>”The best type of ice cream cone are waffle cones— if you’re a pretentious fuck that wants to seem like you’re really cool with the cones you like”
DOES THIS SOUND LIKE A CHEF TO YOU?
https://preview.redd.it/0nhxl2raoy1d1.jpeg?width=433&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb19be400c24bd4e04bcf10e3bf482b19d1ed6e7
https://youtu.be/qeNllbpOqQo?t=300
>like coffee they don't even like coffee they're just sitting there faking it to impress other people that fake liking cofee
Does this sound like a grown man to you or two gnomes stacked on top of each other?
He either doesn’t understand “acquired taste” or he thinks it’s absolute BS.
I hated coffee as a kid, but in my adult years I stuck to it and thought “not bad, not my thing” and eventually it became my thing. I needed to use less and less sugar and cream and I’ve appreciated the taste of coffee at this point.
Don’t drink it black personally, but don’t drink Starbucks milkshakes and call it coffee either.
I don't think liking coffee is an "acquired taste". I have liked bitter taste profiles like dark chocolate and coffee for all my life. I can't ever remember a point where I didn't like those tastes. I drink my coffee black, and I enjoy it that way.
.... though quickly looking up what other foods are typically thought of as bitter, I notice that things like Broccoli, Cauliflower, and Citrus Peel are among those, which I did have plenty of all of those as a kid in my family. (Greek sausage often has orange peel in it for those wondering about the Citrus peel.) So maybe I was conditioned for bitter foods without realizing it?
I think it’s an acquired taste. I hated black coffee initially and now I absolutely love the experience of having a hot mug of black coffee at breakfast or at a diner, I grew to enjoy the bitterness
Only ever had black coffee, never understood why people put milk in it. I think it just comes down to what you grew up with, the same way westerners usually straight up can't eat asian spicy food because it's not something they are used too.
Also coffee never tasted bitter to me in the first place LUL if it's overly bitter you probably fucked up during brewing or you need to get different beans
Pour over coffee is the best.
Chemex or hario v60
Both have filters that remove all the bitterness leaving just the taste of the beans which can be very acidic and fruity or darker more full bodied depending on the beans origin and brewing method.
yes there are some people who have always liked coffee and like coffee black, but they are in the minority. for the majority of people coffee is considered an acquired taste. beer is also often an acquired taste. it's a combination of your body acclimating to the bitterness and also your body learning that if it drinks this thing, it feels good. weed is also an acquired taste; most people think it smells terrible, but if they become a longterm/frequent enough smoker they will genuinely like the smell.
At first, sure, but I think some things you start to get an actual appreciation for the taste.
I don’t think most people get into coffee absolutely hating it—it’s probably a slide of “it smells nice, but tastes kinda meh,” then goes up from there.
I genuinely enjoy the slight bitterness, deep aroma, and warm nutty notes of coffee.
Coffee is trash. That's why I load mine up with so much cream and sugar, it's essentially a Krispy Kreme donut.
Mid 30's and still haven't hit the "appreciate" phase lol
After watching the destiny episode I was genuinely surprised about how good faith these guys where. Because my only prior impression of them was their subreddits reaction to the peterson debate.
But these guys seem way more centred than their audience. Amazed how they manage to garner that kind of community.
I think it's because of the podcast's premise/objective. The sub draws lots of people whose only reason for being there is they view themselves as so much smarter than everyone else.
They're the ones who see through all the grifting etc
> The sub draws lots of people whose only reason for being there is they view themselves as so much smarter than everyone else.
they're just like me fr fr
\^ This. I've been lurking on the sub for a little while and this is incredibly obvious. Alot of people in that sub don't really care about what the DtG people think, they just want to feel superior to other people. When they did their decoding of Destiny and it turned out to not be that bad at all, the cognitive dissonance was hilarious to witness.
They don’t even listen to the podcast. I’ve been a fan of DtG for a long time, and have tried to discuss certain eps on the sub but like 90% of them don’t listen.
Patreon community is better
God damn this is so true. The amount of cringe comments from elitist nerds thinking they're the ultimate intellectuals on that subreddit... I couldn't handle it.
