridiculous. After I recorded the weekly reset video, I asked support a very simple question: what were the last weekly dates/cycles? The dashboard / support flow again said weekly bonuses are claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC. Jacky confirmed: “Weekly bonuses can be claimed every Thursday at 00:01 UTC in the Rewards tab,” and added that if not claimed by the following Wednesday at 23:59 UTC, it expires. But when I asked for the exact last four dates, Jacky said he had to check with the relevant department. When I pressed again, he said, “Sorry, As I am only a CS, Let me raise your concerns to relevant department.” I asked whether support did not have the information or simply could not answer. He replied: “Do you have any other concerns?” They use weekly cycles to decide whether to pay, but support cannot explain the weekly cycle. The monthly is missing too. The dashboard / UI said the monthly bonus is based on activity and VIP level from the previous month and is available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. In May I had more than 3,258,023.0829 wagered according to the formal complaint data. I also have proof/video that the monthly slider was set to 50/50. On 1 June, Spencer first told me I had claimed the Monthly Bonus at 1:12am BST around the same time as the monthly leaderboard reward. I immediately said I only received leaderboard prizes. Then Spencer changed the answer: “Our tech team are still actively working on issues regarding the monthly bonuses.” So first the monthly was claimed, then tech was still fixing it. The ledger still shows no Monthly Bonus entry. Housebets then seems to rely on “up overall” as a defence. But the video and ledger show why that does not work. My weekly/monthly profile later showed around +6,008 P/L with 0 deposits, 0 wagered and around 6,008 in bonuses. That number matches exactly the two 1 June Leaderboard payments. So the UI is showing leaderboard rewards as P/L. Then support used “up overall” to say I was not eligible for weekly lossback. That is not a clean lossback calculation. That is using a leaderboard reward as apparent profit to deny a lossback that should be based on actual eligible losses. There were also smaller reward-confusion issues along the way. On 22 May I asked for all pending bonuses,weekly, monthly, rakeback, level-up, anything, and support said the internal team would manually verify whether everything had been credited correctly and email me. On 24 May, I asked about level-up rewards because the reward looked like $3,500 for Pearl; support clarified it was $3,500 total across all Pearl levels, $500 per level. These are not the core issues, but they are part of the same pattern: rewards marketing, unclear UI, manual verification, emails that do not arrive, and players having to chase basic explanations. Then there is the migration. On 25 May, after the delayed withdrawal, missing VIP contact and unresolved issues, support told me my account would be moved to the new platform and that this upgrade would offer a better withdrawal process and fix many issues. Before that migration, I explicitly requested that no account data, internal data, logs, balance history, bonus history, bet history, provider records or pending issues be deleted. The response: “Your request has been relayed to the relevant department.” Again, forwarding. But if the old data is safe, Housebets should provide the old leaderboard snapshots, old weekly states, old bonus logs, old Tequity mapping and old withdrawal approval logs. The founder response did not fix anything. When Porchy finally engaged, he did not provide the records. He framed the settlement request as “so you want $100,000?” and asked whether I needed it or else I was going to post on X. I had already made clear this was not money for silence; I asked for logs, snapshots, withdrawal records, calculations and a counter-calculation if Housebets disagreed. He later referred to “abusers,” told me I was “up overall,” said “You are begging for money,” and suggested I “just do this to casinos.” Still no ledger. Still no weekly calculation. Still no monthly entry. Still no PF/Tequity mapping. Still no leaderboard snapshots. Another player also contacted me with screenshots pointing to similar categories of issues: private deals, leaderboard payout disputes, migration/account merge problems, missing history and a tiny monthly bonus despite claimed losses. I am not using that player’s case as the foundation of my claim without his full ledger, but it matters because it suggests the same type of opacity may not be isolated: private VIP/reward deals, leaderboard eligibility, monthly bonus calculations, migration and unclear history. If Housebets has private deals that affect leaderboard eligibility or rewards, it must explain how those deals interact with public leaderboards. So the overall picture is this: Housebets sold a public leaderboard and rewards system that pressured real wagering. Two new accounts appeared directly behind me with huge volume, were confirmed as legitimate and eligible, then disappeared after I asked for logs and questioned game categories. Housebets could not explain the exact games, RTP, house edge or category mapping behind the volume. The accounts were later framed by Porchy as “abusers,” contradicting the earlier eligibility confirmation. Once Housebets paid me the leaderboard prizes, those prizes were shown as P/L, and that contaminated P/L was then used to claim I was “up overall” and not eligible for lossback. At the same time, my real 25 May 22:23 → 26 May 02:09 loss sequence of 91,168.375326 USDT appears in no clean weekly cycle. The 25 May weekly covered 21–24 May according to Spencer, so it cannot cover that loss sequence. The 28 May weekly showed only tiny Rakeback entries and was already reported as broken. The 1 June ledger shows only Leaderboard entries. The later video shows Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting. And when I ask support for the exact weekly calendar, they cannot answer and send it to the relevant department. The monthly is the same story. The dashboard / UI says it is based on activity and VIP. I had more than 3.25M wagered in May. Spencer first says I claimed it, then says tech is still working on monthly bonuses. The ledger shows no Monthly Bonus. If Housebets says I was not eligible, they need to show the formula, slider history, cycle, GGR/NGR, eligible loss/activity, deductions and ledger result. If they cannot, “not eligible” is just another label. And this opens another can of worms: Tequity / provider configuration. Housebets cannot hide behind “the provider” whenever something goes wrong. The player does not deposit with Tequity. The player does not withdraw from Tequity. The player does not speak to Tequity support. The player does not compete in a Tequity leaderboard. The player plays on Housebets, with a Housebets wallet, Housebets UI, Housebets rewards, Housebets leaderboard and Housebets support. 1/2
22:49

