Even here on hexbear, in a very explicitly leftist space, I have witnessed some people who wouldn’t think twice about using a shock collar for training. They’re very common.
I’ve never seen someone here would would support the use of a shock collar, and to my knowledge I have never met a leftist who regards such a thing well unless we’re counting ACP freaks and anyone else who just calls themselves “left”. A vibrating collar, which appears to be what she actually has? Sure, but not a shock collar.
Why do even huge TV personalities, actors, CEOs making 7-8 figures a year manage to blow up their careers with easily avoided PR disasters constantly?
Usually they aren’t doing something this ridiculously stupid, and you’re also using a large sample size to be able to point to a relatively small number of cases.
I don’t buy every story I hear about Hasan, because 99.9% of the time they’re lies. I’m not claiming it’s a shock collar, or that he shocked her in that clip, just that it’s plausible.
You’re mistaking something possible for it being plausible. Yes, it is literally possible that it’s a shock collar, we don’t have hard facts that make such a thing absolutely out of the question, but when you yourself recognize the endless stream of lies about Hasan, that in isolation the collar could be a ton of different things, and that the incident doesn’t seem to tell us that much because momentary coincidences can happen over the course of thousands of hours, the shock collar story is no longer plausible, it is merely possible but implausible because we have so much evidence outweighing it. The only reason this gained traction is because of conspiracist confirmation-seeking patterns of thinking that can transform virtually any evidence into something hostile because that’s all that the subject is willing to conceptualize with respect to the target of their obsessive hatred. You obviously are not that, but you aren’t thinking about this in a balanced way, you’re just giving undue credibility to a flimsy theory when better explanations exist.
Someone in this very thread was talking about their use of a shock collar. Check the modlog.
Using a shock collar is, even on the left, relatively minor of a “crime” and Hasan would probably have little trouble maintaining the same audience numbers if he was openly using a shock collar.
I’m not giving “credibility” to anyone beside the video itself. When you hear a liar speak you ignore them, not actively believe the opposite. We can stop talking about which liars said it first because I’m not relying on their word for anything.
Someone in this very thread was talking about their use of a shock collar. Check the modlog.
Alright, let me update what I said: One person.
Using a shock collar is, even on the left, relatively minor of a “crime” and Hasan would probably have little trouble maintaining the same audience numbers if he was openly using a shock collar.
Nonsense. While Hasan himself has said in the wake of this that a shock collar typically isn’t as bad as it sounds, that it just makes a tingling feeling (he has some experience with these in the past, though he says he never personally used one with a dog of his own), people would be at least a little upset at him for using one, somewhat more upset at doing so secretly, and incomparably more upset at him for lying about it, which is what we would need to conclude now with him explicitly and extensively denying these claims. He had several less-damaging offramps, so the assumption here is that he is using a shock collar, which is a mild brand risk, in secret, which mitigates that risk, but then flagrantly revealed the secret, creating a bigger risk, and is now denying it despite the shock collar (supposedly) being clearly visible on camera in addition to flagrantly using it, inviting a huge degree of risk to his personal credibility. It doesn’t make sense. It requires believing that he basically made a perfect catastrophe of wrong decisions over the course of days and possibly years to do the most damage to his reputation with the smallest extra-social infraction.
I’m not giving “credibility” to anyone beside the video itself. When you hear a liar speak you ignore them, not actively believe the opposite. We can stop talking about which liars said it first because I’m not relying on their word for anything.
But how substantive is that claim really when you’re in here having the discussion they want you to have and shrugging at refutations? How can you act like you’re ignoring them when you are treating their plainly implausible claim as comparably plausible to the alternatives? This is only a real possibility to you because they started saying it, and now we’re just playing a game of endless excuses because the claim ultimately cannot be falsified and there can always be some way of lining up counterfactuals to reach the conclusion that the liars want. Actually ignoring them, if ignoring was what you wanted to do, would be to retain the mindset you had before they said anything, which I really doubt you have. What I recommend, when one is forced to talk about this shit because I agree that ignoring is usually the better option but social circumstances like this sort of prevent it, is critically examining the claim to see how completely flimsy it is and, even if it’s not literally physically impossible, dismissing it as the less plausible explanation because a bunch of liars gassing it doesn’t make it more valid than when it was a non-idea before. It never had any substance and there are explanations that make more sense, that’s all there is to it.
