正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Counterargument:

Yui’s Eternal Husband 🌂☔️

4,528 subscribers

12,410 次观看 • 3 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Single-day voting on Election Day. Make it a national holiday. Use paper ballots. Require government ID to match the voter file. Give me the best counterargument. I'll wait.

Single-day voting on Election Day. Make it a national holiday. Use paper ballots. Require government ID to match the voter file. Give me the best counterargument. I'll wait.

Vivek Ramaswamy

532,508 次观看 • 2 年前

BANNON ASKS Curt Mills FOR THE STRONGEST COUNTERARGUMENT ON IRAN MILLS: The Foundation for Defense of Democracies. They’re driving the push for war, chock full of Never Trumpers, yet instrumental in shaping Trump’s Iran policy in term one and now blowing the horn for war again. If you want the neocon case, that’s where to go.

BANNON ASKS Curt Mills FOR THE STRONGEST COUNTERARGUMENT ON IRAN MILLS: The Foundation for Defense of Democracies. They’re driving the push for war, chock full of Never Trumpers, yet instrumental in shaping Trump’s Iran policy in term one and now blowing the horn for war again. If you want the neocon case, that’s where to go.

Grace Chong, MBI

15,419 次观看 • 6 个月前

Chris Camillo reveals he spends 50 to 80 hours researching trades before making them. “When I develop a high-conviction thesis like I did with $BE , with $HOOD , especially with $AMZN , I'll generally spend anywhere between 50 and 80 hours doing deep-dive due diligence. So, my thesis is baked. I've seen the counterargument, I know what the other side of that argument looks like, and I obviously don't agree with people.”

Chris Camillo reveals he spends 50 to 80 hours researching trades before making them. “When I develop a high-conviction thesis like I did with $BE , with $HOOD , especially with $AMZN , I'll generally spend anywhere between 50 and 80 hours doing deep-dive due diligence. So, my thesis is baked. I've seen the counterargument, I know what the other side of that argument looks like, and I obviously don't agree with people.”

The Iced Coffee Hour

69,485 次观看 • 1 个月前

Reporter: The counterargument from Vance is, if you throw these people out, houses will be cheaper. AOC: Well, who is going to be helping repair your home? Long-term care is going to go up. Health care is going to rise. There are lots of costs that are going to go up because of these mass disruptions of our labor market, driven by these data-free, non-data-backed decisions coming out of this White House.

Reporter: The counterargument from Vance is, if you throw these people out, houses will be cheaper. AOC: Well, who is going to be helping repair your home? Long-term care is going to go up. Health care is going to rise. There are lots of costs that are going to go up because of these mass disruptions of our labor market, driven by these data-free, non-data-backed decisions coming out of this White House.

Acyn

191,441 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨🚨 EPIC Paul Offit takedown! PLEASE LIKE AND SHARE WIDELY! A point by point analysis of the false claims and lies he presented as scientific fact in his infamous 2024 "DNA fragments in COVID vaccines are completely harmless" video: LIE #1: The mRNA vaccines contain fragments of DNA, but these are in very small quantities, measured in nanograms - Counterargument: Even though the DNA fragments may be in small quantities, their presence still poses a risk. DNA integration into the genome, even in small quantities, could still have long-term, unpredictable effects that we are not yet fully aware of. LIE #2: Impossibility of DNA entering human DNA: For these DNA fragments to integrate into our DNA, they would have to overcome several barriers, including crossing the cytoplasm and nuclear membrane, which is virtually impossible - Counterargument: The entire purpose of the LNP (lipid nanoparticle) in mRNA vaccines is to allow for the mRNA to enter the cytoplasm in order to transcribe the desired proteins. While fragments integrating into human DNA might be low, it's not "impossible." Scientific literature on gene editing technologies, like CRISPR, demonstrates that foreign DNA can be integrated into the genome under certain conditions. LIE #3: Role of innate immune system in rejecting foreign DNA: The innate immune system and enzymes in the cytoplasm work to destroy foreign DNA - Counterargument: While our immune system does recognize and destroy some foreign DNA, the immune response isn't perfect, especially if the foreign DNA is introduced in a manner that is not immediately recognized such as via the LNP. In certain environments or under specific conditions, foreign DNA can evade immune detection. LIE #4: Lack of integrases in mRNA vaccine DNA: The DNA fragments in the mRNA vaccine do not have the necessary integrases to integrate into our genome - Counterargument: While the fragments might lack integrases, it's possible that they could still interact with the genome in other ways, for example, through epigenetic changes or by influencing gene expression as is commonly achieved in laboratory settings. LIE #5: Comparison to naturally occurring foreign DNA: We are constantly exposed to foreign DNA through our food from bacteria, plants, and animals, which is much larger and more abundant than the DNA in vaccines - Counterargument: Although we are exposed to foreign DNA regularly through the digestive tract, the introduction of DNA through vaccination is a more controlled and concentrated process. The body is not naturally prepared to deal with such DNA in the same way it handles the ingestion of plant or animal DNA. LIE #6: Fear-mongering accusation: The physician scientist who raised these concerns was just scaring people unnecessarily - Counterargument: Raising concerns about potential risks is an important part of scientific discourse, especially when it comes to public health. It's better to err on the side of caution and investigate these possibilities rather than dismissing concerns outright, especially when the long-term effects of mRNA vaccines are still being studied. LIE #7: Assurance that these risks are negligible: The DNA fragments from the vaccines are clinically harmless - Counterargument: The assertion that these fragments are harmless is premature. Without long-term studies specifically addressing the potential risks of vaccine-derived DNA integration, it's impossible to claim with certainty that there will be no adverse effects in the future. Paul Offit knows all of this, so WHY IS HE LYING TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC? Please share this important video with everyone you know and DEMAND TRANSPARENT RESEARCH INTO THE QUESTION OF DNA CONTAMINATION AND INTEGRATION IN THE #COVID #vaccinated POPULATION! @P_J_Buckhaults Kevin McKernan Danny Jones Bret Weinstein Vejon Health - Dr Philip McMillan John Campbell Robert F. Kennedy Jr Steve Kirsch #AwfulOffit