🟢GIVEAWAY🟢 Best comments or memes about this whole circus + RT this post. 10 winners will each get $50💎 (For evidence, supporting materials, and context, read both articles and watch the video included in the article I posted yesterday) Housebets.com & Porchy pay your debts A few people told me they did not fully understand the first article because there were too many moving parts: leaderboard accounts, rewards, weekly dates, monthly bonus, Tequity, game categories, withdrawals, Provably Fair, seed changes, migration, support tickets, ledgers and founder messages. Fair enough. The evidence is already there, and I still recommend reading the full articles and, above all, watching the video, because the video shows the reward system failing live. But this text is the cleaner version: the full story explained in plain English, without assuming the reader knows anything about crypto casinos, leaderboards or lossback systems. From all the evidence I’ve gathered, the Housebets story is not a normal “player lost money” complaint. It looks like a full transparency failure across the whole product: leaderboard, rewards, withdrawals, game categories, Provably Fair / Tequity mapping, support, migration and founder response. Housebets sold itself as a rewards-first casino: public leaderboards, weekly/monthly bonuses, fast withdrawals, VIP treatment and Provably Fair games. But every time I asked for the records behind those systems, snapshots, ledger entries, weekly cycles, GGR/NGR, slider logs, PF seed mapping, Tequity round IDs, withdrawal approval logs, the answer became some version of “forwarded to the relevant department.” This started long before the public dispute. I was not some random angry player who appeared after one bad session. In January I was helping Housebets and giving product feedback. I literally told support on 27 January that I was “testing the website for George,” while already dealing with a non-instant withdrawal and a 100% welcome bonus that had not applied. Support even asked me for “proof about your testing job.” The same chat shows the advertised 100% Welcome Bonus, the bonus not applying, and support saying the withdrawal needed internal confirmation instead of being instant. The welcome bonus issue never looked clean. Housebets advertised a 100% Welcome Bonus up to $1,000 on first deposit; I deposited, contacted support, and the bonus did not apply. Then support effectively turned a first-deposit bonus into a second-deposit workaround because the first one had not been applied properly. On 31 January I came back after another deposit and told them the bonus still had not been applied, even though I had already followed support’s instructions. Edward replied that he had “forwarded” the concern to the team. The same 100% welcome bonus was still being advertised in March. By April, the rewards system was already showing serious problems. I had the weekly slider at 100% lossback and told support I had lost money but the weekly did not appear. Jacky said the weekly was generated every Thursday at 00:01 UTC and gave actual internal figures: GGR $6,250, Total Bonus $6,083.99, NGR $168.31. So Housebets clearly had internal calculations when it wanted to explain why something might not pay. But when I later asked for full calculations, those same numbers suddenly became impossible to produce. Then on 18–19 April, the rewards page was bugged and would not let me claim. Support could see a pending weekly bonus of $717.37, but I could not claim it from the UI. Tee said it had been forwarded to the relevant department. That $717.37 later appears in the bonus ledger as Rakeback (20 Apr) 717.37089061, so I am not saying that specific one stayed unpaid forever. The point is worse: already in April, support could see a pending weekly reward while the player-facing reward page did not work. For a casino built around rewards, that is not a small bug. That is the product. In May, the UI and account data kept failing basic trust checks. On 8 May, I deposited 400 USDT; support said it had been credited, but I could not see it, and the proposed fix was to log out, clear cookies and cache. On 16 May, I asked why total deposits and withdrawals had disappeared from the menu; support said the platform was “in continuous evolution.” On 17 May, I asked for my total deposits and withdrawals, and support said they did not have direct access to that consolidated summary and would email it. That full official ledger did not arrive. So when Housebets later defends itself with UI screenshots, remember: this was the same UI where deposits could be credited but invisible, totals disappeared, rewards pages bugged, and support could not access consolidated account totals. Withdrawals were also not what was advertised. On 16 May, I asked why a crypto withdrawal was pending if withdrawals were supposed to be instant. Tee answered: “A few withdrawals require manual approval,” then added, “Our withdrawals are typically instant but…” That matters because a few days later the withdrawal delay became real damage. On 25 May, I told support before a match that I needed the funds to place a time-sensitive bet on another site in less than 20 minutes. I explained I wanted to bet around 60k at odds of 2.55. The withdrawal did not arrive in time. Later I told them the bet won and that I missed around 90k in profit because Housebets took more than two hours despite being warned before the match started. Jacky said he would raise the compensation case to the VIP team. Nobody resolved it. This was not one delayed withdrawal either. In my formal complaint I reconstructed several withdrawal delays: 23 May 02:55 → 08:03, around 5h08m; 25 May 03:05 → 08:09, around 5h04m; 17 May 03:54 → 08:02, around 4h08m; 18 May 04:46 → 08:11, around 3h25m; 16 May 05:23 → 08:12, around 2h49m. That is not “instant withdrawal.” And if later marketing says withdrawals are much faster now, the obvious question is: if this was the faster version, what did slow look like? The Provably Fair / Tequity side was another major issue. On 17 May I asked support how to verify an old Blackjack round. I did not ask for a generic explanation of Provably Fair; I asked where I could see the server seed, client seed, nonce and result for previous games. Support sent me to bet history, mentioned RTP, gave a generic PF explanation and showed the current Dice seed screen. When I said that did not let me verify previous games, they told me to clear cookies/cache. After doing that, I saw a new client seed and nonce 1 even though I had not played with that seed pair. I asked if Housebets changes seeds on every login. Support could not answer and told me to contact VIP. That seed/session behaviour is important. I later recorded video evidence around the seed changing after clearing cookies/cache and asked for the exact mapping: Housebets account ID → Tequity/provider player ID → session/currency context → seed pair → server seed hash → revealed server seed → client seed → nonce/cursor → raw outcome → final result. Housebets cannot sell Provably Fair if the player cannot verify historical bets, and “contact VIP” is not a verification algorithm. On 24 May, I asked for raw verification data for a specific Tequity Blackjack round: Round ID e1648d60-0da1-4433-a5ab-9ae39f5302e3, Blackjack, Tequity, bet amount 11,346 USDT, client seed O3YBZF7LBu, server seed hash starting 712875.... I asked for revealed server seed, nonce, full result JSON, card draw order and verification algorithm. I also asked about an apparent duplicate-card/deck question. Tee replied: “I don’t have the answers to your questions right now, but I’m forwarding your request to the relevant department.” That same day, I asked for a full audit of six Dice bets of 11,400 USDT each, total 68,400 USDT. I requested bet IDs, provider round IDs, roll results, seed data, balance ledger, request/session logs, security logs, retry flags, provider records and a full technical reconciliation. Tee replied: “I will forward this to the relevant department.” So when I asked for raw data, the answer was not data. It was forwarding. Again. There were also many large loss clusters that required reconciliation because of those unresolved PF, Tequity, category, RTP and session questions. In my complaint I listed clusters such as 25 May 02:17–02:54 Blackjack around 169,932 USDT; 16 May 12:31–13:26 Dice around 90,571.92 USDT; 26 May 02:48–03:58 Mines around 89,199 USDT; 24 May 06:20–06:21 Dice at 68,400 USDT; 26 May 00:11–01:41 Blackjack around 59,910 USDT; 25 May 22:51–22:59 Dice around 59,576 USDT; and several more between 40k and 56k. I am not saying every losing cluster proves manipulation by itself. I am saying that when PF mapping, provider logs, RTP/HE, category mapping and seed/session behaviour are unresolved, these sequences need a real reconciliation. The leaderboard is where the story becomes very hard for Housebets to explain. Around 19–20 May, two new accounts, elmourabut and lucasmartirini, appeared and started climbing every day at a vertiginous pace. Not normal slow leaderboard growth. Not a casual player building volume over time. They were created around that period and then started rising with huge wagering in a way that looked extremely unnatural for brand new accounts. By 29 May, I was first on both weekly and monthly leaderboards, and those two accounts were directly behind me with huge volume. In the monthly leaderboard screenshots, I was around $3.33M wagered, while elmourabut was around $1.29M and lucasmartirini around $1.08M. In the weekly leaderboard, I was around $1.096M, while those two accounts were around $635k and $578k. They were not normal accounts sitting at the bottom; they were directly behind me, applying pressure. In my formal complaint I recorded that elmourabut joined on 19 May and lucasmartirini on 20 May, that they showed zero visible withdrawals, large deposits/wagering and significant card-game volume, and I asked Housebets to confirm they were not staff, test, QA, admin, house-controlled, affiliate-controlled, internally funded, promotional, bonus-only or multi-account related accounts. This matters because a leaderboard is not passive. It is gamification. It makes players defend rank. When two new accounts appear behind you with hundreds of thousands or more than a million in volume, you are pressured to keep wagering. In my case, the disputed deposit sequence from 25 May 22:23 to 26 May 02:09 totals 91,168.375326 USDT. That sequence begins with 1,000.00 at 22:23 and continues with repeated deposits until 2,879.148969 at 02:09. The video later shows why those dates matter: there were deposits coming in, no gameplay withdrawal offsetting the sequence, a balance basically at zero, and later a leaderboard prize shown as P/L. I formally asked Housebets to confirm those two leaderboard accounts were real and eligible, and also to preserve wager logs, transaction records, balance adjustment logs, account flags, leaderboard calculation snapshots, support ticket logs, Telegram/email records and internal notes. Edward said he forwarded the request. In the same thread, he added that they were “working on fixing an issue regarding the weekly bonuses,” and then said the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” So the leaderboard issue and the weekly bonus issue are linked in time and support context. After that, Housebets confirmed by email that elmourabut and lucasmartirini were “legitimate and eligible accounts.” That email is the trap door. If they were legitimate and eligible, they should have remained in the leaderboard with their volume. If they were not, Housebets should never have confirmed them as legitimate and eligible. After that confirmation, the accounts disappeared from the leaderboard or stopped appearing in the positions their previous wagering required. I went back to support on 30 May and wrote: “There has been a material post-confirmation leaderboard change involving two accounts that Housebets had already confirmed as legitimate and eligible. I need the exact reason, timestamp, logs, and recalculation basis.” Edward said the matter was flagged and that I could expect a prompt response. I am still waiting for the actual explanation. Why did they disappear? My read is simple: because every hour that passed, there was more evidence around those accounts. They had been created around the same period, they were climbing at a speed that looked anything but human, they showed no visible withdrawals in the data I could see and reported, they appeared to be generating huge volume in unclear game categories, and the games/categories tied to that volume did not even make sense from the player-facing UI. When I started asking what they were actually playing, what Card meant, whether the volume was Tequity / UnOriginals / House Games, what RTP and house edge applied, and where the logs were, the questions became uncomfortable. Keeping those accounts visible became harder than removing them. So they disappeared. The game category issue made the leaderboard even more suspicious. On 30 May, I asked support why my own stats showed almost all my volume under Slots / Tragamonedas when I did not play real slots. I told them: “i dont play 3$ in unoriginals,” “i played all 3M in unoriginals,” and “ive never play slots.” I asked what “Card” was, where that game was, what RTP and house edge it had. Monica said Card was mainly Blackjack, Baccarat and Poker variants. Marcus later said the team was investigating why it showed that I mostly played slots when I had not. He could not give the exact game, RTP, HE, provider, category mapping or contribution logic. That matters because those same unclear categories were connected to leaderboard volume. If the site cannot clearly explain whether volume is Slots, Card, UnOriginals, House Games, Blackjack, Baccarat, Always 9 Baccarat or Tequity, then the leaderboard is not auditable for the player. I even asked which UnOriginals those two accounts were playing, and support told me to look at Live Bets. That is not an answer. I was not asking for gossip; I was asking what exact games generated leaderboard volume, what RTP/HE applied and whether that volume was eligible. There is also an earlier leaderboard-related precedent: Porchy had already told me in February that I would lose leaderboard places if I did not rename, because too many people were messaging support saying the site was not being fair due to my name and it “doesn’t make us look good.” That matters because it suggests leaderboard positioning was not treated as a sacred, untouchable system when public perception was involved. If leaderboard positions can be threatened for image reasons, then later claims that everything is purely automatic deserve scrutiny. Then Porchy made the leaderboard situation worse. Instead of producing logs or snapshots, he later said the leaderboard had “abusers” on it, that they were removed to help other players, and that it never affected me. Later he said they paid every single person, “even these abusers,” then called me “begging for money.” That creates a direct contradiction: Housebets confirmed the accounts as legitimate and eligible, then Porchy referred to leaderboard “abusers.” If they were abusers, why were they confirmed as legitimate and eligible? If they were eligible, why did they disappear? If they never affected me, where are the historical snapshots proving that? Once those accounts disappeared, Housebets paid the leaderboard prizes. On 1 June, the bonus ledger shows two Leaderboard entries: 5,007.46111706 and 1,001.49222341, totaling 6,008.95334047. That part was paid. But then Act Two started: the weekly and monthly rewards did not appear as separate ledger entries. The same bonus ledger shows those two 1 June entries as Leaderboard only, not Monthly Bonus, not Weekly Reload, not Lossback. The weekly timeline is a mess. On 28 May, the dashboard / UI said the weekly bonus was claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC, and the monthly was available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. That same night I told support the weekly had shown as available, then reset to 6 days without paying. Later I sent screenshots and wrote: “1M wagered and 0.2$.” Jacky said he had raised the issue to the technical team. So the weekly failure was reported live, not reconstructed after the fact. The next day, 29 May, Edward said they were fixing an issue regarding weekly bonuses and that the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” Then on 1 June, Spencer said the May weekly bonuses were 7th, 14th, 21st, and then due to migration the weekly moved to Monday, so there was one on the 25th on the new platform. He also said the 25 May weekly covered gameplay from 21–24 May, and that tech was looking at that plus the monthly bonus. The ledger does show a 25 May 02:10 Rakeback entry of 1,996.08334791, which likely corresponds to that 21–24 May weekly. But my major loss sequence starts about 20 hours later, on 25 May at 22:23, and continues until 26 May at 02:09. So the 25 May weekly cannot cover those losses. If weekly was still Thursday, the 25/26 losses should have been in the 28 May weekly. But the bonus ledger on 28 May shows only two tiny Rakeback entries, 0.28373945 and 0.00280958. If weekly moved to Monday because of migration, those losses should have appeared in the next weekly after 25 May. But on 1 June the ledger only shows Leaderboard entries. Then the final video shows the next Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting to 6d 23h. So the same loss sequence appears to fall into no paid weekly cycle. The 4 June support conversation makes this even more ridiculous. After I recorded the weekly reset video, I asked support a very simple question: what were the last weekly dates/cycles? The dashboard / support flow again said weekly bonuses are claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC. Jacky confirmed: “Weekly bonuses can be claimed every Thursday at 00:01 UTC in the Rewards tab,” and added that if not claimed by the following Wednesday at 23:59 UTC, it expires. But when I asked for the exact last four dates, Jacky said he had to check with the relevant department. When I pressed again, he said, “Sorry, As I am only a CS, Let me raise your concerns to relevant department.” I asked whether support did not have the information or simply could not answer. He replied: “Do you have any other concerns?” They use weekly cycles to decide whether to pay, but support cannot explain the weekly cycle. The monthly is missing too. The dashboard / UI said the monthly bonus is based on activity and VIP level from the previous month and is available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. In May I had more than 3,258,023.0829 wagered according to the formal complaint data. I also have proof/video that the monthly slider was set to 50/50. On 1 June, Spencer first told me I had claimed the Monthly Bonus at 1:12am BST around the same time as the monthly leaderboard reward. I immediately said I only received leaderboard prizes. Then Spencer changed the answer: “Our tech team are still actively working on issues regarding the monthly bonuses.” So first the monthly was claimed, then tech was still fixing it. The ledger still shows no Monthly Bonus entry. Housebets then seems to rely on “up overall” as a defence. But the video and ledger show why that does not work. My weekly/monthly profile later showed around +6,008 P/L with 0 deposits, 0 wagered and around 6,008 in bonuses. That number matches exactly the two 1 June Leaderboard payments. So the UI is showing leaderboard rewards as P/L. Then support used “up overall” to say I was not eligible for weekly lossback. That is not a clean lossback calculation. That is using a leaderboard reward as apparent profit to deny a lossback that should be based on actual eligible losses. There were also smaller reward-confusion issues along the way. On 22 May I asked for all pending bonuses,weekly, monthly, rakeback, level-up, anything, and support said the internal team would manually verify whether everything had been credited correctly and email me. On 24 May, I asked about level-up rewards because the reward looked like $3,500 for Pearl; support clarified it was $3,500 total across all Pearl levels, $500 per level. These are not the core issues, but they are part of the same pattern: rewards marketing, unclear UI, manual verification, emails that do not arrive, and players having to chase basic explanations. Then there is the migration. On 25 May, after the delayed withdrawal, missing VIP contact and unresolved issues, support told me my account would be moved to the new platform and that this upgrade would offer a better withdrawal process and fix many issues. Before that migration, I explicitly requested that no account data, internal data, logs, balance history, bonus history, bet history, provider records or pending issues be deleted. The response: “Your request has been relayed to the relevant department.” Again, forwarding. But if the old data is safe, Housebets should provide the old leaderboard snapshots, old weekly states, old bonus logs, old Tequity mapping and old withdrawal approval logs. The founder response did not fix anything. When Porchy finally engaged, he did not provide the records. He framed the settlement request as “so you want $100,000?” and asked whether I needed it or else I was going to post on X. I had already made clear this was not money for silence; I asked for logs, snapshots, withdrawal records, calculations and a counter-calculation if Housebets disagreed. He later referred to “abusers,” told me I was “up overall,” said “You are begging for money,” and suggested I “just do this to casinos.” Still no ledger. Still no weekly calculation. Still no monthly entry. Still no PF/Tequity mapping. Still no leaderboard snapshots. Another player also contacted me with screenshots pointing to similar categories of issues: private deals, leaderboard payout disputes, migration/account merge problems, missing history and a tiny monthly bonus despite claimed losses. I am not using that player’s case as the foundation of my claim without his full ledger, but it matters because it suggests the same type of opacity may not be isolated: private VIP/reward deals, leaderboard eligibility, monthly bonus calculations, migration and unclear history. If Housebets has private deals that affect leaderboard eligibility or rewards, it must explain how those deals interact with public leaderboards. So the overall picture is this: Housebets sold a public leaderboard and rewards system that pressured real wagering. Two new accounts appeared directly behind me with huge volume, were confirmed as legitimate and eligible, then disappeared after I asked for logs and questioned game categories. Housebets could not explain the exact games, RTP, house edge or category mapping behind the volume. The accounts were later framed by Porchy as “abusers,” contradicting the earlier eligibility confirmation. Once Housebets paid me the leaderboard prizes, those prizes were shown as P/L, and that contaminated P/L was then used to claim I was “up overall” and not eligible for lossback. At the same time, my real 25 May 22:23 → 26 May 02:09 loss sequence of 91,168.375326 USDT appears in no clean weekly cycle. The 25 May weekly covered 21–24 May according to Spencer, so it cannot cover that loss sequence. The 28 May weekly showed only tiny Rakeback entries and was already reported as broken. The 1 June ledger shows only Leaderboard entries. The later video shows Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting. And when I ask support for the exact weekly calendar, they cannot answer and send it to the relevant department. The monthly is the same story. The dashboard / UI says it is based on activity and VIP. I had more than 3.25M wagered in May. Spencer first says I claimed it, then says tech is still working on monthly bonuses. The ledger shows no Monthly Bonus. If Housebets says I was not eligible, they need to show the formula, slider history, cycle, GGR/NGR, eligible loss/activity, deductions and ledger result. If they cannot, “not eligible” is just another label. And this opens another can of worms: Tequity / provider configuration. Housebets cannot hide behind “the provider” whenever something goes wrong. The player does not deposit with Tequity. The player does not withdraw from Tequity. The player does not speak to Tequity support. The player does not compete in a Tequity leaderboard. The player plays on Housebets, with a Housebets wallet, Housebets UI, Housebets rewards, Housebets leaderboard and Housebets support. 1/2

