Well privileged males discussing their nutteries sounds like a party.
Yes, thatâs a criticism. That isnât him complaining about being cancelled, which is what the author said
He can complain about it happening to other people, canât he?
Sounds like splitting hairs. Obviously he can do whatever he pleases and still make money.
The author of the piece that you shared made a disingenuous argument. Straw man.
It isnât splitting hairs to point out that she is stating falsehoods to prop up her shitty argument
Nobody said otherwise.
You havenât proved anything by bringing up Chappelle who has clearly complained about being cancelled and continues to profit off of that brand.
It was one of several points i brought up from the article you promoted. She brought him up, disingenuously
Still waiting for the proof on that, I called bullshit like 7 hours ago
There is a difference between complaining about racism and complaining about being racialized. It isnât hair splitting.
He profits from being funny. He talks about things that are important to him.
Exactly why they want you somewhere else; less discussion and more laughs.
Itâs the same logic behind the covid humbug thread
You called bullshit and didnât do a Google search. First quote is him hoping we all survive cancel culture. You either accept evidence right in front of you or you donât.
Sounds like tribalism. Youâre only allowed to laugh at the jokes your tribe agrees with. 
Eventually I did, found the BBC article about him literally getting canceled. In an actual way/shape/form
It isnât evidence for the claim that she made
Iâm sorry, are you making jokes?
It is compartmentalism, because some topics snowball too far out and some people donât care much about other peopleâs obsessions.
I think thatâs pretty normal when it comes to politics, even if people like me would laugh no matter whoâs the victim of the joke. But some other people cannot stand certain people making a clown of themself, so they seem to be compelled to justify or defend them or something.
Whoâs doing that? Or did you think calling out the grifters equates to defending clowns?
Maybe itâs really best to keep that discussion in this thread and leave it out from the other one. Just saying 
That isnât what you were saying is it? If you criticize those that profit off of making their entire platform about finding every little instance and blowing that up to a national crisis, you think that means Iâm defending clowns.
I get why youâd like my points here because youâve got a nice echo chamber. But thatâs not really a discussion is it?
How about to discuss this super exciting topic here and not in a humour centered one?
That is not the stated purpose of the thread nor is every post humorous in any respect. If it was the âFunny Political Pictures Threadâ then youâd have a point. But it is not that.
Doesnât sound like joking to me.
How about if you donât like a post then donât engage and people can contribute how they want? The clowns and the people who make money off the clowns are the part of the same discussion. No reason to go and bifurcate that.
I never read the first posts, and all the things I read there seemed to me funny lunacy. My apologies for not knowing about the origin of the thread 
Nope, we have rules about on topic posting for a reason.
As i already pointed out, we have multiple threads for other topics, too