*24.06.14 Myk And Cowardice - Episode 3 of 100

Link to video:

v50v8cb-myk-and-cowardice-episode-3-of-100.html

Script:

Welcome back to my channel. Things are getting a little annoying. At the rate Myk is going, 100 episodes just may not be enough. But that's up to Myk. Meanwhile, he's just the gift that keeps on giving!

In a live stream on May 31st, Myk from Myk's Philippine Journey announced his usual cowardly intention to censor my channel. Let's follow his pattern as he does his middle school level criticisms.

First, he naturally accused other people, including me, of being "pussies" for exactly one thing - if we won't "cam-up" on a live stream. We start with this comment:

"Don't be a pussy like Reality Check Files"

Anyone who has watched my 3rd video knows about a half dozen reasons why I won't cam up and none have to do with being a coward. But I'll cover that more in a moment.

Myk continues the same childish attack with this:

"I'm calling you a pussy right now because you can't cam up. I'm giving you the opportunity or are you just a pussy like Reality Check Files?"

Keep track of two things. One is that Myk ignores my reasons for not doing anything live. He always either does that, or will focus on one item which he then misrepresents. Strange coming from a guy who falsely claims I take him out of context!

The other is that he never actually shows how not camming up means someone is a coward. It's pure name-calling like in middle school. Again, more on this in a few moments. Meanwhile, more from Myk:

"I welcome a conversation."

Well, actually, not so much. He seems to only welcome conversation on HIS terms, one where he expects to have an advantage. But what he wants is not required for a real discussion of the issues.

But let's get back to who is really being a coward with a comparison!

Am I doing anything to stop Myk from saying whatever he wants, presenting any facts he wants, or even making up whatever he wants? Nope. There isn't anything he can say in a live debate with me that he can't say on his own. The facts don't change, do they?

Furthermore, Myk has over 23,000 subscribers, which is 958 times more than I have. So if he has his say on his channel and I have my say on my channel, he has a rather substantial advantage, doesn't he? Yet that doesn't bother me at all. Mostly because the number of subscribers or viewers doesn't change the facts either!

Yet Myk says this on that live stream:

"I'll even take down his Rumble channel soon."

See what I mean? Just who is actually afraid? Who needs to have things done only their way?

Myk can vlog any way he wants to with the single exception that he doesn't get to require that I do things his way. In the past he claimed he did it my way for months so now I'm supposed to do it his way. But that simply isn't true. He was always allowed to do his videos his way.

You see, a coward is a person who won't stand up to someone. I'm quite willing to do so and, in fact, I do so every week. I just don't do it in a live debate for the roughly half dozen reasons I listed in my third video.

But even if I didn't have those reasons, I still wouldn't do a live debate. Debating is a skill, which can be used for good or ill. I'm just not good at it, but I do just fine laying out my arguments in a methodical way like I do here in my own videos. The facts don't change, do they? And the facts seem to pretty consistently work in my favor so I like my way!

Unlike Myk, I don't tell other people how they have to make their arguments or how much of a video to use. If they want to do live streams, prepared videos, written comments, whatever, that's up to them. I chose to do things the way you've seen in my videos. 

If they react, I just study what they say and, if they misrepresent what I say or fail to back up their own claims or lie, I just point that out.

You see, while I may do fine on a live debate, I KNOW I'll come out ahead my way. And what are you missing if I don't do a live debate? What can be said in a live debate that can't be said my way? But a clever debater can manipulate a debate. I documented this before, when on YouTube. Which is just another reason Myk had to censor me instead of making a counter argument.

Occasionally he tries to, but it doesn't work well for him. Like I documented in a recent video where Myk claimed I said that body language doesn't work. Yet I never said any such thing, so all Myk accomplished was to give me another example of his dishonesty! And remember, Myk pretends to care about maintaining context, yet that was just one of many times he changed mine. Same with this next one.

Myk said I declared his claim about body language was "just a study" as if that meant it had little value. But I didn't say that either. Yes, it was a study. Actually, it was two. But I didn't downplay it because it was a study. I pointed out the flaws in the study IF it actually was about general communication. And I also documented, from the person who actually did the studies, that it wasn't even about general communication and that author said it was absurd to think words were only 7% of communication!

Which means Myk was flat out wrong according to the author of the studies his claim is based on! So why has Myk never admitted being wrong? He has made past statements about how he can accept criticism and admit he is wrong. Yet he hasn't done so. Why not?

Of course, Myk also has said he would make a video apology on his channel about his false accusation made about the age of Uncle Jessie's wife. Yet he never did. Not only that, but the videos where he made those false claims seem to still be available. Nothing quite like falsely accusing someone of breaking the law and then fail to take down the videos that made that claim!