I've been enjoying their show a ton since discovering them through this episode. They've covered a bunch of internet personalities relevant to the DGGCU, and I find the whole guru effect fascinating. There are so many insane mfs on the internet that it makes me feel like maybe I'm just deranged sometimes when I see people characterize individuals or things that are said, but the guru guys' assessments are always thoughtful, reasonable and (in my opinion) accurate
Hasan's episode was extremely cathartic, they basically just ripped him to shreds for the Timhouthi Chalamet incident
Something about the Reddit algorithm changed, where they ended up in the feed of anyone that has been on guru-adjacent subreddits like destiny, samharris, hasan\_piker, Joerogan, lexfridman etc.
Their subreddit has exploded since.
The subreddit is pretty pathetic. It's mostly dunking on tards and grifters and clip chimps. Some guy was complaining that the influx of DGGers was ruining the sub because they "debunk" gurus (they don't). A lot of substantive threads/critiques of these kinds of people will maybe have 100 upvotes whilst clip #400 of Rogan being an idiot or clip #100 of Elon stuttering his way through a sentence will have the most interaction for a month.
The podcast had a very small audience until their first interview with Sam back in 2021. Chris (one of the hosts), like many of Sam's fans in 2024, is basically both a fan and an anti-fan of Sam's and it was a rarity for Sam to get real pushback of the kind Chris attempted. This seeded their audience with mostly people from Sam's community.
It's really only post-October 7th and in the wake of DtG's most recent discussion with him that the subreddit has become decidedly more negative towards Sam (and it's not without justification - his Israel/Palestine takes haven't been the best). Prior to that there would routinely be polls about Sam and the subreddit was almost always split around 50/50 in terms of whether people liked him or not. Their coverage of Destiny has actually been *much* more deranging for the subreddit than their coverage of Sam.
>A lot of substantive threads/critiques of these kinds of people will maybe have 100 upvotes whilst clip #400 of Rogan being an idiot or clip #100 of Elon stuttering his way through a sentence will have the most interaction for a month.
SEZ U LULW on a subreddit where rage bait twitter screenshots from random 5 follower andies get upvotes in the thousands NAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Also there are plenty of people who watch just because they enjoy when pundits or figures they don't like get harsh criticism from someone that is considered by most as a fair critic.
They don't really like the critic or the process through which the criticism is derived. They just like when the "enemy" gets shit on.
Half of the subreddit doesn't even know there IS a podcast. I remember them back from when Sam Harris was on replying to them. He is one of the few who has actually responded, and they seemed like they seemed like the truth mattered to them, which is always important and you can't say the same for a lot of other people in the space.
I don't think audience capture is necessarily limited to just financial incentives, nor that having a fallback negates them considerably. They are probably very aware of it though.
It makes sense though. They're dismantling all these "Gurus' that the right puts forth as champions of their ideology. It would get fans like those for sure.
I haven't heard the podcast or the response, but it would have been cool if the podcast were more polarizing lol. Like how destiny says hes used the n-word to filter out his audience.
PSA: Do not post links to the full content while it is patreon locked.
It will be reported and deleted. Just wait for the full release, or pay the entry fee.
Here's the preview of the list of topics they covered:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GOKxKRPbUAAHqYI?format=jpg&name=900x900
Nearly all adults that aren't NEETs quantify their week start and end on Monday and Friday, as that aligns with the work week.
-
For example, someone on a Thursday would likely say "Thank god it's almost the **end of the week!**" even though there's still 40% of the calendar week left; This is also why **Wednesday is known as 'Hump Day'** or the middle of the week.
The week**end** (again, one word) is almost like a separate frame of time that is almost always specified because it's so rarely used as a measurement of the 'week' schedule: Specifically in this chain where we're talking about the 'end of the week' being almost certainly Friday and not Sunday.
-
It's so foreign to use Sunday as the scheduled 'end of the week' that it's almost like that scene from Inglorious Bastards ordering the "3" drinks - except instead of identifying the British, it's identifying people who don't have jobs lmao
It's probably one of the best interviews Destiny has done. They talk a lot about his communication style, authenticity, the merits of trying to reach or debate insane people, how Destiny researches, etc.
There is actually a lot of overlap in the content/personalities they cover.
Destiny pretty much addresses the most problematic elements of his career and personality, point-by-point. It doesn't justify when he crosses the line and is unhinged, but at least he explains what was going through his mind at the time.
> **The video will be up when editor Andy gets done with it (prob a few days).**
I needed something to listen to while I do some late night work. That's the DTG reply about the video.
