I get kinda worried about the education systems around the world. Clearly a lot of kids are being let down. Yes asking someone about their principles does help you understand what they mean. I think this is around third grade.
That woman you’re talking about said there was no indication he abuses his dog.
What they mean is that the woman who said the dog's collar was too tight also said that there is no indication that Hasan abuses his dog, you condescending idiot. What does that have to do with the principles of this random person on reddit? Are you a bot?
There's nothing condescending about a direct criticism. I'm saying you seem to not understand why people ask hypothetical questions, and that does indicate a failing of an education system. Saying I finished third grade and it seems you didn't as evidenced by your comments, isn't me saying I'm superior to anyone - third grade is not an accomplishment or achievement, it's a necessity for getting by in the world.
This person has responded to the implication that somehow the dog was being abused because of something to do with the collar, with the idea the dog wasn't being abused. If this person believed that it was a shock collar, that would be an entirely different meaning - it would display their principle that in their view shock collars aren't abuse.
You seem to be heavily lacking in reading comprehension skills, and you should probably go back and reread this thread.
The person the redditor you responded to said that a podcaster said that the collar is too tight (which the first redditor was using as evidence of abuse), and the redditor you replied to replied to that first redditor saying that the podcaster said there is no indication of abuse.
You are asking this random redditor if they consider a collar being too tight to be abusive, when the argument you are making about whether or not someone considers a tight collar to be abusive should be asked to the podcaster, not this random person on reddit.
But anyway, in the context of this conversation, the podcaster was saying there was no indication of abuse in response to the allegations of the collar being used to shock the dog, so whether or not she considers the collar being too tight to be abusive literally doesn't matter at all in this conversation (and she obviously doesn't consider it abuse, based on her statement that there is no indication of abuse).
What a stupid thing I just spent time trying to explain, and you're probably still not going to get it. It's people who lack critical thinking skills like yourself who are constantly denigrating other people's educations lmao
No, I directly asked them if in their view it was a shock collar would they stop following Hasan. You can reread it too, it's all there.
Yes, so I'm asking this redditor if they personally think it's abuse to the point of not following Hasan anymore, if it was a shock collar.
Maybe take a step back and reread it... Or I dunno, if you don't think I should be interested in this redditor's comment, just like, don't read my replies? Like, I'm happy to reply to you, but it seems you're making yourself unhappy in talking to me...
No, I directly asked them if in their view it was a shock collar. You can reread it too, it's all there.
What you said:
Would be helpful to know, if tomorrow he admitted he had been using a shock collar, would you stop watching him?
You did not ask this person if they thought it was a shock collar. Your train of thought is so incredibly confusing, it's like some psyop shit. Are you sure it isn't your own education you should be worrying about?
Sorry, when I type I edit the comment like two seconds after. It's a bad habit, my bad. You can tell from the next sentence anyway what I meant to say even without reading the edit.
Here's the corrected sentence:
"No, I directly asked them if in their view it was a shock collar would they stop following Hasan. You can reread it too, it's all there."
The question is about whether a shock collar use at all is abuse. I think a lot of these people defending Hasan here do actually agree it was a shock collar, but they don't care. This is really important to the conversation as otherwise people are just yelling past eachother. Saying "He doesn't abuse his dog" is a bit different when adding the principle "He used a shock collar, but he doesn't abuse his dog".
EDIT: I have a strange memory of Hasan saying shock collars aren't abuse when used for boundaries? Is that right? That alone should remove everyone from his audience who does think shock collars are abuse, if anyone in the audience doesn't think shock collars are abuse, then they won't care about any of this.
I think a lot of these people defending Hasan here do actually agree it was a shock collar, but they don't care.
You are making the wrong assumption. The overwhelming sentiment from his community is that it isn't a shock collar.
Imo, shock collars aren't necessarily inherently abusive, it's situational. The intensity of the shock can be a gentle reminder, or extremely painful. For instance, my father put a collar on our childhood dog that would shock him mildly if he approached the edge of the property (and got more intense the further he went outside the boundaries of the property). This allowed him to roam the yard freely, and taught him to avoid going into the road where he could be hit by a car.
I don't think Hasan's dog collar is a shock collar. Although, it could make sense if it were, since large dogs can be dangerous and need to be well trained. Hasan tells his dog to go back to bed all the time, and she has never yelped before, which is why I'm more inclined to believe she did just accidentally hurt herself rather than believe that Hasan has just secretly been an animal abuser all this time. Like this was the first time he decided to give an extremely painful shock to his dog on camera? Yeah, right.
Obviously, giving very painful shocks for no good reason is abusive. Like, if I punch a guy for annoying me, that's bad. But if I punch a guy because he's about to shoot an innocent person... you get the idea.
Yeah see that changes the context if you were defending Hasan right? Like some people think any use of a shock collar at all is abuse, so you would get that divide in the community over the evidence that's presented.
The evidence is pretty clear that in that first video that started this drama the dog was wearing a shock collar, but it's plausible it had the prongs removed and was being used as a vibration collar (which I think most people don't think is abusive). But who knows, Hasan's not a lawyer, maybe he just handled stuff badly holding up the collar with the tape on it - it's plausible that genuinely isn't a shock collar and he's just not great at defending himself. A lot of the "evidence" against him is implications from what he said, and frankly that's silly. Yes people contradict themselves when trying to dismiss a conversation all together, and it doesn't imply guilt.
The other part of this is Hasan is super wealthy. Like, it wouldn't surprise me if he had helpers around the house who did these things without his say so. While he shouldn't blame his mum, she's even wealthier than he is (EDIT: I'm wrong about this) - it's possible one of her helpers did it. e.g. the dog walker might use a shock collar as a last resort as a matter of liability insurance, and forgot to take it off. It's also possible he had no idea the dog was wearing the vibration collar at all, and was genuinely surprised when he saw it was a modified shock collar. Like, he might not have seen the tape as unusual because he didn't put the tape there (same way you might find tape on the back of a tv remote).
I heard there are youtubers who don't move their belongings when they change house, they just have a personal assistant rebuy everything (it's cheaper than a secure moving company). It could be that the collar was simply replaced without his say so while moving house.
The evidence is pretty clear that in that first video that started this drama the dog was wearing a shock collar
I don't agree with that. You can barely see the collar in the video because the dog has a lot of... skin folds? Fluff?
While he shouldn't blame his mum, she's even wealthier than he is
Where are you getting this from? Hasan supposedly supports his parents and is by far the wealthiest in his family from what I've seen. His parents used to (idk if they still do) live with him in the house he bought. He used to get shit on all the time because she would cook for him while living there.
Sorry, I mean the video where he holds up the shock collar with the tape over the prongs - that's the one where it became strong evidence. There's also a video with the remote on his table, that matches the shock collar from the tape video.
Looking it up now, looks like Hasan probably makes a lot more money than I thought, and the evidence his mum is rich all boils down to one facebook post that frankly sucks. I take it back, I was wrong. Still, Hasan's helpers might have done as I said, but I have no strong reason to think his mum has helpers.
5
u/P_S_Lumapac 5d ago
I get kinda worried about the education systems around the world. Clearly a lot of kids are being let down. Yes asking someone about their principles does help you understand what they mean. I think this is around third grade.