By the way, on the live stream on Alo Dewinter's channel I previously referred to, Andy Omar seemed to have a problem with this issue when it came up while Myk wasn't there. Remember, the claim was that Uncle Jessie's wife was underaged. But Uncle Jessie provided her ID card which showed she was born in 1999, so not underaged.

What did Andy say? Did he do the obvious and admit it was wrong to make public accusations that turned out to be false? Nope. He talked about how Jessie's wife looked really young as if that excuses smearing Uncle Jessie. It does not. If someone has concerns based on what she looked like, there is a simple solution. Contact the local government officials and let them know your concerns. They can quickly check it out and, when it turns out to be a false alarm, no one is hurt.

But that isn't what was done. Myk still owes that apology and Andy Omar needs to not try to create excuses for someone making a false, and serious, accusation publicly.

Myk doesn't sound like someone who can take criticism or admit mistakes to me! Maybe there are too many to keep up with!

Myk also said this, in regard to me:

"Don't hide. That's the thing. People have the opportunity to have a conversation, but they don't want to."

Which is weird since Myk gets to say whatever he wants on his channel and I respond on mine. Seems to work just fine, at least for those of us interested in the facts. An exchange of information, views, etc, don't have to be live or face to face. But Myk needs it to be that way to have any chance of winning.

That left him with no option but to either stop behaving badly or to be a coward and censor me. We know what choice he makes.

Meanwhile, I'm quite satisfied to deal with his 23,000 subscribers while I just have a couple dozen. Because I know those that check both channels will see I make a better case. I'm sure Myk and his followers will disagree, but he's the one who is resorting to censorship, not me! So maybe any disagreement is really just a self-serving declaration, not matched by his actions!

Since Myk is so intent on further censoring, let's review a few things that show he's just being a coward.

There are two main aspects to consider when using someone's material. One is based on what the copyright owner says is okay and that can literally allow anything. Like I've said anyone can use my videos that criticize trolls in full or in part as long as they don't take credit for my work. So far, one person has done that on YouTube. I wonder if Myk will strike them since it contains clips from Myk?

The other is based on what the law allows, what is commonly called "fair use". These are things the law allows and it doesn't matter if the copyright owner likes it or not.

I documented this stuff in a previous video, but I'll remind you again here. Also, keep in mind that from the start I always just used clips - enough to establish what I reacting to and prove my point. So whatever Myk said was okay would apply to the way I was doing things from the start.

"It's another channel that had like over 9 videos just about me, which is amazing, alright. I was like, yo, that's fine. Fair use. And it's all about me, him trying to prove me wrong against the Pea and that's perfectly fine. I appreciate that."

That statement covers both scenarios. On the personal level, he said what I was doing was fine - twice. On the legal side, he admitted it was fair use.

But there is more!:

"There's channels out there trying to expose me. I'm good. Please do. Please use my channel. Please use my videos. I ain't gonna strike someone for, you know, using my videos. It's fair use. And so, that's the fun part. But one thing that you guys do know is when we review people's videos here, we play their videos. We don't use 10 seconds, 5 second clips."

Again, saying he's good with what I'm doing and won't make strikes. And once again says it's "fair use". Sure, he complains that I don't use his full videos, but that doesn't change anything. Especially since I've also shown that Myk has used just small portions of other people's videos. As such, he has no grounds to complain about others in any case.

Then we have Myk criticizing folks who may complain about his video reactions to others:

"This is the fair use description. Video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism & comment. And for you idiots out there who says, 'Oh, you're just chasing', uh, excuse me, this is YouTube. This is allowed. This whole thing where reaction videos, is allowed in YouTube."

Of course, that is what my videos have always done! And Myk was both fine with it and admitted it was fair use - until he finally realized that my tiny channel was making him look bad!

Remember, Myk has plenty of videos where he leaves out most of what was in the original, so he is violating his own practices when he says anyone has to use all of his.

Myk also knows it is necessary to leave things out. Remember this?:

"When we see a video, whether who the creator is, we have to understand that they're not going to be able to use the full amount of the video to be able to fully explain everything, okay? Happens to me all the time."

Yet Myk claimed that I'm supposed to use his full videos, which can last for hours! Remember the recent video where I was using a couple short clips that applied to the point I was reacting to. Those clips came from two live streams with a total length of 5.5 hours! Of course I'm not going to include the entire video! If only 10 seconds matter, I'll use 10 seconds even if the video is "only" 20 minutes. And as you just heard, Myk understands this. At least for himself. It's that double standard thing again which cowards specialize in.

