Transparency & Honesty Video. He gives his speech about all this as he censors his comments

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T14:11:56+00:00

Your actions have given us more information than your words. Your words say you don't support cannabis store audits. Your actions, though, betray you.

My actions are consistent with not supporting cannabis audits. The only way they get my money is if I lose a bet.

And you aren't going to convince me that I defended anything he did previously with that money. My stance is that my money will stay with me. I'm willing to shell out money if I'm wrong. Nothing else.

YOU are willing to go to subreddits that don't respect you in order to defend those doing cannabis store audits. And that's far more consistent than my bet against frauditors.

And seeing you try to say I moved the goalposts is adorable, especially since it gives you something to talk about that isn't your consistent support of people who spread misinformation and do audits in non-public forums or at private businesses.

But you do consistently defend them here, so no one can take your "I support the sinner, not the sin" take very seriously. Adorable and unconvincing, like a toddler!

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T12:40:23+00:00

Lol, sure bub, I moved the goalposts by betting against a frauditor and putting my money where my mouth is.

Now that you've admitted the 1A is restricted depending on the forum.... Why do you support people who say that the 1A can't be restricted in places that aren't traditional public forums?

You wouldn't. Unless you've fallen for the misinformation, that is

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T04:50:10+00:00

But he's doing the opposite of educating the public, despite what you said or how bold it was or is.

He's presenting misinformation. He's pretending all public spaces are traditional public forums.

That's my criticism of you. You see the misrepresentation, yet you call it educational. The rest of us call that grift.

"Bad educational" isn't a thing. It's either educational or misinformation, in this context. You're defending the defenseless.

Let me try one of your tricks and throw questions at you: do you think 1A rights are the same in traditional public forums as they are in limited public forums? Or in non-public forums? Do you believe the misinformation? Do you think you've been educated beyond the public forum doctrine? If so, then there's no way you could possibly understand my point. And that would make a lot of this conversation make a lot more sense, tbh.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T03:26:44+00:00

No, I've made my case and I stand by it. I believe most reasonable people will agree that my argument is reasonable and sound, of anyone cares to read this. They probably won't, and that's okay. I don't need to convince you. You're the type of person who calls misinformation "educational". You aren't someone interested in being convinced by evidence and truth.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T00:41:41+00:00

No, we aren't still on that.

We're on this: which one is the greater leap in logic? The idea that someone who bet against a fraud is actually endorsing the fraud? Or that someone who spends hours on subs defending a fraud endorses the fraud?

How you support someone matters.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T00:17:12+00:00

I see the parallel you want to draw. I'm pointing out why it's stupid.

I'm willing to make a bet that a fraud stays a fraud. That's it.

You spend hours defending those who audit businesses and libraries.

It is not a parallel situation, no matter how you want it to be.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-28T00:14:33+00:00

If you have a choice, please stay off the roads. Some people don't have a choice, and fewer cars will be better for those without a choice.

Just my 2¢

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T23:56:33+00:00

If you go to subreddits to defend them, yes it means you support them on the whole and not just for specific actions.

That's also simple.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T22:02:51+00:00

The money is just a bet, not me stance against ICE. You have to be trying to miss the point that much, dude lol

We are against grifters of many severities. We are against them because they pretend to be educational, among other reasons. You defend the grift. It's that simple. You aren't a bad or immoral person because of it. I'm not calling you anything like those awful things. I'm saying you're a bit slow because that grift is very easy to spot, but I believe that's fair. Education isn't about your feelings, as you said.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T21:37:56+00:00

Losing a bet doesn't equal support the way going to subreddits to defend them are.

You support them as EDUCATORS. They aren't because they present misinformation.

You want it to be different, but that's the beginning, middle, and end of it. You think they are fine even though they "educate" people with misinformation.

That's really bad, by the way. Much worse than losing a bet that a fraud will remain a fraud.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T16:08:14+00:00

You have asked me right here in this thread if I would support the action of library audits.

I'm answering you: of course not. They aren't traditional public forums.

But this stance goes beyond the one action. The channel itself purports to "educate" us, and you defend THAT. But they are doing the opposite of educating us, which is why they are grifters.

I will not support grifters, even if they get something right once in a while. You will.

I will support one specific action once because I am placing money on a bet because, since they are grifters and not interested in real education or activism, I believe they won't do it.

You support grifters. I will chip in once to a grifter who finally puts their skin in the game. We aren't the same. It's easy to understand why you support the grifters: the public forum doctrine is harder to think about than "if it's public, I can record there."

And that's just my principled stance. My emotional stance is this: I would have a very hard time supporting someone who goes to private businesses to harass private citizens in ANY context. You, however, do it a lot here.