🚨🚨 EPIC Paul Offit takedown! PLEASE LIKE AND SHARE WIDELY! A point by point analysis of the false claims and lies he presented as scientific fact in his infamous 2024 "DNA fragments in COVID vaccines are completely harmless" video: LIE #1: The mRNA vaccines contain fragments of DNA, but these are in very small quantities, measured in nanograms - Counterargument: Even though the DNA fragments may be in small quantities, their presence still poses a risk. DNA integration into the genome, even in small quantities, could still have long-term, unpredictable effects that we are not yet fully aware of. LIE #2: Impossibility of DNA entering human DNA: For these DNA fragments to integrate into our DNA, they would have to overcome several barriers, including crossing the cytoplasm and nuclear membrane, which is virtually impossible - Counterargument: The entire purpose of the LNP (lipid nanoparticle) in mRNA vaccines is to allow for the mRNA to enter the cytoplasm in order to transcribe the desired proteins. While fragments integrating into human DNA might be low, it's not "impossible." Scientific literature on gene editing technologies, like CRISPR, demonstrates that foreign DNA can be integrated into the genome under certain conditions. LIE #3: Role of innate immune system in rejecting foreign DNA: The innate immune system and enzymes in the cytoplasm work to destroy foreign DNA - Counterargument: While our immune system does recognize and destroy some foreign DNA, the immune response isn't perfect, especially if the foreign DNA is introduced in a manner that is not immediately recognized such as via the LNP. In certain environments or under specific conditions, foreign DNA can evade immune detection. LIE #4: Lack of integrases in mRNA vaccine DNA: The DNA fragments in the mRNA vaccine do not have the necessary integrases to integrate into our genome - Counterargument: While the fragments might lack integrases, it's possible that they could still interact with the genome in other ways, for example, through epigenetic changes or by influencing gene expression as is commonly achieved in laboratory settings. LIE #5: Comparison to naturally occurring foreign DNA: We are constantly exposed to foreign DNA through our food from bacteria, plants, and animals, which is much larger and more abundant than the DNA in vaccines - Counterargument: Although we are exposed to foreign DNA regularly through the digestive tract, the introduction of DNA through vaccination is a more controlled and concentrated process. The body is not naturally prepared to deal with such DNA in the same way it handles the ingestion of plant or animal DNA. LIE #6: Fear-mongering accusation: The physician scientist who raised these concerns was just scaring people unnecessarily - Counterargument: Raising concerns about potential risks is an important part of scientific discourse, especially when it comes to public health. It's better to err on the side of caution and investigate these possibilities rather than dismissing concerns outright, especially when the long-term effects of mRNA vaccines are still being studied. LIE #7: Assurance that these risks are negligible: The DNA fragments from the vaccines are clinically harmless - Counterargument: The assertion that these fragments are harmless is premature. Without long-term studies specifically addressing the potential risks of vaccine-derived DNA integration, it's impossible to claim with certainty that there will be no adverse effects in the future. Paul Offit knows all of this, so WHY IS HE LYING TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC? Please share this important video with everyone you know and DEMAND TRANSPARENT RESEARCH INTO THE QUESTION OF DNA CONTAMINATION AND INTEGRATION IN THE #COVID #vaccinated POPULATION! @P_J_Buckhaults Kevin McKernan Danny Jones Bret Weinstein Vejon Health - Dr Philip McMillan John Campbell Robert F. Kennedy Jr Steve Kirsch #AwfulOffit