Here's another one:

"I'm not calling for, um, for canceling people. I'm just not. That's just not me, right. I don't believe in cancel culture."

Seems he does believe in cancel culture. Maybe, for consistency sake, he should have said something like, "I don't believe in cancel culture unless I'm losing."

Another thing Myk likes to do is complain an opponent is "moving the goalpost". Interestingly, this often happens when it is Myk actually doing it.

For example, remember all that stuff saying what I was doing was "fine", "fair use", etc. But when he realized he was losing, he then said I had use his full videos, or at least 80% - he isn't very consistent. When I responded and said what I would be willing to do, but not that, he was quick to say I was moving the goalposts.

Do you see the problem? Myk had moved them first! By about 50 yards! And when I would agree to no more than 10 yards, he falsely said I was the one moving them! It's like dealing with a child.

This next part also fits in with his censorship approach:

"The only time I erase comments is if a person is being racist, you know, or if the person is just straight out, you know, being, um, straight up a pig to women"

That isn't true either, but put it in the bigger concept of censoring a channel! Who is it who not only attacks women based on their physical appearance, but laughs about it while doing so? I sure don't. Myk should be censoring his own channel, not mine!

A previous video showed Myk taking great joy in ridiculing Paul Old Dog New Tricks wife. Yet Myk sometimes whines about people attacking his girlfriend - typically with no examples. So even if someone did, where is his justification to complain when he does it to others so often? Must be another of those constantly changing "standards".

And as I previously mentioned, he attacked the appearance of The Filipina Pea's mother and how she supposedly didn't take care of her face.

I pointed out that Pea's mother does have facial problems resulting from the difficult birth of her youngest child. It is serious.

I hammered Myk about this numerous times and eventually he responded - but not to apologize. He danced around the whole thing, much like he did when caught being wrong about Uncle Jessie's wife. But what I found most interesting was he included a comment about how he could tell what Pea's mother was suffering from. 

Uh, so what? Not that I would accept his long distance diagnosis anyway, but even if he actually knew what it was, how does that matter to the serious problem of him attacking a woman whose facial problems are the result of something that has nothing to do with caring for herself? His attack did specifically make it about her failure to take care of herself.

I once had a teacher who had suffered from severe facial burns. I mean, it was uncomfortable to even look at him. But no one went around saying he was ugly or that he didn't take care of himself, or imply his children would likely end up the same! Myk doesn't see to mind doing it though.

One more thing. I normally don't bring in religion, but it is fair to hold someone to what they say their beliefs are. So when Myk has said this:

"I'm Catholic. A strong Catholic."

Then I'm going to ask him exactly where in the Bible or any Catholic Doctrine, does it say it is okay to claim there is a 90% chance that The Filipina Pea didn't register with the BIR, or, after it turned out she did, for him to then claim she probably didn't actually pay them. No apology for false claims. Myk just creates new ones.

I'm pretty sure there is something in Catholicism about bearing false witness. And that would also apply to Myk falsely claiming that Pea said feminism doesn't exist in the Philippines. Or saying that Pea told people to pay "girlfriend alimony" when she never did. Or falsely claiming that Pea said that lying was cultural or traditional in the Philippines. Or that "saving face" justified lying even though Pea actually said it didn't.

Before ending this, let me add a bit to that "saving face" item that I covered in detail in a prior video. I mentioned that Myk himself had previously said that saving face was "very important" there. His excuse for attacking Pea for similar statements was it was only around his 5th video when he said it was very important and he had since learned better.

I made one mistake. I said it was really his 95th video. Turns out it was really his 97th. Now, that isn't a big difference, but then I found that he actually said it was very important on his 468th video as well, in 2022!

When did he first say the opposite? It was on his 530th video, just two months later. And it wasn't to announce a correction. No, it was just to attack Pea for saying the same thing he said about saving face existing in the Philippines! It was only after he got caught in that blatant contradiction that he came up with the, 'Oh, I learned better' excuse. Remember, it took him two weeks to come up with that excuse when challenged! Mostly because it almost certainly wasn't true. If it was true, any normal person would have said so immediately.

So, is Myk a strong Catholic? That is, someone who believes and really tries to follow the teachings of his religion and the Bible?

Well, I suspect we'll know by what he does. Maybe an admission that he was wrong about words only being 7% of communication. And an apology for misrepresenting what I actually said.

And that long delayed apology video to Uncle Jessie. Also an apology for the insults he's made against Paul's wife.

Just a simple start to show his claimed Catholicism is true.

Thanks for watching and don't let the trolls stop you from speaking out.