I always assumed that people on this board had a similar level of experience with dealing with conspiracy theorists, but I’m beginning to think that that’s not true.
I am now convinced it’s a shock collar. The following picture is only to show the piece of tape and what I claim it’s covering.
I’ve played around with stills from this clip in my own image editor to my satisfaction. There is without any doubt a piece of electrical tape on the bottom of the black box, obscuring the two holes where the prongs were either unscrewed or cut off. You can easily see the impression of them for yourself if you crank up the brightness and contrast.
I am not making any claims about whether he used it in the clip he’s accused of using it in. The dewclaw getting caught explanation sounds reasonable to me. It’s definitely a shock collar though.
I am probably just personally bad at interpreting blurry images, because I don’t see what you mean. I see the little button-looking thing at the top, but that doesn’t seem to be what you mean, and it’s not obvious to me at all what is under the tape. It looks like the tape is just a covering over a flat surface and we can’t really say what is under it besides obviously there not being a protrusion.
I also kind of need to ask what the point is of a shock collar that doesn’t shock. Like, vibrating collars also have two little contact points, usually, or is that what the button at the top is here?
The round thing at the top is a barrel jack you use to charge the device.
The prongs of the shock collar have been unscrewed prior to the picture being taken, then the holes covered with electrical tape.
There’s a strip of electrical tape across the bottom of the black box, and if you get the contrast ratio right you can even make out the little depression in the tape where the prong holes are. You can make out the tape as it’s moving in the unedited clip as well since it has a matte finish and the plastic around it is shiny. There seem to be a couple dog hairs stuck in the sides of the strip of tape. While it’s possible that the tape was there the whole time, it doesn’t look like a place where the thing would crack, and it isn’t applied in such a way that it would hold anything together. I can’t see any other purpose for it than to cover the prong holes in hopes the camera wouldn’t pick it up, which it very nearly didn’t.
I am pretty certain dog hairs would be caught in the tape over time normally, and it seems possible that there was just a crack or something, e.g. the collar got caught on something that scraped it, so the tape is there to prevent the scrape from scraping Kaya or something (since abrasions to rigid surfaces can themselves be hazards in that way). You also didn’t mention about if they could be the little nodes for a vibration collar, since he says that’s what it is and I don’t see where else it would have the nodes (though I assume on a shock collar that also vibrates, the same prongs do both).
I’ve never used a collar with electronic parts, if it wasn’t clear, just mechanical kinds.
I’ve never seen someone here would would support the use of a shock collar, and to my knowledge I have never met a leftist who regards such a thing well unless we’re counting ACP freaks and anyone else who just calls themselves “left”. A vibrating collar, which appears to be what she actually has? Sure, but not a shock collar.
Usually they aren’t doing something this ridiculously stupid, and you’re also using a large sample size to be able to point to a relatively small number of cases.
You’re mistaking something possible for it being plausible. Yes, it is literally possible that it’s a shock collar, we don’t have hard facts that make such a thing absolutely out of the question, but when you yourself recognize the endless stream of lies about Hasan, that in isolation the collar could be a ton of different things, and that the incident doesn’t seem to tell us that much because momentary coincidences can happen over the course of thousands of hours, the shock collar story is no longer plausible, it is merely possible but implausible because we have so much evidence outweighing it. The only reason this gained traction is because of conspiracist confirmation-seeking patterns of thinking that can transform virtually any evidence into something hostile because that’s all that the subject is willing to conceptualize with respect to the target of their obsessive hatred. You obviously are not that, but you aren’t thinking about this in a balanced way, you’re just giving undue credibility to a flimsy theory when better explanations exist.
Someone in this very thread was talking about their use of a shock collar. Check the modlog.
Using a shock collar is, even on the left, relatively minor of a “crime” and Hasan would probably have little trouble maintaining the same audience numbers if he was openly using a shock collar.
I’m not giving “credibility” to anyone beside the video itself. When you hear a liar speak you ignore them, not actively believe the opposite. We can stop talking about which liars said it first because I’m not relying on their word for anything.
Alright, let me update what I said: One person.