Vaccine Safety Research Foundation

338,876 次观看 • 1 年前

When it comes to election integrity, Democrats' only counterargument is fearmongering They used to insult minorities by claiming they couldn't figure out how to get an ID. Now they're claiming married women are too helpless to vote because of name changes after marriage. Call it racist, call it sexist—they’re just desperate. Voter ID is common-sense protection that the vast majority of Americans support. Do you know what the left’s REALLY afraid of? Once elections are truly secure, they'll never claw back power.

When it comes to election integrity, Democrats' only counterargument is fearmongering They used to insult minorities by claiming they couldn't figure out how to get an ID. Now they're claiming married women are too helpless to vote because of name changes after marriage. Call it racist, call it sexist—they’re just desperate. Voter ID is common-sense protection that the vast majority of Americans support. Do you know what the left’s REALLY afraid of? Once elections are truly secure, they'll never claw back power.

Kari Lake

58,898 次观看 • 6 个月前

.Peter Meijer: "Today at the United Nations Security Council, France voted with Russia and China to torpedo a resolution by the Emirates -- you want to talk about the allies -- the allies have been formed thanks to Iran's reckless actions throughout those regions. France joined with China and Russia to oppose a move to say that reopening the Strait of Hormuz is a legitimate defensive maneuver for countries like the Emirates." "The counterargument is we do nothing is, I think the European position that they're fine with Iran claiming soverignty over the Strait"

.Peter Meijer: "Today at the United Nations Security Council, France voted with Russia and China to torpedo a resolution by the Emirates -- you want to talk about the allies -- the allies have been formed thanks to Iran's reckless actions throughout those regions. France joined with China and Russia to oppose a move to say that reopening the Strait of Hormuz is a legitimate defensive maneuver for countries like the Emirates." "The counterargument is we do nothing is, I think the European position that they're fine with Iran claiming soverignty over the Strait"

Curtis Houck

133,362 次观看 • 5 个月前

Could humanoid robots replace people on the battlefield? Compared with risking human lives — and with all the political backlash and risks of stress-induced war crimes and trauma — humanoid soldiers offer a more resilient, restrained, and precise alternative. Robots do not suffer from fatigue or fear and can operate continuously in extreme conditions while immune from radiation, chemicals, or biological agents. But the counterargument is chilling: humanoid soldiers have lower political and ethical barriers to initiating conflict, blur responsibility for any abuses, and further dehumanize warfare. In the latest episode of AI, Explained by Humans, TIME editor-at-large Charlie Campbell visited a company making these robots to see the war technology they're selling to governments around the world and interviewed experts on the potential implications. Read the full story here:

Could humanoid robots replace people on the battlefield? Compared with risking human lives — and with all the political backlash and risks of stress-induced war crimes and trauma — humanoid soldiers offer a more resilient, restrained, and precise alternative. Robots do not suffer from fatigue or fear and can operate continuously in extreme conditions while immune from radiation, chemicals, or biological agents. But the counterargument is chilling: humanoid soldiers have lower political and ethical barriers to initiating conflict, blur responsibility for any abuses, and further dehumanize warfare. In the latest episode of AI, Explained by Humans, TIME editor-at-large Charlie Campbell visited a company making these robots to see the war technology they're selling to governments around the world and interviewed experts on the potential implications. Read the full story here:

TIME

12,152 次观看 • 5 个月前

BORN IN THE USA Birthright citizenship is a moral abomination, yet the Supreme Court is likely to sustain it. Here’s why. I sit down with former Border Patrol commander Gregory K Bovino to reveal what’s really stopping mass deportations. (0:00:15) Birthright Citizenship Crisis (0:03:15) Law vs Justice (0:07:20) Framers Never Intended This (0:10:10) 14th Amendment Breakdown (0:13:15) Jurisdiction Counterargument (0:16:18) Beat the Left at Their Game (0:19:29) interview w/ Greg Bovino (0:24:07) Biden Border Incentives (0:27:49) Smuggling Cycle Exposed (0:32:20) Why Deportations Stall (0:43:42) Media Strategy Matters (0:49:15) Minneapolis Turning Point (0:54:00) Future Of The Fight (0:58:06) Trump's Brilliant Easter Post