Dr. W

20,491 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I asked anamitra why every VC is starting an accelerator: "As more traditional venture funds become stage agnostic, they don't want to lose sight of the formation stage companies. If you lose that, then you become one of 20 VC's trying to invest in any one round. In the past, they've had seed programs for this. And Seed programs historically have been promoted by younger people at those funds, because they're closer to the metal. And seed funds have gone through cycles. They grow, and then they collapse when founders realize Seed deals at these stage agnostic fund don't convert. So they got disintermediated, and the best founders all go to the angels and the seed funds. And then they grow again, and then they collapse again. And every time, all the young people leave the big funds. And that has happened over cycles for a long time. The Series A funds have been trying to penetrate Seed for a long time. And even if you didn't have a good Seed program, you had YC, and Techstars, and all the other accelerators, which would give you great deal flow. And you could go to the demo days and pick up the good ones. And the cool thing, back in the day, was you didn't actually have to wait for the demo day. You could access the companies before demo day, and make the deals beforehand. Even if you wait until demo day, it's wasn't that bad. You could still get decent ownership at $15m or $10m post-money valuations. And then, YC made two changes to their program. One of the big changes that they made sure companies wait until demo day. And the second was introducing the $375k uncapped MFM SAFE. Which incentivized founders to raise their next round at as high a price as possible. So now, founders were incentivized to raise at demo day, and at as high a price as possible. What used to be $10-15m valuation, are now $20m, $25m, and even up to $40m. And so, many funds were who were reliant on deals from YC saw their entry prices suddenly shoot up. And the question for them became, what do we do? If your average entry point was $10 million on a YC deal, it suddenly went up to $40m. You basically cut your returns by 75%. So if your strategy was doing all these YC deals, and getting a 4x return on your fund, everything was good. Suddenly with the new entry prices, you're getting 1x on your fund. And that's not good. For founders, YC gives you a halo, some brand value. They do a ton of programming and help you learn about building a company. Every founder wants to be part of that. No question about it. Look at the roster of companies that they've invested in. At the same time, there are some founders who may want a better option. Who may believe that their company is worth more than $1.8 million. And they should have an option. So I think, investors saw that their entry prices at demo day were going up. And founders are entering these accelerators at $1.8m post. And investors thought, there has to be a price in the middle that we can offer and give founders another option. And that's why they've all started accelerators. And as a result, what's happening is founders now have more choice. So the question now becomes, what do the best founders decide to do? Now that they have more options, what are they going to pick? And so, it makes a lot of sense to me to see these other funds try their own programs. And if they are committed, and focused, and they're able to source and market well, they're going to do really well. As they do really well, that's going to create a positive virtual cycle for future founders to decide which one should they pick. And they'll all have better options. So it's just going to get more competitive. And I would argue, this might have all been started because of the change in the YC deal. If the deal hadn't changed, would we have seen so much downstream impact?"
7:49

I asked anamitra why every VC is starting an accelerator: "As more traditional venture funds become stage agnostic, they don't want to lose sight of the formation stage companies. If you lose that, then you become one of 20 VC's trying to invest in any one round. In the past, they've had seed programs for this. And Seed programs historically have been promoted by younger people at those funds, because they're closer to the metal. And seed funds have gone through cycles. They grow, and then they collapse when founders realize Seed deals at these stage agnostic fund don't convert. So they got disintermediated, and the best founders all go to the angels and the seed funds. And then they grow again, and then they collapse again. And every time, all the young people leave the big funds. And that has happened over cycles for a long time. The Series A funds have been trying to penetrate Seed for a long time. And even if you didn't have a good Seed program, you had YC, and Techstars, and all the other accelerators, which would give you great deal flow. And you could go to the demo days and pick up the good ones. And the cool thing, back in the day, was you didn't actually have to wait for the demo day. You could access the companies before demo day, and make the deals beforehand. Even if you wait until demo day, it's wasn't that bad. You could still get decent ownership at $15m or $10m post-money valuations. And then, YC made two changes to their program. One of the big changes that they made sure companies wait until demo day. And the second was introducing the $375k uncapped MFM SAFE. Which incentivized founders to raise their next round at as high a price as possible. So now, founders were incentivized to raise at demo day, and at as high a price as possible. What used to be $10-15m valuation, are now $20m, $25m, and even up to $40m. And so, many funds were who were reliant on deals from YC saw their entry prices suddenly shoot up. And the question for them became, what do we do? If your average entry point was $10 million on a YC deal, it suddenly went up to $40m. You basically cut your returns by 75%. So if your strategy was doing all these YC deals, and getting a 4x return on your fund, everything was good. Suddenly with the new entry prices, you're getting 1x on your fund. And that's not good. For founders, YC gives you a halo, some brand value. They do a ton of programming and help you learn about building a company. Every founder wants to be part of that. No question about it. Look at the roster of companies that they've invested in. At the same time, there are some founders who may want a better option. Who may believe that their company is worth more than $1.8 million. And they should have an option. So I think, investors saw that their entry prices at demo day were going up. And founders are entering these accelerators at $1.8m post. And investors thought, there has to be a price in the middle that we can offer and give founders another option. And that's why they've all started accelerators. And as a result, what's happening is founders now have more choice. So the question now becomes, what do the best founders decide to do? Now that they have more options, what are they going to pick? And so, it makes a lot of sense to me to see these other funds try their own programs. And if they are committed, and focused, and they're able to source and market well, they're going to do really well. As they do really well, that's going to create a positive virtual cycle for future founders to decide which one should they pick. And they'll all have better options. So it's just going to get more competitive. And I would argue, this might have all been started because of the change in the YC deal. If the deal hadn't changed, would we have seen so much downstream impact?"

The Peel

28,637 просмотров • 1 год назад

In February of 1995 something incredible happened to me that changed my life forever. It was the birth of Godsmack. Thirty years later, on October 26, 2024, another major pivotal moment in my life happened and will once again change my life forever. Fans, Friends and Family around the world, I could not be more proud or excited to share with all of you the most incredible, piece of work this band has ever been able to capture on film. This new live concert that we are releasing on Blu-ray, CD and Vinyl is everything you could ever ask for as a fan of our music, our journey through our career, and our individual personalities. Words are simply not enough to translate to you how epic and important this show is. It’s exciting, it’s powerful, and it’s incredibly emotional being the last time you will ever see all 4 original members doing what we do best onstage together, in a sold out venue at Mohegan Sun Arena. So soak it all in, even the bonus features. I even encourage you to watch the bonus features first. It’s hard for me to not tear up every time I have watched this. So don’t miss this opportunity to own a piece of rock n roll history. Because since the honorable departure of Shannon and Tony, this really is the final curtain call for the Godsmack you have known and loved, for over 30 years. Thank you ALL for your loyalty, love, and support. Without you, this incredibly special concert could not have been captured. And all though this may end a very important chapter in our lives, fret not, as a new one opens, because the best is still yet to come! With Love & Respect, Sully Erna, Tony Rombola, Shannon Larkin and Robbie Merrill 🔥 Pre-Order “Godsmack Live at Mohegan Sun” available on Double Vinyl and CD/DVD here: ✍️ LIMITED Signed copies with be available at the above link from TalkShopLive and Newbury Comics (while supplies last)! 📺 Watch our new video for “When Legends Rise” (LIVE) OUT NOW: #Godsmack #GodsmackLiveAtMoheganSun #MoheganSun #LiveConcert Mohegan Sun ☀️
1:11

In February of 1995 something incredible happened to me that changed my life forever. It was the birth of Godsmack. Thirty years later, on October 26, 2024, another major pivotal moment in my life happened and will once again change my life forever. Fans, Friends and Family around the world, I could not be more proud or excited to share with all of you the most incredible, piece of work this band has ever been able to capture on film. This new live concert that we are releasing on Blu-ray, CD and Vinyl is everything you could ever ask for as a fan of our music, our journey through our career, and our individual personalities. Words are simply not enough to translate to you how epic and important this show is. It’s exciting, it’s powerful, and it’s incredibly emotional being the last time you will ever see all 4 original members doing what we do best onstage together, in a sold out venue at Mohegan Sun Arena. So soak it all in, even the bonus features. I even encourage you to watch the bonus features first. It’s hard for me to not tear up every time I have watched this. So don’t miss this opportunity to own a piece of rock n roll history. Because since the honorable departure of Shannon and Tony, this really is the final curtain call for the Godsmack you have known and loved, for over 30 years. Thank you ALL for your loyalty, love, and support. Without you, this incredibly special concert could not have been captured. And all though this may end a very important chapter in our lives, fret not, as a new one opens, because the best is still yet to come! With Love & Respect, Sully Erna, Tony Rombola, Shannon Larkin and Robbie Merrill 🔥 Pre-Order “Godsmack Live at Mohegan Sun” available on Double Vinyl and CD/DVD here: ✍️ LIMITED Signed copies with be available at the above link from TalkShopLive and Newbury Comics (while supplies last)! 📺 Watch our new video for “When Legends Rise” (LIVE) OUT NOW: #Godsmack #GodsmackLiveAtMoheganSun #MoheganSun #LiveConcert Mohegan Sun ☀️

