I think it’s safe to assume that if he was wearing the merch of a youtube channel, then he was subscribed to the channel, or at least very familiar with the channel’s content, yes.
If he were trying to blend in, it’d be more logical to just wear a Trump shirt rather than a somewhat obscure youtube channel. It’s been a few days, and the shooter’s conservative political leanings have been well established. Safe to say this was an accurate assumption.
“Why I Hate The World” is a strong channel name.
How do you know he was subscribed to the Demolition Ranch youtube channel? Is that an assumption because he died in one of their t-shirts?
I think it’s safe to assume that if he was wearing the merch of a youtube channel, then he was subscribed to the channel, or at least very familiar with the channel’s content, yes.
It’s still an assumption, the shooter could have just been trying to blend in with the trump crowd rather then being a subscriber
If he were trying to blend in, it’d be more logical to just wear a Trump shirt rather than a somewhat obscure youtube channel. It’s been a few days, and the shooter’s conservative political leanings have been well established. Safe to say this was an accurate assumption.
Are you assuming he hadn’t watched demolition ranch before? Why?
(Better be as good as the inverse logic of ‘he’s a viewer because he wears their merch’)
The entire point of this discussion is about MISINFORMATION
Making assumptions directly leads to misinformation.
So the person trying to be clear about what is known and unknown shouldn’t conflate a shirt with a subscriber.
If we’re gonna use Occam’s razor we must make all things equal. That means thinking of all the possibilities before applying the logic sieve.
Hence my counterclaim.
Stop policing thought please.
I’m not policing thought, think what you like, please
I just want to be clear about what we have observed (know) vs what we deduce (speculate) our confidence may be high but it isn’t directly observed.