BORN IN THE USA Birthright citizenship is a moral abomination, yet the Supreme Court is likely to sustain it. Here’s why. I sit down with former Border Patrol commander Gregory K Bovino to reveal what’s really stopping mass deportations. (0:00:15) Birthright Citizenship Crisis (0:03:15) Law vs Justice (0:07:20) Framers Never Intended This (0:10:10) 14th Amendment Breakdown (0:13:15) Jurisdiction Counterargument (0:16:18) Beat the Left at Their Game (0:19:29) interview w/ Greg Bovino (0:24:07) Biden Border Incentives (0:27:49) Smuggling Cycle Exposed (0:32:20) Why Deportations Stall (0:43:42) Media Strategy Matters (0:49:15) Minneapolis Turning Point (0:54:00) Future Of The Fight (0:58:06) Trump's Brilliant Easter Post

Dinesh D'Souza

434,829 次观看 • 5 个月前

"The commodity markets are not for entertainment." Former CFTC Commissioner and SEC General Counsel Dan Berkovitz joins Rebecca Rettig and Renato Mariotti on this week's The Policy Protocol to break down the ‘economic purpose’ test for prediction markets and the CME–CFTC fight over perps. Plus, Jamie McDonald makes person of the week. Timecodes: 00:00 The Role of CFTC 00:25 Welcome to The Policy Protocol 00:44 The Record SpaceX IPO and Retail Demand 01:41 Synthetic SpaceX Perps on Hyperliquid 03:40 Terry Duffy Exits CME and Sues the CFTC 06:07 Dan Berkovitz Joins the Show 06:44 Can the SEC and CFTC Harmonize? 08:29 Are Perpetuals Swaps or Futures? 09:11 Prediction Markets and the 'Economic Purpose' Test 11:07 The ErisX Sports Betting Precedent 13:07 The Hurricane Hedging Counterargument 15:02 Why Crypto Couldn't 'Come In and Register' Before 17:28 Gary Gensler Is Back 20:27 Person of the Week: Jamie McDonald

"The commodity markets are not for entertainment." Former CFTC Commissioner and SEC General Counsel Dan Berkovitz joins Rebecca Rettig and Renato Mariotti on this week's The Policy Protocol to break down the ‘economic purpose’ test for prediction markets and the CME–CFTC fight over perps. Plus, Jamie McDonald makes person of the week. Timecodes: 00:00 The Role of CFTC 00:25 Welcome to The Policy Protocol 00:44 The Record SpaceX IPO and Retail Demand 01:41 Synthetic SpaceX Perps on Hyperliquid 03:40 Terry Duffy Exits CME and Sues the CFTC 06:07 Dan Berkovitz Joins the Show 06:44 Can the SEC and CFTC Harmonize? 08:29 Are Perpetuals Swaps or Futures? 09:11 Prediction Markets and the 'Economic Purpose' Test 11:07 The ErisX Sports Betting Precedent 13:07 The Hurricane Hedging Counterargument 15:02 Why Crypto Couldn't 'Come In and Register' Before 17:28 Gary Gensler Is Back 20:27 Person of the Week: Jamie McDonald

CoinDesk

28,381 次观看 • 2 个月前

I asked our Head of Finance if I could spend $60,000 to take five enterprise CRO prospects to the Super Bowl. He did the ROI math and it's not looking good for me. Karan Parekh ( Karan Parekh) actually walked me through the numbers on camera - deal size requirements, probability lift benchmarks, estimated ROI, and why our bet at the US Open was 10x smarter. Some of what we get into: - How to calculate the real cost per ticket - Why a 15-20% increase in close probability on even $400k ACV deals doesn't justify the spend - My land-and-expand counterargument (which I thought would win him over) - Our portfolio approach to event marketing budgets and when we measure individual bets vs signal for scaling In the end, Karan gives a surprising reason why even if all five CROs convert, the Super Bowl isn't worth the $. This type of conversation happens every day at Clay. It's how we balance making aggressive creative bets with financial discipline. Yes, he just killed my Super Bowl dreams. But he is (probably) right!

