Donated.

Hi Patty.

There is a popular YouTuber named Logan Paul (whom I'd never even heard before yesterday). He filmed himself going through a wooded area in Japan known as Aokigahara, known as the most popular site for suicides in Japan, a nation among the top ten (at least it was in 2012) in the world when it comes to suicide rates per capita.

Logan Paul and group came across a man who had hanged himself and filmed the body, blurring it out for the video, and then filmed his reaction, which was at first stunned, then a kind of shocked amusement.

The backlash came as expected, and Logan issued two apologies then took down the video.

Then Vanity Fair weighs in, bemoaning the fact that the pushback didn't ruin Logan Paul's life or cause his fans to desert him in droves, claiming that the internet outrage "seems totally ineffectual."

It's interesting to me that the culture of Internet Outrage considers it their inalienable right to ruin someone's life, or at least their career (even if it is as a successful YouTuber) because their video crossed the line in taste. They consider it cause for alarm when a person did something terrible, and the backlash did nothing more than compel him to issue an apology.

What more needs to be done? He apologized. You can accept it and continue to watch his videos. Or you can decide he's insincere and not watch his videos. All I'm seeing is a huge complainfest that the Internet Bully Patrol didn't cause Logan Paul to suddenly lose all his money, lose his career as a YouTuber and be forced to live the rest of his life as a vagrant whom no one will hire because of the everlasting stigma that will follow him throughout the rest of his life and certain consign his immortal soul to everlasting hell.

Affirmed— ☑

Re: Logan.

That video is disgusting, Crid. It's exploiting an eleven-year-old for the sake of showing the world how much better we are than that mean ol' Logan Paul.

I don't suppose it's occurred to that mother-of-the-year candidate that that kind of publicity is not her child's best interest.

As for Logan Paul, yes, he's a clod. A contrite clod, but still a clod. Nevertheless, he had nothing to do with that man's death, nor is there anything he could have done to prevent it.

Do you have any friends who post pictures of their meals on Facebook? (Something I admit is ridiculous, but undeniably common.)

Well, if you do, unless they're vegans, you better tell them to cut it out right now! Posting pictures of foods containing meat, eggs or dairy is offensive to vegans!

I worked with a vegan guy. He was from India and didn't use animal products. Folks at the office used to save the dark chocolate from the candy dishes for him since he couldn't eat milk chocolate. Those who brought in candy made sure to have dark chocolate for him.

Going to lunch as a group was painful at times, since even in San Francisco, finding a restaurant with a vegan (not just vegetarian) option was difficult. On occasion, he'd tell us on the walk back to the office that a vegan option was not truly vegan, as he could taste the fish oil or butter. He never made a scene in the restaurant when that happened, letting everyone enjoy their meal.

He never tried to impose his views on us, never criticizing the choice of others to eat meat or dairy, or wear leather. He never protested that we were imposing on his safe space by not keeping vegan in his presence.

Because we could all get along, we tried to accommodate his lifestyle in our communal gatherings and celebrations.

He'd been vegan all his life. It was part of the religion in which he was raised.

So, no, pictures of meat do not impose on your vegan-ness.

Now now Conan. That poor confused fellow wasn't vegan. As you mention eating vegan was part of his religion. But vegan is a religion all on it's own. And an annoyingly evangelical and supremacist one at that.

We need a new word to separate the Vegan (as a religion) from those who just don't eat meat or dairy.

Thank you, Conan. I'm glad to know that not all vegans have to be unreasonable. (Although you could argue that being a vegan is not reasonable.)

> You also mix up who you
> are talking to.

It seemed we had established that it didn't matter:

Please don't make me do my homework Crid.

Y'know, if your identities aren't distinct, what fault is mine?

> If I had, you'd have learned where to put a comma.

When you want a pause that's shorter than a coma?

Well, if you do, unless they're vegans, you better tell them to cut it out right now! Posting pictures of foods containing meat, eggs or dairy is offensive to vegans!

I don't care.

As I said Crid, you flat don't have a clue. No wonder you hate people bringing up all those predictions you made that didn't turn out.

"a pause that's shorter than a coma"

I'll take 'afternoon nap'' for $400, Alex.