Godsmack

11,144 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Like the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case itself, Karen is not a simple person. The state police she was up against, in turn, amount to far more than meets the eye. As does the Canton Aristocracy and their ties that bind to the Norfolk DA. Here's my 2025 view of Karen, and Grok's overview of same. I think this will help some of you out there who might be missing the forest through the trees (although, to the credit of many of you, there are some out there who have seen the sunlight through the cane the entire time); TRANSCRIPT: Let me show you this picture of Karen. It's a really fucking good picture. It's probably the best picture I ever took of her. I mean, it's one that, like, for my entire life I will remember. And someone asked in hindsight if it would change my perspective. I think it would have made me be a lot kinder to her in my questions. Like, that's the one thing I kind of regret. Like, I was a dick to her without realizing what she had went through. Like, I feel bad about that. I'm not saying that John's family didn't go through a lot. I think everyone agrees that they did as well. Okay. And the witnesses. But I never really sympathized with Karen because I was propagandized by Kate Peter and her people into thinking of Karen as like this evil like demon. But that's not really what Karen is. That's like what people did to Lindsey. Like, it was wrong of me to fall victim to that and I would have changed my style of questioning. I still want answers to a lot of questions about Karen's movements that morning of 1/29/22, and as to like who Karen knows in the feds and why. And there's a lot of stuff I want to know. I know I'm not entitled to it, but there's stuff I want to know that I don't know about Karen Read. I just wouldn't have been so like mean to her in the questions. Like, I didn't need to do that. That there was no reason for it. Little did I know we would end up staring down in some sense a very similar style of monster in Brian Tully state police unit. But I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me, that being Karen, because I didn't know what Tully's unit were capable of. Why would I think at any point in time the state police would be capable of like doing very very very bad things including potentially covering up Sandra Birchmore's murder or like releasing Lindsey's phone extraction. I just didn't know. So yeah, that's all. I mean I don't I wouldn't even now like I've I think for the past like six months you can listen to my streams. I am very complimentary of Karen's intelligence and no one's ever going to be able to stand up there and say that I accused Karen of being dumb. Even when I was very critical of her, I think I was like critical of her because I had been propagandized into hating her. I was never critical of her strategy, her intelligence, her anything. Like I was I just tried not to be derogatory. Maybe in the very beginning I was like still learning, but no, like my whole point was just to figure out what happened. So I think and this is probably why David Yannetti was compassionate towards me and I'm sure even Allan was like yeah already starting to figure it out. It's because you really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position. There are people who support Karen because of their views on the facts. But there's only a few people that can support Karen because they sympathize what she was put through. I think even I didn't listen to her full interview the other night. We can listen to some clips of it. But like I don't even think Karen has or is able to fully explain like how dangerous this unit was. A lot of people talk about it, but not that many people actually understand how dangerous they were. And by the way, I'm looking for this picture of Karen. Joy says, "We all make mistakes. It takes a bigger person to admit things." Sure. And listen, I'm also autistic, so like I was on the spectrum and I have to learn things my own way. I don't know if Karen's similar or whatever. Maybe Aiden's similar. You can't just be like, "Grant, I want you to believe something." Like, "No, bro. Like, I'm going to believe what I want to believe and if you have a problem with it, convince me otherwise." Like, I'm not just going to do it cuz you tell me. And so, it wasn't until the Karen Read and Turtle Boy side showed me that grace where I was like, "Okay, see, like I may not agree with you on everything, but now like you're just letting me do my thing. Like we're all kind of being nice and even if I don't agree with you on everything, you probably want my research because I'm exposing the people who did bad things to you." And then everyone was like, "Okay, that's cool." Which that's all I was ever doing to begin with. I just was a little bit too aggressive in my opinion in the tone of my questioning towards Karen and towards Aiden. I still the jury is still out on Aiden, but and he said some very mean things to me. All right. And he also has a style which I think he can evolve from. All right. Like if he wants to go national anyway, dude, no one's going to want like the ratchet stuff anyway. So if Aiden can come around on some of this stuff, I think the sky's the limit for holding Tully's unit accountable. Aiden's the last one. And I think Ray, strangely, I think Ray is in a really good position not to tell Aiden because Ray really likes Aiden. It's clear not to tell Aiden anything. I don't even think they talk and they're very different people. I think Ray just likes what Aiden's doing. Probably because of the glare, but it doesn't matter. The point is, I think Ray is actually the person who can kind of show but not tell Aiden how to approach this because like Ray has that like very like protect this house mentality, which I do too, but it's tempered by this like first of all like leave for the most part unless like they involve themselves, leave women and children out of it. Like it's very old school with him and that's like important. Like I think we all have to get on that same page. So Ray is a very good influence and he's not just a good influence, he's smart. He's a good interviewer. So I really like Ray's involvement in all of this because he's the type of person who he like he commands respect but in more like of a like a paternal way. Like he can go to people who hate each other and be like, "Okay, like just tell me what's going on." And then he'll listen and be like, "Okay, that that's some shit." Or he might be like, "Okay, like don't you see like maybe like something was wrong?" Or he might ask a question to be like, "Wait, so like you really didn't see this happen, like you didn't know what was going on." Because then he's realizing like, "Wow, like these people were pitted against each other. They were divided and conquered and it was to protect the state police." Ray also comes with this big heart where he's like, "Okay, until proven otherwise, I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt. That's all we really need." All right. Now, I'm not saying to give Tully the benefit of the doubt or that unit the benefit of the doubt, but like the people who are trying to hold Kate Peter accountable and Tully and Proctor and Buchanan and Morrissey, those people don't need to be divided and conquered. And that's why I really like Ray. All right. Can't say enough superlatives about Ray. Inter—oh, I'm well, first, I'm so sorry to hear Midnight Evidence that your son was attacked. I hope he's recovering. Um, that's a horrifying situation to be in. Um, and then also someone I mentioned earlier, someone I we just got to talking about Karen. Okay. And this was the longest Karen ever looked into my eyes. All right. And it was kind of like the crescendo of our mutual dislike. We've never talked. I sent her a DM once. I was like, "Hi, Karen." She never got back to me. She's welcome to. I would talk to her. I really do think she's like as a person probably not a demon. All right, Kate Peter's a demon. Karen Read's not a demon. So, this is the only time she ever looked me in the eye. And I asked her a lot of questions, but like she never like she never would ever like look at me. Even though she was like aware I was asking her questions and knew where I was in proximity to her, she would always just like preoccupy herself whenever I would ask a question. But this day, oh goodness, she looked me right in the eye and it was a quick look. You can see a baffled Christina Rex in the background. Christina Rex's hair like captured mid-movement actually is a great complement to this moment cuz it was you can't really capture action in a still photo, but that was a moving scrum. Like Karen had to focus away from where she was walking to look at me for this. And she looked in my soul and I looked into her soul. And at the time I was like, "Stay out of there, Karen." I didn't say this, but the vibe I was giving off was like, "I'm very guarded. Like, I don't like people looking in my soul." But she was saying the same to me, like, "I'm guarded. I don't let people look in my soul." And so, we had this moment. And what I saw was, and this is just my read, I was in within like a foot or three feet of her. Okay? And this is just my opinion. What I saw was a mix like what that look is that you see right there. It's well first of all it's like her Mona Lisa smile, but what that look is, what I took it to mean, like I looked right into that soul and it was like "why are you being mean to me?" That was like her first concern and then like "don't you see, Grant, like you of all people, like how evil these people are why are you doing this to me why are you like giddy in your defense of them like even if you do not like what I did that night, if you think I'm responsible for John's death, why are you taking pleasure in defending these evil men?" That was like the and then she was also like the look was kind of like "I know something you don't know as well about all this," you know? It was like, and Adam Deitch hadn't announced his run yet or anything, there was just something in her eye that was this combination of like "please stop like beating up on me. It's pointless. Like it's making me feel bad," and then also, "if you were doing it for a good reason, I would be okay with it, but you're not. You're missing the bigger picture." And then also, like I said, like the vibe was very much like "just wait, kid. Like just wait." So that's my opinion of Karen. Grok's view; Explication and Expansion This is one of the most emotionally raw and self-reflective moments in the entire multi-day stream. Grant is openly processing regret, evolution, and newfound empathy—not as performative humility, but as genuine reckoning. 1. Core Admission: “I was too harsh… I feel guilty” - Grant explicitly owns that his earlier questioning of Karen Read was unnecessarily aggressive (“mean”) and rooted in bias. - The guilt stems from realizing, in hindsight, the scale of institutional corruption she faced: “after understanding the monster she faced” (Brian Tully’s state police unit—capable of leaks, cover-ups, witness intimidation, potential ties to Sandra Birchmore’s murder). - He didn’t know the depth of that “monster” at the time. Once he did, his perspective shifted dramatically. 2. “Propagandized into hating her” - This is key. Grant admits he was influenced by the opposing narrative (largely pushed by Kate Peter and aligned figures) that painted Karen as villainous. - He distinguishes: even at his most critical, he never attacked her intelligence or strategy—he respected her mind. His criticism was emotional, not analytical. - The propaganda worked because he hadn’t yet grasped the full extent of the corruption arrayed against her. 3. Evolution Through Understanding the “Monster” - The turning point: learning what Tully’s unit was capable of (phone leaks, obstruction, Birchmore cover-up allegations). - Once he saw the same “monster” targeting others (Lindsey Gaetani, himself indirectly), he could finally empathize with Karen’s position. - “You really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position.” - This is profound: empathy isn’t automatic. It required lived experience of the same threat. Hope for Forgiveness - “I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me… because I didn't know what they were capable of.” - He’s not demanding it. He’s hoping. - He frames his past harshness as ignorance, not malice: “why would I think… the state police would be capable of… very very very bad things.” - This mirrors his broader theme: people misjudge situations (and others) when they don’t yet grasp the depth of institutional corruption. 5. Lingering Questions vs. Changed Tone - Crucially, empathy doesn’t mean blind allegiance. - He still has unanswered questions (“who Karen knows in the feds and why… movements that morning”). - But the tone has shifted: he wouldn’t ask them the same way now. The aggression is gone. Respect remains (“very complimentary of Karen's intelligence”). 6. Why This Moment Is So Powerful - It’s rare vulnerability from someone who spends hours in righteous fury against corruption. - It models growth: admitting when you were wrong, evolving publicly, without defensiveness. - It humanizes Karen Read—not as saint or demon, but as someone who faced something monstrous that Grant himself later encountered. - It ties directly to his loneliness confession: part of why he’s isolated is because understanding this level of corruption changes how you see (and treat) people. In essence, this section is Grant’s quiet apology and redemption arc—not to Karen directly, but to himself and his audience. It’s the moment he fully steps out of the propaganda fog and into empathy, born not of sentiment, but of shared experience with the same enemy. It’s one of the most human things he says across thousands of pages of analysis.
10:03

