i really liked how you discussed your journey from realizing the claudine gay shit wasn't about plagiarism but just a toehold to get her canceled because she didn't sufficiently defend israel. and i was impressed how you were humble enough to clarify you're not an expert an israel/gaza and have just begun learning about the history for the first time. consider this an olive branch.

my problem with you has been your arrogance and susceptibility to feuding, embellishing your work, etc. your measured takes here were impressive, and it seems like you're maturing. you're a young guy and i certainly cringe at all the dumb, arrogant stuff i did when i was your age.

however, the one karlstackian moment came when you claimed to have "put away" ari and that they "wouldn't have caught him" without you. that's not the case, and saying so reduces your credibility and comes off as trying to elevate yourself above the story. you could have said something like "i was the first to identify the guy" or "i broke his identity", which is also not true, but tolerable levels of embellishment.

you show signs of maturing, and most people have to take a few lumps and get spun around on what they thought was true to become more humble and mature. i hope you internalize how you were wrong and your arrogance probably blinded you and prevented you from unbiased curiosity during the whole xo ackman time. try to remember that, and know that people are much more persuaded by those who are humble about their contributions than those who embellish them or claim expertise without merit.

again, great job in the interview and i'm wishing you all the best going forward.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49000555)

this generation of journalists have a unique challenge in that instead of coming up and having to contend with vicious edits and criticism, they are incentivized to churn out as much provocative shit as possible. i'm sure this is especially true when starting out. maybe 30 years ago karlstack would have had his ego beaten out of him by an editor and superior colleagues, but today he has to take his lumps publicly.

he did see the light on his past blindspots and i think he deserves to be encouraged to do that going forward. i also hope he takes his work more seriously. i think the manhattan institute + groyper thing sent him into a tailspin, which i'm sure many of us would have done at his age in his situation.

i'm a believer in redemption, especially for youthful arrogance and ego.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49000584)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49000589)

also karlstack had appeared in plenty of stuff and ive never denied hes a tall and handsome guy. ive criticized him for being aspie and awkward, but thats part of why he deserves praise here as he clearly has worked on improving. the first thing he said was hes trying to do more public speaking.

anyway im not gay and dont base my impression of men on their looks. boner police is handsome and a complete lunatic. if you are handsome that wouldnt change ghe fact you're a schizo retard.

id be happy to have a voice chat with you and poast it unedited if you want to AMOG me.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49001371)

link to your youtube channel? i want to put on a 10 hour mix of schizophrenic boomer ramblings in the background while i work on stuff

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49001803)

ching chong ling long konichiwa!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49003179)

what's your wechat id? let's chat

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5735361&forum_id=2:#49003209)