Nonsense. While Hasan himself has said in the wake of this that a shock collar typically isn’t as bad as it sounds, that it just makes a tingling feeling (he has some experience with these in the past, though he says he never personally used one with a dog of his own), people would be at least a little upset at him for using one, somewhat more upset at doing so secretly, and incomparably more upset at him for lying about it, which is what we would need to conclude now with him explicitly and extensively denying these claims. He had several less-damaging offramps, so the assumption here is that he is using a shock collar, which is a mild brand risk, in secret, which mitigates that risk, but then flagrantly revealed the secret, creating a bigger risk, and is now denying it despite the shock collar (supposedly) being clearly visible on camera in addition to flagrantly using it, inviting a huge degree of risk to his personal credibility. It doesn’t make sense. It requires believing that he basically made a perfect catastrophe of wrong decisions over the course of days and possibly years to do the most damage to his reputation with the smallest extra-social infraction.
But how substantive is that claim really when you’re in here having the discussion they want you to have and shrugging at refutations? How can you act like you’re ignoring them when you are treating their plainly implausible claim as comparably plausible to the alternatives? This is only a real possibility to you because they started saying it, and now we’re just playing a game of endless excuses because the claim ultimately cannot be falsified and there can always be some way of lining up counterfactuals to reach the conclusion that the liars want. Actually ignoring them, if ignoring was what you wanted to do, would be to retain the mindset you had before they said anything, which I really doubt you have. What I recommend, when one is forced to talk about this shit because I agree that ignoring is usually the better option but social circumstances like this sort of prevent it, is critically examining the claim to see how completely flimsy it is and, even if it’s not literally physically impossible, dismissing it as the less plausible explanation because a bunch of liars gassing it doesn’t make it more valid than when it was a non-idea before. It never had any substance and there are explanations that make more sense, that’s all there is to it.
I always assumed that people on this board had a similar level of experience with dealing with conspiracy theorists, but I’m beginning to think that that’s not true.
Also that one person got banned. I thought this Grinch person was the same user at first.
I am now convinced it’s a shock collar. The following picture is only to show the piece of tape and what I claim it’s covering.
I’ve played around with stills from this clip in my own image editor to my satisfaction. There is without any doubt a piece of electrical tape on the bottom of the black box, obscuring the two holes where the prongs were either unscrewed or cut off. You can easily see the impression of them for yourself if you crank up the brightness and contrast.
I am not making any claims about whether he used it in the clip he’s accused of using it in. The dewclaw getting caught explanation sounds reasonable to me. It’s definitely a shock collar though.
I am probably just personally bad at interpreting blurry images, because I don’t see what you mean. I see the little button-looking thing at the top, but that doesn’t seem to be what you mean, and it’s not obvious to me at all what is under the tape. It looks like the tape is just a covering over a flat surface and we can’t really say what is under it besides obviously there not being a protrusion.
I also kind of need to ask what the point is of a shock collar that doesn’t shock. Like, vibrating collars also have two little contact points, usually, or is that what the button at the top is here?
The round thing at the top is a barrel jack you use to charge the device.
The prongs of the shock collar have been unscrewed prior to the picture being taken, then the holes covered with electrical tape.
Thanks for explaining what the jack is. I still don’t understand how you’ve coming to that conclusion about there having been prongs. Am I just blind?
There’s a strip of electrical tape across the bottom of the black box, and if you get the contrast ratio right you can even make out the little depression in the tape where the prong holes are. You can make out the tape as it’s moving in the unedited clip as well since it has a matte finish and the plastic around it is shiny. There seem to be a couple dog hairs stuck in the sides of the strip of tape. While it’s possible that the tape was there the whole time, it doesn’t look like a place where the thing would crack, and it isn’t applied in such a way that it would hold anything together. I can’t see any other purpose for it than to cover the prong holes in hopes the camera wouldn’t pick it up, which it very nearly didn’t.
It’s not even electrical tape, it’s literally just the collar
I am pretty certain dog hairs would be caught in the tape over time normally, and it seems possible that there was just a crack or something, e.g. the collar got caught on something that scraped it, so the tape is there to prevent the scrape from scraping Kaya or something (since abrasions to rigid surfaces can themselves be hazards in that way). You also didn’t mention about if they could be the little nodes for a vibration collar, since he says that’s what it is and I don’t see where else it would have the nodes (though I assume on a shock collar that also vibrates, the same prongs do both).
I’ve never used a collar with electronic parts, if it wasn’t clear, just mechanical kinds.