This is vindication for me. I've been trying to tell people who like this guy that he's just regurgitating old DD from Superstonk for his market analysis and anon research from over the years for everything else. He never says ANYTHING NEW, HE JUST STEALS.
Folks, I cannot emphasize this enough: If they show their face while telling OLD INFORMATION, they are building a B R A N D. They're grifters riding off the coattails of others, passing off the hard work of other researchers as if they found it themselves. Instead of putting the information front and center, he throws himself into the spotlight (like many others) to make it seem like HE'S THE VOICE OF REASON. IT'S ALL BRANDING.
"Be careful who you follow." - Q
Not all who do it are grifters, but I would not be shocked if this dude has merch or something in mind he wants to bring up soon.
EDIT: ANOTHER HUGE RED FLAG: HE NEVER GIVES SOURCES! That is always a HUGE deal to me, and how I know he's just stealing others research (even though I've heard it and read it all years before he started trying to pass it off as his own). If he gave sources, he'd just be linking to the research he's regurgitating and would easily be called out for it.
Actually he always gives sources, and tells his viewers to check his sources for themselves. If you think people on tiktok are posting walls of text for all their sources like wiki, than you really have nfi.
He has been redpilling on a wide range of Great Awakening related subjects long before he made anything about GME. He does it in an easily digestible engaging format, and is redpilling millions of normies.
Some of the subjects he makes videos on inlcude: Pizzagate, Boeing whistleblower deaths, Epstein, Israel, Covid lies, Diddy lawsuit (pedo shaming), Blackrock etc etc.
He isnt declaring that he finds all the info himself, quite the opposite actually. He posted on Superstonk asking for crowd-sourcing information to create more videos and get the message out to a wider audience.
Heres a post he made which gives you more insight. He hates grifters/paytriots.
I agree with you on all of this- and I watched those grifts and learned- when I built my platform, I intentionally built it away from the GME community until it was successful and stood alone. Because if you’re relying on the GME community for your interaction and monetization- you are inherently grifting.
Instead- I was lucky enough to succeed at building a platform that is now self sustaining, and so now I’ve started making GME videos- because now I can GME pill one million regular people on TikTok that would have never heard of it otherwise- and apes can enjoy the content without me needing anything from them. not even the views or attention. I just make videos I believe in and want to make now. The brand is already built.
That’s the critical difference between my business model and, for example, gherk’s business model.
Still not seeing any direct sourcing of anything. "Go look it up yourself" is one thing, linking to it so people can discern exactly what he sees is what I'm asking for. Idk why this is so hard for people to understand.
So you disprove me saying he's a grifter by saying his grift is different since he owns up to it? And again, he doesn't hide that he just uses other people's research, and if that's the case, why doesn't he ever link to any of it in the comments or anything? Why is that so hard? If you ever try and prove anything, the first thing people want is sourcing, why am I the bad guy for calling him out for not doing that while he gleefully steals research that has the decency to source everything in the very research he steals. If he wants people to be GME pilled or red pilled on other topics, wouldn't it logically make sense to want to POINT PEOPLE IN THE DIRECTION OF MORE INFORMATION THEY CAN EXPAND THEIR KNOWLEDGE WITH? Why does he only want people listening to him? BECAUSE he wants all eyes on him! Whether he does anything nefarious with it or not is one thing, I'm just sick of the dishonest grifters stealing the limelight, acting like they do all this work, and NEVER POINTING PEOPLE IN THE DIRECTION OF MORE INFORMATION.
As for the vindication comment, I get that it's weird, I just get in arguments over this guy irl all the time trying to point this very thing out that he never sources anything and he's just trying to pass off others info as his own.
He shows his sources period. But ok you think he should make wiki citation style walls of text for all his tiktok videos. You could always contact him and tell him this.
I just hope he keeps spreading eye opening redpill videos full of crowd-sourced information to millions of normies. Or "stealing peoples research" as you call it.
And you seriously get in arguments with people irl about where he sTeALs his facts from!? You do that instead of being glad they are waking up, and pointing them in the direction of more (sToLeN) info to help them open their eyes? Thats not something to be proud of.
He shows his sources period. But ok you think he should make walls of text out of those sources for all his tiktok videos. You could always contact him and tell him this.
All I'm asking for is the link back to the superstonk DD, the Q research, news article, website, or the Twitter thread he got his info from. It would literally be one link to the already written and completed research that already has that source inside of it. This strawman about a wall of text doesn't negate my point at all.
And I agree he's doing a service by spreading the word, but he would be doing an even greater service by pointing people in a direction where they can do their own research by seeing THE ORIGINAL STUFF. By not linking back to it and trying to pass it off as his own, he does everyone a disservice.
The people I argue with about him irl are already awake. Again, from my previous comment:
I just get in arguments over this guy irl all the time trying to point this very thing out that he never sources anything and he's just trying to pass off other's info as his own.
The debate I'm having with you right now is the exact same debate I have with the already awake irl. He's doing both the researchers and the viewers a disservice by not linking back to the original and letting people see more for themselves.
I get your point. It's true, making sources easy to link into is good. His content and commentary has value. Citing others work isn't stealing. Referring back to others work and content is part of the work, no?
Yes, which is why I'm asking why he doesn't do that. I enjoyed his content at first, even though I've known all he's doing is regurgitating others'work since I've literally heard the research he brings up already. Over time, though, I've grown weary of people like him who don't link to any sources whatsoever and pass it off as their own. If he didn't put his face and name front and center, I wouldn't have a problem with him. But by doing it, he's just branding himself. As Q said, anons do this work for free.
Brother, Q literally said anons do this work for free. I've been a part of this train waking people up around me and online for 10 years now, before Q even started. Sorry I don't have a tangible grift I can point to that'll satiate you. You're really fired up all because I pointed out someone is doing people a disservice, take a look in the mirror.