I asked our Head of Finance if I could spend $60,000 to take five enterprise CRO prospects to the Super Bowl. He did the ROI math and it's not looking good for me. Karan Parekh ( Karan Parekh) actually walked me through the numbers on camera - deal size requirements, probability lift benchmarks, estimated ROI, and why our bet at the US Open was 10x smarter. Some of what we get into: - How to calculate the real cost per ticket - Why a 15-20% increase in close probability on even $400k ACV deals doesn't justify the spend - My land-and-expand counterargument (which I thought would win him over) - Our portfolio approach to event marketing budgets and when we measure individual bets vs signal for scaling In the end, Karan gives a surprising reason why even if all five CROs convert, the Super Bowl isn't worth the $. This type of conversation happens every day at Clay. It's how we balance making aggressive creative bets with financial discipline. Yes, he just killed my Super Bowl dreams. But he is (probably) right!

Varun Anand

170,514 次观看 • 8 个月前

Marc Andreesen on why building companies will become more expensive in the AI Era. There's a notion that AI will help cut down costs and increase efficiency. However, Marc presented a strong counterargument by referencing Jevon's paradox. Jevon's paradox: The Jevon's paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced. He gave some eg of Jevon's Paradox: ->Building roads will only lead to more cars & resulting in traffic. ->CGI in hollywood was developed to reduce the cost of film making but people's expectation increased, so cost involved in CGI also increased. ->Coal consumption increased in Industrial Revolution when the coal prices decreased. He says,The paradox here making cost of a given piece of software would be reduced, but the massive surge of demand for more powerful softwares will actually increase the cost of building a software company. Customers will start seeking for more & more powerful features.

Marc Andreesen on why building companies will become more expensive in the AI Era. There's a notion that AI will help cut down costs and increase efficiency. However, Marc presented a strong counterargument by referencing Jevon's paradox. Jevon's paradox: The Jevon's paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced. He gave some eg of Jevon's Paradox: ->Building roads will only lead to more cars & resulting in traffic. ->CGI in hollywood was developed to reduce the cost of film making but people's expectation increased, so cost involved in CGI also increased. ->Coal consumption increased in Industrial Revolution when the coal prices decreased. He says,The paradox here making cost of a given piece of software would be reduced, but the massive surge of demand for more powerful softwares will actually increase the cost of building a software company. Customers will start seeking for more & more powerful features.

Aish

810,529 次观看 • 2 年前

Get Ready To Rumble: John Spencer and Robert A. Pape debate Israel's strategy to respond to October 7th. Is Israel's strategy going to lead to the end of Israel? (0:00) Introduction (3:36) Coin Toss Decision (5:30) Robert Opening Pape's Argument (11:20) John Spencer's Counterargument (15:53) Pape Responds (29:53) Assessing Hamas's Strategic Goals (34:00) Critique on Planning for the Future (37:13) Rebuilding Democracy in the Middle East (41:01) Pape's Preferred Israeli Strategies for October 8th (42:46) Creating a Wedge Strategy (47:09) Insights from General McChrystal (49:42) Differing Military Strategies (50:23) Debating Military Approaches (51:38) Winning Battles vs. Winning Wars (55:58) Political Power Dynamics (59:00) Importance of Words in Strategy (1:01:27) Acknowledging Past Mistakes (1:04:53) Counterinsurgency Strategies (1:08:36) Role of Threat in Strategy (1:10:20) Separating Militant Groups (1:12:05) Achieving Strategic Objectives (1:12:09) Counterinsurgency Tactics (1:14:20) Importance of Meaningful Conversations (1:14:38) Sharp Arguments and Surviving Contact with the Enemy

Get Ready To Rumble: John Spencer and Robert A. Pape debate Israel's strategy to respond to October 7th. Is Israel's strategy going to lead to the end of Israel? (0:00) Introduction (3:36) Coin Toss Decision (5:30) Robert Opening Pape's Argument (11:20) John Spencer's Counterargument (15:53) Pape Responds (29:53) Assessing Hamas's Strategic Goals (34:00) Critique on Planning for the Future (37:13) Rebuilding Democracy in the Middle East (41:01) Pape's Preferred Israeli Strategies for October 8th (42:46) Creating a Wedge Strategy (47:09) Insights from General McChrystal (49:42) Differing Military Strategies (50:23) Debating Military Approaches (51:38) Winning Battles vs. Winning Wars (55:58) Political Power Dynamics (59:00) Importance of Words in Strategy (1:01:27) Acknowledging Past Mistakes (1:04:53) Counterinsurgency Strategies (1:08:36) Role of Threat in Strategy (1:10:20) Separating Militant Groups (1:12:05) Achieving Strategic Objectives (1:12:09) Counterinsurgency Tactics (1:14:20) Importance of Meaningful Conversations (1:14:38) Sharp Arguments and Surviving Contact with the Enemy

