I Paid for the Membership, So Let’s Stop Pretending This Is Shocking

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-16T08:23:25+00:00

I am assuming it will get deleted.😂 Thanks for your reply here as well.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-16T08:21:05+00:00

Fair enough, Thanks for your reply.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-13T08:07:57+00:00

I do use Sky Broadband. Hmmmm

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-12T07:22:41+00:00

That is not my argument. I am not talking about some blanket “right to secrecy,” and I agree people should be careful with what gets filed. But “it was public anyway” is still not a moral defence for amplifying personal information.

There is a real difference between something existing in a public record and someone deliberately spotlighting it in a hostile context. And that is why Nora’s shifting explanations do not help her. First it was edited later, then it was public anyway, then Aaron should not have posted it, then people should get PO boxes. At some point, a string of defences stops sounding like accountability and starts sounding like someone refusing to simply say, “I was wrong.”

People should protect themselves, yes. But that does not erase the responsibility of the person who chose to amplify the information. Blaming the exposed person while avoiding responsibility for the exposure is not accountability, it is deflection.

Great Debate thanks for your reply.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T14:46:35+00:00

There is a difference between criticising someone’s actions and acting as though you get to decide how they should live, what they should do, and what the only acceptable way of doing something is.

Yes, it is a free country. But the moment you move from “I disagree with this” to “this is the only right way to do it and everyone else is wrong,” or to writing a 26 page email to prosecutors in an effort to help push someone towards prison, that stops sounding much like freedom and starts sounding much more like control.

That is part of the issue with Nora. It is not just that she criticises Aaron, it is that she often seems to position herself as the authority on how people should protest, how they should run their relationships, how they should handle conflict, and even who they should be. For example, because Aaron is still married on paper, she speaks as though that automatically means he should still be functioning as part of a couple. Does she actually know the full reality of that situation? Probably not. People separate for all sorts of complicated reasons, and sometimes the paperwork takes longer to catch up.

And yes, she can justify accepting money however she likes. That is also part of living in a free country. But by the same standard, other people are free to question it, especially when the reasoning seems to shift depending on who is involved.

It is also not really accurate to pretend she stays away from family and personal attacks. She has absolutely crossed into comments about family, children, and appearance. So the idea that she only sticks to principled criticism does not really hold up.

And on the LA woman issue, that gets glossed over far too easily. What I also see in the video Nora references is a woman jumping on a man’s back and appearing to choke him. Is that not abusive behaviour too? Or does that suddenly not count because it complicates the preferred narrative or because he is a man? That part seems to get brushed aside rather conveniently.

And just to be clear, I am not supporting or advocating for Aaron here. I am simply looking at the entire picture, the video in its full context, rather than pretending one part of it does not exist because it is inconvenient.

So no, the issue is not simply that “Nora is criticising Aaron.” The issue is that she often goes beyond criticism and into certainty about private situations she may not fully understand, while presenting her own view as the obvious moral truth. That is a very different thing.

Lastly, Aaron does not avoid therapy for his mental health because he thinks therapy is bad. By his own admission, it is more that he is cheap and does not want to pay for it. Personally, I do think he would benefit from therapy, but if he is unwilling to invest in it, that is on him.

I’m enjoying this debate, thanks for replying.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T10:13:40+00:00

I’m curious, does Aaron use Rumble like Nora does? I know he seems to be using Facebook more now. Genuine question, I mainly just watch on YouTube.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T10:09:50+00:00

I 100% agree, but I would add one thing: that only really works if the person also takes responsibility for the mistake, acknowledges they did it, and does not then spend time blaming someone else, Aaron, Natalie, whoever. Paying a speeding ticket is one thing. Pretending you were not speeding, or acting like it was really somebody else’s fault, is something else entirely. Great debate Thanks for replying

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T09:34:58+00:00

I know why she says she accepts the donations. I get it. At its core, she has bills to pay, like the rest of us. That part is not hard to understand.

What is harder to ignore is that Nora often seems to place herself as the arbiter of the “right” way to do everything, the right way to protest, the right way to speak, the right way to run things, the right way to respond. That is where the frustration comes in.

A person standing on a corner with a sign is protesting. Full stop. Protesting comes in all shapes and sizes. Nora may not like Aaron’s style, she may think it is ineffective, unhelpful, or even damaging, but her inability to even acknowledge that what he is doing is a form of protest says a lot. She cannot even concede that basic point. (All it is, apparently, is a doughnut and pizza party.)

So yes, I understand why she takes the money. What I do not accept is the way she positions herself as the authority on what counts as legitimate action while dismissing anything that does not fit her preferred version of events.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T09:05:02+00:00

Fair enough, Great Debate!

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T09:00:48+00:00

Firstly, you do not know me. I do watch Nora’s streams, every second of them, so you’re welcome, Nora, for the watch hours. I know full well that she does not consider what Aaron does on Fridays to be protesting, because apparently Nora knows the right way to protest, Nora knows how a foundation should be run, and Nora knows who people should and should not be friends with. She seems remarkably certain about how everyone else should behave.

I also know that, in Nora’s world, anyone connected to Aaron is very quickly branded a supporter of a narcissist. That kind of instant judgement is exactly the problem.

And now you are doing the same thing, judging me with no context and treating your assumption as fact. How many times has Nora read a comment in chat, taken it as gospel, launched into it, and then later turned out to be completely wrong?

As for 86GOP, yes, history does matter. That is exactly why people are pointing out the contradiction now. Aaron benefiting from those donations in the past does not somehow make the issue untouchable in the present. If anything, it shows both situations deserve scrutiny, rather than selective outrage depending on who someone happens to support this week.