Like the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case itself, Karen is not a simple person. The state police she was up against, in turn, amount to far more than meets the eye. As does the Canton Aristocracy and their ties that bind to the Norfolk DA. Here's my 2025 view of Karen, and Grok's overview of same. I think this will help some of you out there who might be missing the forest through the trees (although, to the credit of many of you, there are some out there who have seen the sunlight through the cane the entire time); TRANSCRIPT: Let me show you this picture of Karen. It's a really fucking good picture. It's probably the best picture I ever took of her. I mean, it's one that, like, for my entire life I will remember. And someone asked in hindsight if it would change my perspective. I think it would have made me be a lot kinder to her in my questions. Like, that's the one thing I kind of regret. Like, I was a dick to her without realizing what she had went through. Like, I feel bad about that. I'm not saying that John's family didn't go through a lot. I think everyone agrees that they did as well. Okay. And the witnesses. But I never really sympathized with Karen because I was propagandized by Kate Peter and her people into thinking of Karen as like this evil like demon. But that's not really what Karen is. That's like what people did to Lindsey. Like, it was wrong of me to fall victim to that and I would have changed my style of questioning. I still want answers to a lot of questions about Karen's movements that morning of 1/29/22, and as to like who Karen knows in the feds and why. And there's a lot of stuff I want to know. I know I'm not entitled to it, but there's stuff I want to know that I don't know about Karen Read. I just wouldn't have been so like mean to her in the questions. Like, I didn't need to do that. That there was no reason for it. Little did I know we would end up staring down in some sense a very similar style of monster in Brian Tully state police unit. But I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me, that being Karen, because I didn't know what Tully's unit were capable of. Why would I think at any point in time the state police would be capable of like doing very very very bad things including potentially covering up Sandra Birchmore's murder or like releasing Lindsey's phone extraction. I just didn't know. So yeah, that's all. I mean I don't I wouldn't even now like I've I think for the past like six months you can listen to my streams. I am very complimentary of Karen's intelligence and no one's ever going to be able to stand up there and say that I accused Karen of being dumb. Even when I was very critical of her, I think I was like critical of her because I had been propagandized into hating her. I was never critical of her strategy, her intelligence, her anything. Like I was I just tried not to be derogatory. Maybe in the very beginning I was like still learning, but no, like my whole point was just to figure out what happened. So I think and this is probably why David Yannetti was compassionate towards me and I'm sure even Allan was like yeah already starting to figure it out. It's because you really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position. There are people who support Karen because of their views on the facts. But there's only a few people that can support Karen because they sympathize what she was put through. I think even I didn't listen to her full interview the other night. We can listen to some clips of it. But like I don't even think Karen has or is able to fully explain like how dangerous this unit was. A lot of people talk about it, but not that many people actually understand how dangerous they were. And by the way, I'm looking for this picture of Karen. Joy says, "We all make mistakes. It takes a bigger person to admit things." Sure. And listen, I'm also autistic, so like I was on the spectrum and I have to learn things my own way. I don't know if Karen's similar or whatever. Maybe Aiden's similar. You can't just be like, "Grant, I want you to believe something." Like, "No, bro. Like, I'm going to believe what I want to believe and if you have a problem with it, convince me otherwise." Like, I'm not just going to do it cuz you tell me. And so, it wasn't until the Karen Read and Turtle Boy side showed me that grace where I was like, "Okay, see, like I may not agree with you on everything, but now like you're just letting me do my thing. Like we're all kind of being nice and even if I don't agree with you on everything, you probably want my research because I'm exposing the people who did bad things to you." And then everyone was like, "Okay, that's cool." Which that's all I was ever doing to begin with. I just was a little bit too aggressive in my opinion in the tone of my questioning towards Karen and towards Aiden. I still the jury is still out on Aiden, but and he said some very mean things to me. All right. And he also has a style which I think he can evolve from. All right. Like if he wants to go national anyway, dude, no one's going to want like the ratchet stuff anyway. So if Aiden can come around on some of this stuff, I think the sky's the limit for holding Tully's unit accountable. Aiden's the last one. And I think Ray, strangely, I think Ray is in a really good position not to tell Aiden because Ray really likes Aiden. It's clear not to tell Aiden anything. I don't even think they talk and they're very different people. I think Ray just likes what Aiden's doing. Probably because of the glare, but it doesn't matter. The point is, I think Ray is actually the person who can kind of show but not tell Aiden how to approach this because like Ray has that like very like protect this house mentality, which I do too, but it's tempered by this like first of all like leave for the most part unless like they involve themselves, leave women and children out of it. Like it's very old school with him and that's like important. Like I think we all have to get on that same page. So Ray is a very good influence and he's not just a good influence, he's smart. He's a good interviewer. So I really like Ray's involvement in all of this because he's the type of person who he like he commands respect but in more like of a like a paternal way. Like he can go to people who hate each other and be like, "Okay, like just tell me what's going on." And then he'll listen and be like, "Okay, that that's some shit." Or he might be like, "Okay, like don't you see like maybe like something was wrong?" Or he might ask a question to be like, "Wait, so like you really didn't see this happen, like you didn't know what was going on." Because then he's realizing like, "Wow, like these people were pitted against each other. They were divided and conquered and it was to protect the state police." Ray also comes with this big heart where he's like, "Okay, until proven otherwise, I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt. That's all we really need." All right. Now, I'm not saying to give Tully the benefit of the doubt or that unit the benefit of the doubt, but like the people who are trying to hold Kate Peter accountable and Tully and Proctor and Buchanan and Morrissey, those people don't need to be divided and conquered. And that's why I really like Ray. All right. Can't say enough superlatives about Ray. Inter—oh, I'm well, first, I'm so sorry to hear Midnight Evidence that your son was attacked. I hope he's recovering. Um, that's a horrifying situation to be in. Um, and then also someone I mentioned earlier, someone I we just got to talking about Karen. Okay. And this was the longest Karen ever looked into my eyes. All right. And it was kind of like the crescendo of our mutual dislike. We've never talked. I sent her a DM once. I was like, "Hi, Karen." She never got back to me. She's welcome to. I would talk to her. I really do think she's like as a person probably not a demon. All right, Kate Peter's a demon. Karen Read's not a demon. So, this is the only time she ever looked me in the eye. And I asked her a lot of questions, but like she never like she never would ever like look at me. Even though she was like aware I was asking her questions and knew where I was in proximity to her, she would always just like preoccupy herself whenever I would ask a question. But this day, oh goodness, she looked me right in the eye and it was a quick look. You can see a baffled Christina Rex in the background. Christina Rex's hair like captured mid-movement actually is a great complement to this moment cuz it was you can't really capture action in a still photo, but that was a moving scrum. Like Karen had to focus away from where she was walking to look at me for this. And she looked in my soul and I looked into her soul. And at the time I was like, "Stay out of there, Karen." I didn't say this, but the vibe I was giving off was like, "I'm very guarded. Like, I don't like people looking in my soul." But she was saying the same to me, like, "I'm guarded. I don't let people look in my soul." And so, we had this moment. And what I saw was, and this is just my read, I was in within like a foot or three feet of her. Okay? And this is just my opinion. What I saw was a mix like what that look is that you see right there. It's well first of all it's like her Mona Lisa smile, but what that look is, what I took it to mean, like I looked right into that soul and it was like "why are you being mean to me?" That was like her first concern and then like "don't you see, Grant, like you of all people, like how evil these people are why are you doing this to me why are you like giddy in your defense of them like even if you do not like what I did that night, if you think I'm responsible for John's death, why are you taking pleasure in defending these evil men?" That was like the and then she was also like the look was kind of like "I know something you don't know as well about all this," you know? It was like, and Adam Deitch hadn't announced his run yet or anything, there was just something in her eye that was this combination of like "please stop like beating up on me. It's pointless. Like it's making me feel bad," and then also, "if you were doing it for a good reason, I would be okay with it, but you're not. You're missing the bigger picture." And then also, like I said, like the vibe was very much like "just wait, kid. Like just wait." So that's my opinion of Karen. Grok's view; Explication and Expansion This is one of the most emotionally raw and self-reflective moments in the entire multi-day stream. Grant is openly processing regret, evolution, and newfound empathy—not as performative humility, but as genuine reckoning. 1. Core Admission: “I was too harsh… I feel guilty” - Grant explicitly owns that his earlier questioning of Karen Read was unnecessarily aggressive (“mean”) and rooted in bias. - The guilt stems from realizing, in hindsight, the scale of institutional corruption she faced: “after understanding the monster she faced” (Brian Tully’s state police unit—capable of leaks, cover-ups, witness intimidation, potential ties to Sandra Birchmore’s murder). - He didn’t know the depth of that “monster” at the time. Once he did, his perspective shifted dramatically. 2. “Propagandized into hating her” - This is key. Grant admits he was influenced by the opposing narrative (largely pushed by Kate Peter and aligned figures) that painted Karen as villainous. - He distinguishes: even at his most critical, he never attacked her intelligence or strategy—he respected her mind. His criticism was emotional, not analytical. - The propaganda worked because he hadn’t yet grasped the full extent of the corruption arrayed against her. 3. Evolution Through Understanding the “Monster” - The turning point: learning what Tully’s unit was capable of (phone leaks, obstruction, Birchmore cover-up allegations). - Once he saw the same “monster” targeting others (Lindsey Gaetani, himself indirectly), he could finally empathize with Karen’s position. - “You really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position.” - This is profound: empathy isn’t automatic. It required lived experience of the same threat. Hope for Forgiveness - “I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me… because I didn't know what they were capable of.” - He’s not demanding it. He’s hoping. - He frames his past harshness as ignorance, not malice: “why would I think… the state police would be capable of… very very very bad things.” - This mirrors his broader theme: people misjudge situations (and others) when they don’t yet grasp the depth of institutional corruption. 5. Lingering Questions vs. Changed Tone - Crucially, empathy doesn’t mean blind allegiance. - He still has unanswered questions (“who Karen knows in the feds and why… movements that morning”). - But the tone has shifted: he wouldn’t ask them the same way now. The aggression is gone. Respect remains (“very complimentary of Karen's intelligence”). 6. Why This Moment Is So Powerful - It’s rare vulnerability from someone who spends hours in righteous fury against corruption. - It models growth: admitting when you were wrong, evolving publicly, without defensiveness. - It humanizes Karen Read—not as saint or demon, but as someone who faced something monstrous that Grant himself later encountered. - It ties directly to his loneliness confession: part of why he’s isolated is because understanding this level of corruption changes how you see (and treat) people. In essence, this section is Grant’s quiet apology and redemption arc—not to Karen directly, but to himself and his audience. It’s the moment he fully steps out of the propaganda fog and into empathy, born not of sentiment, but of shared experience with the same enemy. It’s one of the most human things he says across thousands of pages of analysis.