Noam Dworman

13,624 次观看 • 2 年前

Jesse Michels: “If she proves this to be true, this is not only a Copernican level discovery. It’s greater than that.” 🛸 Astronomer Beatriz Villarroel has published peer-reviewed work on more than 100,000 short-lived light-reflecting objects found on Palomar Observatory plates taken between 1949 and 1957. Beatriz Villarroel calls them transients. “Which are light reflecting, mirror-like objects, probably in geostationary orbit.” “And this is before Sputnik, before a man-made satellite was ever in space.” A Vanderbilt researcher then correlated those transients with nuclear tests. They show up more around nuclear detonations. The main counterargument was that they were plate defects or chemical stains. Former NASA astronomer Ivo Busko showed some of the transients have a coma, a small comet-like tail created as light passed through the telescope. That points to a source outside the instrument. Jesse Michels told Joe Rogan that conventional physicists including Brian Keating and Sabine Hossenfelder do not have a clean dismissal. “So you’re left with one conclusion.” The papers exist. The plates predate every human satellite. The nuclear timing and the optical signatures are what make this hard to ignore.

Jesse Michels: “If she proves this to be true, this is not only a Copernican level discovery. It’s greater than that.” 🛸 Astronomer Beatriz Villarroel has published peer-reviewed work on more than 100,000 short-lived light-reflecting objects found on Palomar Observatory plates taken between 1949 and 1957. Beatriz Villarroel calls them transients. “Which are light reflecting, mirror-like objects, probably in geostationary orbit.” “And this is before Sputnik, before a man-made satellite was ever in space.” A Vanderbilt researcher then correlated those transients with nuclear tests. They show up more around nuclear detonations. The main counterargument was that they were plate defects or chemical stains. Former NASA astronomer Ivo Busko showed some of the transients have a coma, a small comet-like tail created as light passed through the telescope. That points to a source outside the instrument. Jesse Michels told Joe Rogan that conventional physicists including Brian Keating and Sabine Hossenfelder do not have a clean dismissal. “So you’re left with one conclusion.” The papers exist. The plates predate every human satellite. The nuclear timing and the optical signatures are what make this hard to ignore.

Interstellar

86,972 次观看 • 9 天前

🔊 | Ewron mentioned Roier on his stream! [talking about the task that Dark Cucurucho gave him and why he chose to give “the chosen one” plushie to Aldo and not to Roier] #Ewron: I would’ve given Roier a plushie if that lazy bum hadn’t been watching the world cup for the past week. Roier, I miss you. And now, here’s the counterargument, Aldo is also not here. Okay, but Aldo has a legal break because he’s working on some project and besides, if we didn’t give one to Aldo it would be fail rp. Aldo is directly responsible for it (Juan’s death). But Roier…? Roier, you need to start playing on the server. What are you doing? Are you watching the world cup all the time? I miss you, Roier. So I didn’t give him one because the plushie would’ve kind of gone to waste. Because you know, Aldo has to get one for the lore reasons even though he’s not around. But does Roier have to get one for the lore reasons? Well, not really. I’d rather give it to someone who’s actually playing and can make use of that lore. That’s why.

🔊 | Ewron mentioned Roier on his stream! [talking about the task that Dark Cucurucho gave him and why he chose to give “the chosen one” plushie to Aldo and not to Roier] #Ewron: I would’ve given Roier a plushie if that lazy bum hadn’t been watching the world cup for the past week. Roier, I miss you. And now, here’s the counterargument, Aldo is also not here. Okay, but Aldo has a legal break because he’s working on some project and besides, if we didn’t give one to Aldo it would be fail rp. Aldo is directly responsible for it (Juan’s death). But Roier…? Roier, you need to start playing on the server. What are you doing? Are you watching the world cup all the time? I miss you, Roier. So I didn’t give him one because the plushie would’ve kind of gone to waste. Because you know, Aldo has to get one for the lore reasons even though he’s not around. But does Roier have to get one for the lore reasons? Well, not really. I’d rather give it to someone who’s actually playing and can make use of that lore. That’s why.

Roier English Updates

33,981 次观看 • 2 个月前