EDIT 2: https://cancelthisclothingcompany.com/shop/ This is literally Ian's Tshirt shop, the same branding as his YouTube channel that can be found all linked in his Twitter Bio. GRADE A GRIFTER, CONFIRMED. Archive.org snapshot
This is vindication for me. I've been trying to tell people who like this guy that he's just regurgitating old DD from Superstonk for his market analysis and anon research from over the years for everything else. He never says ANYTHING NEW, HE JUST STEALS.
Folks, I cannot emphasize this enough: If they show their face while telling OLD INFORMATION, they are building a B R A N D. They're grifters riding off the coattails of others, passing off the hard work of other researchers as if they found it themselves. Instead of putting the information front and center, he throws himself into the spotlight (like many others) to make it seem like HE'S THE VOICE OF REASON. IT'S ALL BRANDING.
"Be careful who you follow." - Q
Not all who do it are grifters, but I would not be shocked if this dude has merch or something in mind he wants to bring up soon.
EDIT: ANOTHER HUGE RED FLAG: HE NEVER GIVES SOURCES! That is always a HUGE deal to me, and how I know he's just stealing others research (even though I've heard it and read it all years before he started trying to pass it off as his own). If he gave sources, he'd just be linking to the research he's regurgitating and would easily be called out for it.
Actually he always gives sources, and tells his viewers to check his sources for themselves. If you think people on tiktok are posting walls of text for all their sources like wiki, than you really have nfi.
Like this video: https://x.com/Cancelcloco/status/1760478419652055127
Or this video where he gives a masterclass on how MSM used their own sources to debunk pizzagate: https://x.com/Cancelcloco/status/1742672942318919682
He has been redpilling on a wide range of Great Awakening related subjects long before he made anything about GME. He does it in an easily digestible engaging format, and is redpilling millions of normies.
Some of the subjects he makes videos on inlcude: Pizzagate, Boeing whistleblower deaths, Epstein, Israel, Covid lies, Diddy lawsuit (pedo shaming), Blackrock etc etc.
He isnt declaring that he finds all the info himself, quite the opposite actually. He posted on Superstonk asking for crowd-sourcing information to create more videos and get the message out to a wider audience.
Heres a post he made which gives you more insight. He hates grifters/paytriots.
And using words like "this is vindication for me" tells me this is somehow personal for you...which is weird.
Still not seeing any direct sourcing of anything. "Go look it up yourself" is one thing, linking to it so people can discern exactly what he sees is what I'm asking for. Idk why this is so hard for people to understand.
So you disprove me saying he's a grifter by saying his grift is different since he owns up to it? And again, he doesn't hide that he just uses other people's research, and if that's the case, why doesn't he ever link to any of it in the comments or anything? Why is that so hard? If you ever try and prove anything, the first thing people want is sourcing, why am I the bad guy for calling him out for not doing that while he gleefully steals research that has the decency to source everything in the very research he steals. If he wants people to be GME pilled or red pilled on other topics, wouldn't it logically make sense to want to POINT PEOPLE IN THE DIRECTION OF MORE INFORMATION THEY CAN EXPAND THEIR KNOWLEDGE WITH? Why does he only want people listening to him? BECAUSE he wants all eyes on him! Whether he does anything nefarious with it or not is one thing, I'm just sick of the dishonest grifters stealing the limelight, acting like they do all this work, and NEVER POINTING PEOPLE IN THE DIRECTION OF MORE INFORMATION.
As for the vindication comment, I get that it's weird, I just get in arguments over this guy irl all the time trying to point this very thing out that he never sources anything and he's just trying to pass off others info as his own.
He shows his sources period. But ok you think he should make wiki citation style walls of text for all his tiktok videos. You could always contact him and tell him this.
I just hope he keeps spreading eye opening redpill videos full of crowd-sourced information to millions of normies. Or "stealing peoples research" as you call it.
And you seriously get in arguments with people irl about where he sTeALs his facts from!? You do that instead of being glad they are waking up, and pointing them in the direction of more (sToLeN) info to help them open their eyes? Thats not something to be proud of.
All I'm asking for is the link back to the superstonk DD, the Q research, news article, website, or the Twitter thread he got his info from. It would literally be one link to the already written and completed research that already has that source inside of it. This strawman about a wall of text doesn't negate my point at all.
And I agree he's doing a service by spreading the word, but he would be doing an even greater service by pointing people in a direction where they can do their own research by seeing THE ORIGINAL STUFF. By not linking back to it and trying to pass it off as his own, he does everyone a disservice.
The people I argue with about him irl are already awake. Again, from my previous comment:
The debate I'm having with you right now is the exact same debate I have with the already awake irl. He's doing both the researchers and the viewers a disservice by not linking back to the original and letting people see more for themselves.
I get your point. It's true, making sources easy to link into is good. His content and commentary has value. Citing others work isn't stealing. Referring back to others work and content is part of the work, no?
Yes, which is why I'm asking why he doesn't do that. I enjoyed his content at first, even though I've known all he's doing is regurgitating others'work since I've literally heard the research he brings up already. Over time, though, I've grown weary of people like him who don't link to any sources whatsoever and pass it off as their own. If he didn't put his face and name front and center, I wouldn't have a problem with him. But by doing it, he's just branding himself. As Q said, anons do this work for free.
He puts way more effort then you have or ever will into truth telling
Brother, Q literally said anons do this work for free. I've been a part of this train waking people up around me and online for 10 years now, before Q even started. Sorry I don't have a tangible grift I can point to that'll satiate you. You're really fired up all because I pointed out someone is doing people a disservice, take a look in the mirror.