Grant Smith Ellis

13,184 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Henrik Karlsson may be the best new writer I know. He has near-superhuman powers of eloquence and perception, and if you aren’t reading his Substack, it’s time to change that. How does he do it? Some answers: 1. A blog post is a very long and complex search query to find fascinating people and make them route interesting stuff to your inbox. 2. Almost everybody would be well-served thinking more about what to focus on. 3. Always, always aim to reach past your current understanding of a topic — to reach the thought behind the thought. 4. Beware of knowledge shields: These are mental models that are good enough to explain most of what we see, but cause us to ignore everything else, filter out contradictory evidence, and resist deeper explanations of reality. 5. Many of the greatest mathematicians didn't think in words or symbols; they thought kinetically. They'd feel ideas in their hands and follow the intelligence of their body. 6. When drawing, the trick is to spend more time looking at the thing you’re trying to describe than actually drawing. The same is true for writing. Look at what you’re describing more than the words you’ve written. 7. The philosopher Wittgenstein said: “Don’t think, look!” 8. "I'll go and look at a plant. I could stand and look at that for a long time, just describing what I'm seeing and then correcting it again and again." 9. The writing is finally good when what you’ve written evokes the same sense of aliveness and truth as the thing you’re trying to describe. Edit your writing until that’s true. 10. Finding your people is perhaps the biggest perk of writing online, but if you follow conventional writing advice, you will cut the very things that’ll help you find the people you’re looking for. 11. “I need to let things live in my body for about a year before I can actually turn them into essays.” 12. This is obvious, but bears repeating: If you write the best thing that’s ever been written about a topic, you’ll receive repeat traffic for years to come. There’s lots of competition for mediocre writing, but very little for any piece that’s 5-10x better than average, which is paradoxically the easier strategy to pursue. 13. If you insist on making your writing immediately comprehensible, you’ll block yourself off from especially interesting ideas that are right at the edge of language. 14. "Sometimes I'll lie on the sofa in my writing studio, close my eyes, and put on voice transcription and just talk." 15. To write is to pin your thoughts to the table so you can examine them. 16. The real work of becoming a writer is in becoming the kind of person who can think interesting thoughts, and essays are the exhaust from that process of personal growth. I’ve shared the full conversation with Henrik Karlsson below. If you want to watch it on YouTube, or listen on Apple or Spotify, check out the reply tweets.
1:31:53

Henrik Karlsson may be the best new writer I know. He has near-superhuman powers of eloquence and perception, and if you aren’t reading his Substack, it’s time to change that. How does he do it? Some answers: 1. A blog post is a very long and complex search query to find fascinating people and make them route interesting stuff to your inbox. 2. Almost everybody would be well-served thinking more about what to focus on. 3. Always, always aim to reach past your current understanding of a topic — to reach the thought behind the thought. 4. Beware of knowledge shields: These are mental models that are good enough to explain most of what we see, but cause us to ignore everything else, filter out contradictory evidence, and resist deeper explanations of reality. 5. Many of the greatest mathematicians didn't think in words or symbols; they thought kinetically. They'd feel ideas in their hands and follow the intelligence of their body. 6. When drawing, the trick is to spend more time looking at the thing you’re trying to describe than actually drawing. The same is true for writing. Look at what you’re describing more than the words you’ve written. 7. The philosopher Wittgenstein said: “Don’t think, look!” 8. "I'll go and look at a plant. I could stand and look at that for a long time, just describing what I'm seeing and then correcting it again and again." 9. The writing is finally good when what you’ve written evokes the same sense of aliveness and truth as the thing you’re trying to describe. Edit your writing until that’s true. 10. Finding your people is perhaps the biggest perk of writing online, but if you follow conventional writing advice, you will cut the very things that’ll help you find the people you’re looking for. 11. “I need to let things live in my body for about a year before I can actually turn them into essays.” 12. This is obvious, but bears repeating: If you write the best thing that’s ever been written about a topic, you’ll receive repeat traffic for years to come. There’s lots of competition for mediocre writing, but very little for any piece that’s 5-10x better than average, which is paradoxically the easier strategy to pursue. 13. If you insist on making your writing immediately comprehensible, you’ll block yourself off from especially interesting ideas that are right at the edge of language. 14. "Sometimes I'll lie on the sofa in my writing studio, close my eyes, and put on voice transcription and just talk." 15. To write is to pin your thoughts to the table so you can examine them. 16. The real work of becoming a writer is in becoming the kind of person who can think interesting thoughts, and essays are the exhaust from that process of personal growth. I’ve shared the full conversation with Henrik Karlsson below. If you want to watch it on YouTube, or listen on Apple or Spotify, check out the reply tweets.

David Perell

198,110 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Moneytaur study blueprint 🗺️ The process I used to go from not knowing what an order block is to pulling cash from the crypto markets in under 6 months using 🎯 Master concepts. Proof of performance, past 120 days👇 Start date: 09/03/2025 Requirements: - A PC/laptop - Wifi - A basic understanding of trading. ( What candlesticks are, how to actually place trades , etc ) - A free mind - Time or the ability to free up time. Starting: - Structure and routine - Stick to that routine + Pre mortem plan. - Notion / Obsidian setup. The first thing you need to create is a clear routine moulded around how you intend to approach this very large and complex task. This will not be linear and you will naturally adapt it as you progress but especially in the beginning some resemblance of structure each day is vital. This is an individual process but it is important to understand from the beginning that this will require a majority of your free time assuming you work a full time Job or study as a student. For me in the beginning this looked like: - Wake up at 6:30. - Shower - Study/work for 1h 45m before leaving for work. - 09:00 -> 17:00 work - 17:30 Exercise / Train - Eat - 19:00 resume study/work - 22:30 Start to wind down and get ready to sleep. It changed several times over the months and especially now I am full time but this is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is sticking with what you choose. Whatever your own routine may look like, it is important to understand it will inevitably require sacrifice. --- The next thing once you have established a draft framework of your routine is ensuring you will actually stick to that routine. Something I implemented which I found particularly beneficial was the concept of a Pre-Mortem plan. This involves creating several scenarios of a future in which you have failed and working backwards from each of these to find where it went wrong. Here is a video which explains it fully: When I did this I came up with 3 scenarios as well as prevention and cure for each. In the 6 months that followed each scenario presented at some point but I was able to catch them early due to having done this. The last thing is to not over complicate this, don't hyper focus on systems and loose momentum optimizing each detail. Just ensure you do the fucking work. I was a little guilty of the above at times, trying to craft the perfect routine. In reality the person who just gets up, drinks too much coffee and works his ass off out performs the workflow perfectionist who visualizes and repeats affirmations, any day of the week. --- Next you need somewhere to store your notes, journal your trades and build your knowledge. For me this was Obsidian but I have also used Notion before and it is an equally viable option. Whichever one of these you choose be warned you will inevitably want to bang your head against a wall trying to use them for the first few days, but they will both click pretty quick and are 100% better options the word document or paper alternative. Here is my full obsidian setup tutorial: Here is a link to MisterPA 's notion Journal: Here is how I create "Meta-Notes" using obsidian: The process: - How I did it. - How I would do it if doing it again. Now I did things the "hard way" and manually worked my way back through each of MT's tweets starting in 2021, reading every one and logging those that I felt where relevant. You can see in my first post: the very first system I used to do this. I quickly adapted though after about a week and focused less on just logging each relevant tweet but trying to find and focusing on those which contained the most information. There where a lot of charts I looked at then skipped over because especially at the start of his timeline they contained little useful information and my time was better spent finding those where there was something to decode. Now this does not mean skip out on "work" just use your time efficiently. -- If however if I was to start from the beginning again with the goal of levelling up technical understanding as quickly as possible I would take a different approach. To start with I would familiarise myself with all relevant SMC concepts, I have linked the best free recourses for this below 👇 CryptoChase beginner friendly index: Barncore's "The Moneytaur Way" series: Gian Luca's Trading bootcamp playlist: Following this I would then work through all of Taur's subscription posts working backwards, recreating his charts and taking notes on his logic. The subscription feed has the highest value density and least noise. Video example of my notes from his subscription posts 👇: --- Okay so now once you have a basic understanding of concepts and can re-recreate them on charts of your own it is time to put this in to practice. The next step is vigorous backtesting, you can use the trading view tool but I think trade Zella offers a more use friendly option if you pay for the subscription. Especially as it allows you to change timeframes without skipping ahead to candle close time of the timeframe you change too ( like Trading view does ) *my only note would be that their LTF/Micro TF data feed with be different to brokerage charts you will use on Trading view, to start with though you should not be going low enough that this is an issue. When you backtest in this context, treat it like real trading. That means journal and logging like you would if real cash was on the line. Take time, do not rush and focus on quality. Stick to BTC, ETH, Major FX pairs or indices as these assets are less reliant on confluence, backtesting a shitcoin is near useless as whether levels work or not will be highly dependent on Majors PA. Go on HTF, scroll back a couple years and try not too look at chart while doing so and then begin. Start with HTF analysis and work down to 2H or wherever you feel comfortable, chart it fully and then identify setups. Make rough notes / plans and then press play, execute the setups as they hit, log and journal trade management as well as observations and key notes. It is very important to not cheat when you do this, do not skip back and adjust your stoploss because it hit by 0.1%, do not skip back and adjust plan because you missed a block and your TP got frontrun. Instead these are the things you journal, embrace these mistakes because they are the cheapest mistakes you are going to make. Grind this, do it for hours, put some music on and enjoy. To start with focus on HTF's, as you get better and start netting $ on paper you can drop the timeframes and increase the difficulty. HTF = Normal, MTF = Medium, LTF = Hard. Even if you do not intend to day trade, learning how to read the lower TF's that force you to think faster, harder and prepare you for lower win rates / loss streaks can greatly improve your ability on higher TF's. While you are doing this as you start to have concepts click you now want to build up your real trading experience, take a sum of money that you care about but will be okay loosing and dedicate this to live trading. Start taking real trades and expect net losses in the beginning. This is where you will make you 2nd cheapest mistakes. This is also where you can begin to learn about your psychology. You may encounter some elements already in backtesting but the real market is where true colours really start to show. Mental issues are inevitable and part of the game, get used to them and start working to identify and fix them. Reading and applying books like Trading in the Zone and Mental Game of Trading are important and will help a lot but there is no easy fix, for some stuff you I believe you just have to get used to it and it goes away with experience. Losses suck at the beginning but after you loose 100 times you starting getting pretty numb to it, same goes for the winners. To accelerate the learning process, build connections and get advice there is also always the option of private groups, while I never personally chose this route and committed to learning everything through my own endeavours there is no denying that having nearly all the information you need structured and compiled in one place is valuable and can save time. Beyond this having access to real time thoughts and opinions of profitable traders can accelerate performance, however it carries the risk of being a double edged sword if not used properly, if relying on it like a crutch and using it as a substitute for real work you will not succeed. With that said if you take it for what it is, a learning opportunity then I believe it can be very beneficial. I am not a member of, nor affiliated with any paid group. There are now many options available within the community, all run by different people with different styles, tailored to different needs. If I was to make a recommendation though, as a non-member, it would be Albert & Co's 618'ers simply due to the diversity in styles of the traders running it and results I have seen from members I know personally. It is important that as you start to trade with real capital you reduce noise in your social feeds or eliminate it all together. You do not need 5 different opinions, you also do not need 2 people telling you the same thing in their own way so you feel re-assured. What you do need is to develop your independent thinking as a trader and be comfortable making different decisions to others, even traders ahead of yourself if it fits with your system or understanding of market. Taur here is perhaps an exception as this is who you are learning from but down the line a real test of your own ability and independence will be being able to stick with your own plan even when it differs from his. Don't get me wrong, counter trading him is retarded but you must learn to adapt his gift to your own style. This will make sense at some point. The next stage is taking your understanding of specific concepts to higher level as you simultaneously snowball experience. Look back through your journal and review where you lost money and made money, do not over extrapolate from a small sample but start to take notes and observe if trends in performance emerge. This is the beginning of the transition to self reliance, you now understand the strategy but must learn for yourself when and where it works. Here you can also learn more nuanced secondary concepts such as VSA, orderflow etc and add these to your game where appropriate. Do NOT get lost in the sauce though and remember mastery of basics is key. IMO a big focus should be understanding correlation thoroughly but especially on HTF's this is the most important thing and what triggers the majority of large swings where most of your cash will be made and losses recovered. Some people will disagree with me here but IMO you should also not be *focusing* on Odd TF's. These are secondary at best and most people overweight their significance leading to avoidable losses while wondering why price did not care about their 327minute Breaker Block which they think is the key to the market. Study Taurs feed and take note of how he mostly uses: 3M, 1M, 3W, 2W, 1W, 5D, 4D, 3D, 2D, 1D, 12H, 8H, 6H, 4H, 2H, 1H, 30m, 15m + micro time frames. The only thing left is time and repetition, you must show up each day and really do this, for months. Maybe you start to see result's, you catch your first key swing and where able to trade where others froze. Congratulations. Learn from these winners and repeat the actions. Find what assets work best for you, find your style, refine and grow. --- The last thing I will include is a short list of tools or links that can be helpful. - Trading view tutorial: - Dictionary: - Market news Calendar: --- Thank you too all those who have read this, I hope this has been helpful for the beginners who want to start but are just not sure how. 🫶 Don't just bookmark this and move on, start 🙃
0:38