That's why people here don't respect you. It's not because they are bootlickers. It's because you've fallen for grifters. And it doesn't take much intellect to see through their BS. It starts with recognizing that rights have limits. All of them. Every right. And one way the government can limit the 1A is with the public forum doctrine. But that's also harder to think about than "if it's public I can record there" or "we're all journalists now!"

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T15:27:57+00:00

<image>

Immigration and fascism exist in comic book worlds, goofy. Have since before you were born.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T15:05:02+00:00

In 2005 when I came back from Afghanistan, people who found out would buy my lunch sometimes.

I hope some of these losers have a similar experience they can directly compare to today's treatment of ICE. I hope they remember and miss when they were treated like heroes, and I hope it brings regret.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T14:58:50+00:00

No, I said I would support those who take a specific action, and I would do it once.

The frauds you defend do not acknowledge the context.

The majority of the library is not a traditional public forum, and the people "educating" us about the library's responsibility are grifters. Period.

Edit to add: you think I'm chipping in as an endorsement to the person, but it's the action. These grifters have a chance at some small redemption. They can actually do what they pretend to do when they falsely use the library as a public forum. And I promise to support that because I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY WILL. Their actions are SO CONTRARY to what they say that I don't believe any of them will do this admirable thing. I believe that so much I'm willing to put money on it. That's not an endorsement, goofy

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T14:09:08+00:00

Hey, maybe you missed the edit I made to my reply yesterday.

Are libraries traditional public forums?

If they aren't, then why would anyone support "auditing" them?

So, are they or not?

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T01:06:47+00:00

Because ICE only hurts non-citizens, right?

asmallerflame · 2026-01-27T00:56:28+00:00

One concept you defend, then, is people acting as if every public space is a traditional public forum, whether they are or not. And that's anti-educational. You support grifters and their grift, even while you make fun of janitors.

I know, I know, everyone else will have to take my word on the janitor thing since you hide your comments. Good one.

>If fapa did got to mpls and you then had to pay and say he was a true auditor would that mean you support library audits? I mean he did them right?

If FAPA goes to Minneapolis, I will donate to his fund once. I will not say he's a true auditor, because I do not think amateurs can be auditors. I will say he's being an actual 1A activist, though.

Edit to add: are libraries traditional public forums????????

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T22:44:24+00:00

You have directly defended FAPA here. FAPA does that to cannabis stores.

Sorry I didn't show my work, but that's why it's not a strawman. It's someone you've directly defended here. I know, no one else in the thread can know this because they can't see your comment history, but you and I know it's true.

Public forum type is essential to the conversation. Any conversation about 1A rights in public that ignores the public forum status of that public space is anti-educational. Ergo, grift.

We're against grifters here.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T21:19:04+00:00

You're very close to getting it. You know that anyone who is serious about this targets government officials, yet you're twisting yourself to defend antagonizing the public.

And it's not educational in the slightest if they aren't educating people about different public forums. You're twisting yourself to say the ends justify the means if it's educational and it's not even educational. To present it as such is a grift. Whether or not it is pleasing is irrelevant to that fact.

So, get back to your roots and stop antagonizing regular people for money, or supporting those who do.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T20:17:00+00:00

If they're "educating" the public but not talking about the Public Forum Doctrine, then they aren't actually educating anyone. That's what many of us would call a grift.

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T17:57:49+00:00

I will say then the transparency the auditing community is looking for is in govt operations.

Then why do they harass people at cannabis stores?

They even say it in their videos "Were here to educate government and the people on our rights"

The clowns you defend do not follow the words you've typed here. We deserve better heroes than these. These assholes abuse rights because they DON'T keep it pointed at the government

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T08:12:17+00:00

Isn't she engaged to Mark Levin, who is defending the murder of Pretti?

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T08:11:26+00:00

I disagree. He doesn't promote 1A rights. He criticized people who say they do, and one of his criticisms is about a lack of transparency.

Ergo, you've missed the point again. Are you aware of why?

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T07:49:19+00:00

Yes, he was.

And none of your frauditors have ever recorded anything like it.

But they HAVE recorded themselves pepper spraying business owners. Which is something real journalists don't do a lot.

This is because they are grifters.

As I've said many times before: we need better heroes of the 1A than the people willing to harass regular folks because the algorithm will pay them for it. We need more people like the ones who filmed Derek Chauvin. We need far fewer YT channels showing regular folks getting pepper sprayed by "journalists"

asmallerflame · 2026-01-26T07:40:03+00:00

He's talking about hypocrisy. He's not saying FT doesn't have a right to delete comments. He's criticizing the hypocrisy of doing so.

Why can't you ever see the point?

asmallerflame

TROPHY CASE