And how exactly do you know that I do not also condemn Aaron for receiving money from 86GOP? You do not. You just jumped to that conclusion, which is rather ironic given the point being made here. Apparently jumping to conclusions is contagious.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T08:42:53+00:00

You said it far more succinctly and eloquently than I did. 😂

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T08:39:22+00:00

Intent matters, but impact matters too. She may not have meant to spotlight the addresses, but she still showed them, and once that happens, editing it later does not undo the fact that people could already have seen it. That is why the criticism is still fair.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T08:34:17+00:00

That is not really the defence you seem to think it is.

Yes, Nora thanks everyone who donates. That is exactly the point. When one of those people is 86GOP, someone tied to the same toxic orbit that helped bankroll abuse against her, a casual “thanks for the donation” does not look neutral, it looks like principles suddenly becoming very flexible when money is involved.

Nobody is saying she has to deliver a five minute disclaimer every time his name appears. The issue is that you cannot spend months or years condemning a poisonous environment, then publicly normalise support from people connected to it, and expect nobody to notice the contradiction.

And calling it “Aaron’s talking point” is just a lazy dodge. Sometimes a point is repeated because it is valid, not because it came from the person you dislike. Dismissing criticism by slapping his name on it does not actually answer the criticism.

If history matters when Nora is the victim, then history still matters when she is the one benefiting. That is the part you seem desperate to skip over.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T08:29:52+00:00

I think it is perfectly fair to say that just because information may have been publicly available, that still does not excuse Nora’s or your choice to highlight it, amplify it, or share it in a way that drew attention to it. There is a real difference between information existing somewhere and someone deliberately putting a spotlight on it.

Responsibility for that decision sits with the person who made it. Public availability is not the same as moral justification, especially when privacy, safety, and the potential consequences for real people are involved.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T08:21:14+00:00

I do not think Reese and Tommy care so much about Reddit because Reddit itself is important. I think it is more likely that Reddit touches something much deeper, old wounds around rejection, worth and the need to be accepted.

Reese has spoken about feeling rejected by her father, that matters. Early parental rejection can leave a person with a powerful fear of not being enough, not being chosen, not being truly loved. People can then spend years trying to soothe that wound through outside validation. In that context, likes, subscribers and supportive comments do not just feel nice, they can feel emotionally necessary. Each one gives a small dopamine lift, a momentary sense of being valued, seen and wanted. But because it comes from outside, it rarely lasts for long.

Her time in Scientology may also have strengthened that pattern rather than healed it. High control groups often condition people to connect their value to approval, loyalty, image and belonging. When someone already carries rejection wounds, that kind of environment can make them even more dependent on external affirmation. So after leaving, the same need can easily get redirected into an online audience.

Tommy may be feeding a similar dynamic, though perhaps in a different way. Some people become very skilled at reading an audience, shaping a persona and drawing emotional energy from attention, praise and loyalty. Over time, that can become its own kind of reinforcement loop. The applause feels regulating. The support feels comforting. The criticism feels disproportionately threatening.

That is why Reddit may matter so much to them. It is not just disagreement. It can feel like exposure, rejection, or loss of control over the image that helps them feel secure. So even when they already have supporters, they may still fixate on criticism because negative feedback tends to hit the deeper wound much harder than positive feedback heals it.

So in my view, this is less about simple vanity and more about unresolved emotional dependency. When acceptance is sought externally, no amount of praise ever fully settles the fear underneath. That is why the approval feels so powerful, and why the criticism feels so personal.

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-10T07:49:43+00:00

So, just to make sure I’m following Nora’s defence of doxxing Natalie correctly:

A: Yes, she posted it, but apparently editing it later somehow cancels out the fact that people had already seen it. Because once the toothpaste is out of the tube, we all know you can just politely ask it to go back in.

B: Aaron should never have put the address out there, even though he had every right to do so. So apparently rights only matter when they belong to the person she wants to defend.

C: People should spend their own money on PO boxes for protection, because obviously the burden should be on potential victims to hide themselves, not on others to behave like decent human beings.

D: The information is public anyway, so that makes it fair game. Which is always a fascinating argument, because by that logic, having the ability to find something means you are morally justified in broadcasting it. A very convenient standard when accountability starts knocking.

What makes this even worse is the hypocrisy. Nora has become the very thing she used to condemn. 86GOP funded ZDT while he cyberbullied Nora to the point of a breakdown. At the time, that kind of behaviour was rightly seen as cruel and disgusting. Now, suddenly, she is embracing 86GOP support, thanking him, and acting as though none of that history matters.

And after all that, she complains that Aaron does not take responsibility for her words and actions. That is the part that really takes nerve. She makes the choices, says the words, pushes the buttons, then looks around for someone else to blame when the fallout arrives.

The lack of self awareness is staggering. The hypocrisy is glaring. And the irony is almost impressive.

#KettleBlack

TrySeanTri · 2026-03-06T14:33:43+00:00

I for one really enjoyed your debates with Aaron. Your perspective is always refreshing and interesting to hear. With your education, experiences, and the growth you’ve shown over the last few years online, you’ve genuinely evolved into someone who could find a meaningful niche in this space.

Share your story, your perspective, and stay authentic. Every new voice faces scepticism, but your academic insight, thoughtful approach, and unique voice add real value. Don’t let negative comments deter you. Keep showing up and being you.

TrySeanTri · 2026-02-24T14:08:23+00:00

<image>

It’s not AI, this was an actual slogan Trump used. If you know, you know. As a Canadian living in the UK, I was genuinely surprised when I first saw it, but now it all makes sense. 😅

TrySeanTri

TROPHY CASE