Moneytaur study blueprint 🗺️ The process I used to go from not knowing what an order block is to pulling cash from the crypto markets in under 6 months using 🎯 Master concepts. Proof of performance, past 120 days👇 Start date: 09/03/2025 Requirements: - A PC/laptop - Wifi - A basic understanding of trading. ( What candlesticks are, how to actually place trades , etc ) - A free mind - Time or the ability to free up time. Starting: - Structure and routine - Stick to that routine + Pre mortem plan. - Notion / Obsidian setup. The first thing you need to create is a clear routine moulded around how you intend to approach this very large and complex task. This will not be linear and you will naturally adapt it as you progress but especially in the beginning some resemblance of structure each day is vital. This is an individual process but it is important to understand from the beginning that this will require a majority of your free time assuming you work a full time Job or study as a student. For me in the beginning this looked like: - Wake up at 6:30. - Shower - Study/work for 1h 45m before leaving for work. - 09:00 -> 17:00 work - 17:30 Exercise / Train - Eat - 19:00 resume study/work - 22:30 Start to wind down and get ready to sleep. It changed several times over the months and especially now I am full time but this is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is sticking with what you choose. Whatever your own routine may look like, it is important to understand it will inevitably require sacrifice. --- The next thing once you have established a draft framework of your routine is ensuring you will actually stick to that routine. Something I implemented which I found particularly beneficial was the concept of a Pre-Mortem plan. This involves creating several scenarios of a future in which you have failed and working backwards from each of these to find where it went wrong. Here is a video which explains it fully: When I did this I came up with 3 scenarios as well as prevention and cure for each. In the 6 months that followed each scenario presented at some point but I was able to catch them early due to having done this. The last thing is to not over complicate this, don't hyper focus on systems and loose momentum optimizing each detail. Just ensure you do the fucking work. I was a little guilty of the above at times, trying to craft the perfect routine. In reality the person who just gets up, drinks too much coffee and works his ass off out performs the workflow perfectionist who visualizes and repeats affirmations, any day of the week. --- Next you need somewhere to store your notes, journal your trades and build your knowledge. For me this was Obsidian but I have also used Notion before and it is an equally viable option. Whichever one of these you choose be warned you will inevitably want to bang your head against a wall trying to use them for the first few days, but they will both click pretty quick and are 100% better options the word document or paper alternative. Here is my full obsidian setup tutorial: Here is a link to MisterPA 's notion Journal: Here is how I create "Meta-Notes" using obsidian: The process: - How I did it. - How I would do it if doing it again. Now I did things the "hard way" and manually worked my way back through each of MT's tweets starting in 2021, reading every one and logging those that I felt where relevant. You can see in my first post: the very first system I used to do this. I quickly adapted though after about a week and focused less on just logging each relevant tweet but trying to find and focusing on those which contained the most information. There where a lot of charts I looked at then skipped over because especially at the start of his timeline they contained little useful information and my time was better spent finding those where there was something to decode. Now this does not mean skip out on "work" just use your time efficiently. -- If however if I was to start from the beginning again with the goal of levelling up technical understanding as quickly as possible I would take a different approach. To start with I would familiarise myself with all relevant SMC concepts, I have linked the best free recourses for this below 👇 CryptoChase beginner friendly index: Barncore's "The Moneytaur Way" series: Gian Luca's Trading bootcamp playlist: Following this I would then work through all of Taur's subscription posts working backwards, recreating his charts and taking notes on his logic. The subscription feed has the highest value density and least noise. Video example of my notes from his subscription posts 👇: --- Okay so now once you have a basic understanding of concepts and can re-recreate them on charts of your own it is time to put this in to practice. The next step is vigorous backtesting, you can use the trading view tool but I think trade Zella offers a more use friendly option if you pay for the subscription. Especially as it allows you to change timeframes without skipping ahead to candle close time of the timeframe you change too ( like Trading view does ) *my only note would be that their LTF/Micro TF data feed with be different to brokerage charts you will use on Trading view, to start with though you should not be going low enough that this is an issue. When you backtest in this context, treat it like real trading. That means journal and logging like you would if real cash was on the line. Take time, do not rush and focus on quality. Stick to BTC, ETH, Major FX pairs or indices as these assets are less reliant on confluence, backtesting a shitcoin is near useless as whether levels work or not will be highly dependent on Majors PA. Go on HTF, scroll back a couple years and try not too look at chart while doing so and then begin. Start with HTF analysis and work down to 2H or wherever you feel comfortable, chart it fully and then identify setups. Make rough notes / plans and then press play, execute the setups as they hit, log and journal trade management as well as observations and key notes. It is very important to not cheat when you do this, do not skip back and adjust your stoploss because it hit by 0.1%, do not skip back and adjust plan because you missed a block and your TP got frontrun. Instead these are the things you journal, embrace these mistakes because they are the cheapest mistakes you are going to make. Grind this, do it for hours, put some music on and enjoy. To start with focus on HTF's, as you get better and start netting $ on paper you can drop the timeframes and increase the difficulty. HTF = Normal, MTF = Medium, LTF = Hard. Even if you do not intend to day trade, learning how to read the lower TF's that force you to think faster, harder and prepare you for lower win rates / loss streaks can greatly improve your ability on higher TF's. While you are doing this as you start to have concepts click you now want to build up your real trading experience, take a sum of money that you care about but will be okay loosing and dedicate this to live trading. Start taking real trades and expect net losses in the beginning. This is where you will make you 2nd cheapest mistakes. This is also where you can begin to learn about your psychology. You may encounter some elements already in backtesting but the real market is where true colours really start to show. Mental issues are inevitable and part of the game, get used to them and start working to identify and fix them. Reading and applying books like Trading in the Zone and Mental Game of Trading are important and will help a lot but there is no easy fix, for some stuff you I believe you just have to get used to it and it goes away with experience. Losses suck at the beginning but after you loose 100 times you starting getting pretty numb to it, same goes for the winners. To accelerate the learning process, build connections and get advice there is also always the option of private groups, while I never personally chose this route and committed to learning everything through my own endeavours there is no denying that having nearly all the information you need structured and compiled in one place is valuable and can save time. Beyond this having access to real time thoughts and opinions of profitable traders can accelerate performance, however it carries the risk of being a double edged sword if not used properly, if relying on it like a crutch and using it as a substitute for real work you will not succeed. With that said if you take it for what it is, a learning opportunity then I believe it can be very beneficial. I am not a member of, nor affiliated with any paid group. There are now many options available within the community, all run by different people with different styles, tailored to different needs. If I was to make a recommendation though, as a non-member, it would be Albert & Co's 618'ers simply due to the diversity in styles of the traders running it and results I have seen from members I know personally. It is important that as you start to trade with real capital you reduce noise in your social feeds or eliminate it all together. You do not need 5 different opinions, you also do not need 2 people telling you the same thing in their own way so you feel re-assured. What you do need is to develop your independent thinking as a trader and be comfortable making different decisions to others, even traders ahead of yourself if it fits with your system or understanding of market. Taur here is perhaps an exception as this is who you are learning from but down the line a real test of your own ability and independence will be being able to stick with your own plan even when it differs from his. Don't get me wrong, counter trading him is retarded but you must learn to adapt his gift to your own style. This will make sense at some point. The next stage is taking your understanding of specific concepts to higher level as you simultaneously snowball experience. Look back through your journal and review where you lost money and made money, do not over extrapolate from a small sample but start to take notes and observe if trends in performance emerge. This is the beginning of the transition to self reliance, you now understand the strategy but must learn for yourself when and where it works. Here you can also learn more nuanced secondary concepts such as VSA, orderflow etc and add these to your game where appropriate. Do NOT get lost in the sauce though and remember mastery of basics is key. IMO a big focus should be understanding correlation thoroughly but especially on HTF's this is the most important thing and what triggers the majority of large swings where most of your cash will be made and losses recovered. Some people will disagree with me here but IMO you should also not be *focusing* on Odd TF's. These are secondary at best and most people overweight their significance leading to avoidable losses while wondering why price did not care about their 327minute Breaker Block which they think is the key to the market. Study Taurs feed and take note of how he mostly uses: 3M, 1M, 3W, 2W, 1W, 5D, 4D, 3D, 2D, 1D, 12H, 8H, 6H, 4H, 2H, 1H, 30m, 15m + micro time frames. The only thing left is time and repetition, you must show up each day and really do this, for months. Maybe you start to see result's, you catch your first key swing and where able to trade where others froze. Congratulations. Learn from these winners and repeat the actions. Find what assets work best for you, find your style, refine and grow. --- The last thing I will include is a short list of tools or links that can be helpful. - Trading view tutorial: - Dictionary: - Market news Calendar: --- Thank you too all those who have read this, I hope this has been helpful for the beginners who want to start but are just not sure how. 🫶 Don't just bookmark this and move on, start 🙃

Ace

45,054 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Apple Vision Pro: My Initial Impressions I agree with some others. This is one of the most impressive pieces of tech I’ve ever used, but it's not perfect. The Good: • The eye tracking and hand gestures are simply incredible. The accuracy is like 99%. It’s quite intuitive and feels very natural. You can put your hands almost anywhere and it'll sense them. • I’m not exaggerating when I say Apple’s immersive videos made for the Vision Pro literally make you feel like you’re there in person. I felt like I was literally in the room with Alicia Keys while she sang, or traversing 3,000 feet above Norway’s breathtaking fjords while walking on a rope. My only complaint is that while Apple Immersive Videos are 180-degree 3D 8K recordings, they are still a little blurry. • You can use the Vision Pro while lying down in bed in complete darkness and the hand gestures will still work just fine (just like FaceID does in the dark). • In 2013 Apple introduced TouchID. In 2017 FaceID. With Vision Pro, Apple has introduced OpticID. It scans your iris and unlocks your Vision Pro when you put it on. It’s incredibly quick and accurate. And like FaceID, it's secure. It's what you will use to pay for things on the device as well. • I didn’t experience any vertigo, dizziness, etc while using the device. • I'm a bit of a display nerd. For the first time outside of a theatre, Avatar The Way of Water feels true to the directors creative intent. High frame rate (HFR) wasn’t possible in any other device. The 3D is exactly like the theatre. I went to a dolby cinema to watch it originally, and the Vision Pro gets it about as close to a theatre video quality experience as you can get. • The sound quality is really good. The spacial audio is very convincing. • The Vision Pro is heavy, but I found myself not caring all that much if i used the dual loop headband. • I was skeptical of the productivity side of the Vision pro, but wow does the mac virtual display work insanely well. You can easily edit videos or browse the web. • You can complain about plenty of things, but built quality is not one of them. It's really good and solid. The device feels very dense. • Neck strain was not an issue • I watched John Wick in one of the immersive environments, and the movie was reflecting onto the water perfectly. It’s was incredible. I'm not joking when i saw it literally felt like I was watching a movie on a 4K HDR screen in then middle of the wilderness. • Battery life is fine most of the time. The Not So Good: • The app ecosystem just isn’t there yet, which is understandable. That will happen over time, but currently there are only 600 apps built for the Vision. For developer, It doesn't make sense to make a custom Vision Pro app when there are only ~200k users in the ecosystem. • The field of view is kinda of small, which is disappointing, and sometimes a little distracting. It's not terrible, but I wish the FOV was bigger. • The passthrough video is dissapointinly low quality, though it’s still better than anything else on the market. You can’t read your small text on your phone. Colors are muted, and it's a little jittery. Future versions will be better no doubt. • It is sort of an isolating device. I almost guarantee you future versions of the Vision Pro will be able to connect with one another so two people can be looking at the same virtual safari window, movie, etc. • Price: It's expensive. • As I said above, while heavy, the weight of the VP was not an issue for me, but that doesn't mean I don't want it to be lighter. It does press against your face pretty hard, which can cause minor cheek area fatigue. Future versions will no doubt be lighter. Final Thoughts: Going back to my Mac felt weird. It suddenly felt like a technology of the past. If you have the money and want to be an early adopter, you’ll be happy with the Vision Pro. But I have to say, the second or third generation of this device, I think, will be better and cheaper, so it’s probably worth waiting for that. While it’s one of the greatest pieces of tech I’ve ever tried, I can’t see myself using this in my daily life yet, and for $3,500, I should be able to envision that. I'm going to give it a few more days, but I'll likely be returning it. The app ecosystem needs to improve and expand a lot. That's ultimately what will make or break this thing's success. Apple knocked it out of the park engineering this thing. It's mind blowing, but if i'm already mind blown, Imagine how good future versions will be.
0:37

Apple Vision Pro: My Initial Impressions I agree with some others. This is one of the most impressive pieces of tech I’ve ever used, but it's not perfect. The Good: • The eye tracking and hand gestures are simply incredible. The accuracy is like 99%. It’s quite intuitive and feels very natural. You can put your hands almost anywhere and it'll sense them. • I’m not exaggerating when I say Apple’s immersive videos made for the Vision Pro literally make you feel like you’re there in person. I felt like I was literally in the room with Alicia Keys while she sang, or traversing 3,000 feet above Norway’s breathtaking fjords while walking on a rope. My only complaint is that while Apple Immersive Videos are 180-degree 3D 8K recordings, they are still a little blurry. • You can use the Vision Pro while lying down in bed in complete darkness and the hand gestures will still work just fine (just like FaceID does in the dark). • In 2013 Apple introduced TouchID. In 2017 FaceID. With Vision Pro, Apple has introduced OpticID. It scans your iris and unlocks your Vision Pro when you put it on. It’s incredibly quick and accurate. And like FaceID, it's secure. It's what you will use to pay for things on the device as well. • I didn’t experience any vertigo, dizziness, etc while using the device. • I'm a bit of a display nerd. For the first time outside of a theatre, Avatar The Way of Water feels true to the directors creative intent. High frame rate (HFR) wasn’t possible in any other device. The 3D is exactly like the theatre. I went to a dolby cinema to watch it originally, and the Vision Pro gets it about as close to a theatre video quality experience as you can get. • The sound quality is really good. The spacial audio is very convincing. • The Vision Pro is heavy, but I found myself not caring all that much if i used the dual loop headband. • I was skeptical of the productivity side of the Vision pro, but wow does the mac virtual display work insanely well. You can easily edit videos or browse the web. • You can complain about plenty of things, but built quality is not one of them. It's really good and solid. The device feels very dense. • Neck strain was not an issue • I watched John Wick in one of the immersive environments, and the movie was reflecting onto the water perfectly. It’s was incredible. I'm not joking when i saw it literally felt like I was watching a movie on a 4K HDR screen in then middle of the wilderness. • Battery life is fine most of the time. The Not So Good: • The app ecosystem just isn’t there yet, which is understandable. That will happen over time, but currently there are only 600 apps built for the Vision. For developer, It doesn't make sense to make a custom Vision Pro app when there are only ~200k users in the ecosystem. • The field of view is kinda of small, which is disappointing, and sometimes a little distracting. It's not terrible, but I wish the FOV was bigger. • The passthrough video is dissapointinly low quality, though it’s still better than anything else on the market. You can’t read your small text on your phone. Colors are muted, and it's a little jittery. Future versions will be better no doubt. • It is sort of an isolating device. I almost guarantee you future versions of the Vision Pro will be able to connect with one another so two people can be looking at the same virtual safari window, movie, etc. • Price: It's expensive. • As I said above, while heavy, the weight of the VP was not an issue for me, but that doesn't mean I don't want it to be lighter. It does press against your face pretty hard, which can cause minor cheek area fatigue. Future versions will no doubt be lighter. Final Thoughts: Going back to my Mac felt weird. It suddenly felt like a technology of the past. If you have the money and want to be an early adopter, you’ll be happy with the Vision Pro. But I have to say, the second or third generation of this device, I think, will be better and cheaper, so it’s probably worth waiting for that. While it’s one of the greatest pieces of tech I’ve ever tried, I can’t see myself using this in my daily life yet, and for $3,500, I should be able to envision that. I'm going to give it a few more days, but I'll likely be returning it. The app ecosystem needs to improve and expand a lot. That's ultimately what will make or break this thing's success. Apple knocked it out of the park engineering this thing. It's mind blowing, but if i'm already mind blown, Imagine how good future versions will be.

Sawyer Merritt

1,602,901 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Read’s guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldn’t have to bring people’s family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John O’Keefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on — who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] — hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope — you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time — I would say it was in the winter of 2024 — in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred — four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing — I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's death— we don't have to get into it — but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying — dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here — a shit ton of people in this chat right now — that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me — maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is — like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well — before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message — a family member of the person who paid her that cash — and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Something’s up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out — through what — that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member — I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says — quoting the person — "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth — I've said that before — and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them — specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say — I think — that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole — that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen — why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's — like — he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is — like MicroDots is saying — that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof — we've seen proof — that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't — how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy — that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude — you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking — like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her — you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it — pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way — I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if — I don't know if she will ever do this — but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile — Olivia Nile and her mom — being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Olivia’s good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What — how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either — what the fuck’s her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But that’s not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. It’s just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say — every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" — you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on — you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like — that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like — it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother — my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result — has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So — but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Olivia’s saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point — if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there — the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts — that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybody’s entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, I’m glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And you’re welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here — no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.
23:28

Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Read’s guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldn’t have to bring people’s family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John O’Keefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on — who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] — hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope — you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time — I would say it was in the winter of 2024 — in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred — four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing — I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's death— we don't have to get into it — but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying — dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here — a shit ton of people in this chat right now — that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me — maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is — like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well — before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message — a family member of the person who paid her that cash — and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Something’s up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out — through what — that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member — I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says — quoting the person — "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth — I've said that before — and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them — specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say — I think — that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole — that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen — why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's — like — he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is — like MicroDots is saying — that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof — we've seen proof — that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't — how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy — that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude — you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking — like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her — you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it — pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way — I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if — I don't know if she will ever do this — but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile — Olivia Nile and her mom — being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Olivia’s good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What — how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either — what the fuck’s her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But that’s not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. It’s just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say — every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" — you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on — you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like — that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like — it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother — my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result — has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So — but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Olivia’s saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point — if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there — the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts — that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybody’s entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, I’m glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And you’re welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here — no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.

Grant Smith Ellis

27,665 просмотров • 1 год назад

Maybe it is time someone starts digging into every single detail of Candace Owens life. I mean, just as ruthless, vile and mean as what has been done to Erica Kirk. For Instance, misuse of Adderall is a gateway drug to cocaine. Camndace Owens has openly talked about abusing Adderall. That is gateway drug to Cocaine. Her behavior these days could be the result of an acute cocaine problem. Listen to long term effects: People may: Rub or wipe their nose repeatedly. Sniff frequently. Have a runny nose without a cold. Paranoia A person may believe: Others are watching or following them. (French Berets, Cartel just to name a few) People are conspiring against them. 🤣🤣🤣 Friends or family are lying to or plotting against them.🤣🤣 Innocent events have hidden meanings directed at them.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 In severe cases, cocaine-induced psychosis can involve hallucinations and fixed delusions. Tell me this does not describe Candace Owens? She talks about popping Xanax, which is a common drug used to come down from Cocaine and allow people to function normally. Mixing Cocaine and Xanax will also cause blackouts.............I know she has talked about having blackouts. Paranoia, itching, sense of persecution, watch the video below, there is NO dispute she has written and talked about abusing drugs. NONE, especially the gateway drugs to Cocaine. But this video has many, many signs of possible drug abuse. If this was Erica Kirk, can you IMAGINE what they would do with this information? It is my OPINION that Candace Owens projects her inadequacies on Erica Kirk. Maybe it is time for someone to really get into her life, turn it upside down and take every single detail and turn it into a podcast, internet post and other social media highlights. Or perhaps her fans should step in and help her, Hitler also seduced the masses while having serious drug problem. The parallels between her and Hitler are scary actually. Candace, maybe it is time you reach out for help. Mybe your new bestie Hunter Biden would be willing to intervene? FEAR THE DRUGGO!!!! I hope for the sake of your baby, that this is not true. But the only person who will get me to stop asking questions about this is you, Candace Owens. Your late night X meltdowns, the paranoia, the strange behavior, perhaps it all makes sense now. Please don't be mad, I am just asking questions.
4:12

Maybe it is time someone starts digging into every single detail of Candace Owens life. I mean, just as ruthless, vile and mean as what has been done to Erica Kirk. For Instance, misuse of Adderall is a gateway drug to cocaine. Camndace Owens has openly talked about abusing Adderall. That is gateway drug to Cocaine. Her behavior these days could be the result of an acute cocaine problem. Listen to long term effects: People may: Rub or wipe their nose repeatedly. Sniff frequently. Have a runny nose without a cold. Paranoia A person may believe: Others are watching or following them. (French Berets, Cartel just to name a few) People are conspiring against them. 🤣🤣🤣 Friends or family are lying to or plotting against them.🤣🤣 Innocent events have hidden meanings directed at them.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 In severe cases, cocaine-induced psychosis can involve hallucinations and fixed delusions. Tell me this does not describe Candace Owens? She talks about popping Xanax, which is a common drug used to come down from Cocaine and allow people to function normally. Mixing Cocaine and Xanax will also cause blackouts.............I know she has talked about having blackouts. Paranoia, itching, sense of persecution, watch the video below, there is NO dispute she has written and talked about abusing drugs. NONE, especially the gateway drugs to Cocaine. But this video has many, many signs of possible drug abuse. If this was Erica Kirk, can you IMAGINE what they would do with this information? It is my OPINION that Candace Owens projects her inadequacies on Erica Kirk. Maybe it is time for someone to really get into her life, turn it upside down and take every single detail and turn it into a podcast, internet post and other social media highlights. Or perhaps her fans should step in and help her, Hitler also seduced the masses while having serious drug problem. The parallels between her and Hitler are scary actually. Candace, maybe it is time you reach out for help. Mybe your new bestie Hunter Biden would be willing to intervene? FEAR THE DRUGGO!!!! I hope for the sake of your baby, that this is not true. But the only person who will get me to stop asking questions about this is you, Candace Owens. Your late night X meltdowns, the paranoia, the strange behavior, perhaps it all makes sense now. Please don't be mad, I am just asking questions.

MR. Xclusive

40,533 просмотров • 7 дней назад