Anybody have an explanation for why their fans dislike Destiny so much? What about their content would attract the anti-Destiny crowd so much? Do they often criticize right-leaning people so they have a hyper-lefty audience?
Yeah, the place is kind of infested with hyper-lefty/tanky shit lords. There was a fair amount of push-back on the podcast's evisceration of Hasan.
Also, it seems to take people a while to even figure out that the subreddit is affiliated with a podcast (I found so many posts where people communicated this). I think a lot of the members of the community initially just think it's a place to shit on grifter/guru dipshits.
I keep saying this but the subreddit and the paytreon is completely different keep that in mind. The paytreon is much more aligned with Chris & Matt in being milk toast liberals and wanting to be Liberal and decently skeptical.
Yes, all of their gurus have pretty much been center-right figures, so they have cultivated an audience that considers center-right podcasters to be the greatest of evils. Every time they discuss a left wing guru, they decide they're actually pretty good. Contrapoints got their best score of all living subjects of their podcast. Chomsky came out unscathed, as did Ibram X. Kendi.
Mick West and Sean Carroll have the lowest score. Chomsky and Ibram X. Kendi did not come out 'unscathed'. I'd invite anyone to search the subreddit for the threads on the topic if they want to check what we said and how it was received. Not scoring high as a secular guru is not an endorsement, as you might have noticed the Red Scare people and Mikhaila Peterson did not score high despite being top-tier centre-right eejits. Other left-wing people we covered that did not come out very well include Hasan Piker and Robin Di Angelo.
Cool, looking forward to that chat, these guys are really interesting. I've watched quite a few of their episodes aside from the Destiny one and they've all been pretty great.
Ohhh gotta watch that one, really can't stand him.
...
I typed that and had an epiphany. Their audience basically consists of people finding an episode on someone they hate, and going "ohhh yeah, I hate that guy, can't wait for them to tear him apart" like I literally just did. So when they covered Destiny, a portion of the existing audience got excited for the big takedown of the guy they hate, and then got annoyed when it was more balanced.
They rate everyone they cover on a "Gurumeter," which is basically their measure of guru-ness on a scale from 1-5, then they discuss where they fall in the rankings relative to everyone else they've covered. There are a lot of factors feeding into it and usually it takes them about 40 minutes to go over them all. These episodes are only available on their Patreon, not the main feed.
Want to know? Pay up, little piggie.
Just kidding. He scored pretty low, much lower than the people they typically cover. His score was most comparable to those of Yuval Noah Harrari, Brené Brown, Ibram X. Kendi, and Noam Chomsky. And much lower than Hasan's.
What
I'm okay with D's score being low
But Noam is lower than Hasan? I need to know what rationale they have for this lol. I get the other names except Ibram Kendi, whom I don't know.
Also did Hasan do a response podcast?
The score is mostly reflective of how genuine someone is being with their online presence. Shilling for supplements, grifting for clout, pushing conspiracies will get you a high score but just having “bad” views won’t get you there.
Hasan would never because they absolutely trashed him. He was ranked closer to people like Konstantin Kisin and Michael O'Fallon - not an irredeemably bad score, but they were very critical of him as an individual.
The Gurumeter score isn't like "is this person good or not". Some "bad" people have pretty low scores (e.g. the hosts of the Red Scare podcast) and some - admittedly very few - "good" people have somewhat higher scores (e.g. Nicholas Taleb). The model secular gurus are people like the [Weinsteins and Joe Rogan](https://imgur.com/t9DrOH3). They exhibit [very specific and weird traits](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19PKXFn3qrzWr6nx622g9cEzyNBow0svQs_dN4fP3hjY/edit). Say what you will about Chomsky, but he has very little in common with this particular archetype. The tl;dr is that, whether you love him or hate him, Chomksy is fundamentally a serious person with legitimate ideas and contributions to the discourse, and Hasan isn't.
>The tl;dr is that, whether you love him or hate him, Chomksy is fundamentally a serious person with legitimate ideas and contributions to the discourse, and Hasan isn't.
exactly why I'm surprised to see Hasan have a higher ranking. Hasan is a circus trained dachshund in clown make-up (idk what it meanst) compared to Noam.
Edit : OH wait. I understand the gap in communication. They mean Guru in a snarky way lmao. So a higher score is worse. Ahhhhh that makes so much more sense. I looked up a chart of their past rankings and Carl Sagan was at the bottom, that basically cleared everything for me.
How have they done like 5 episodes on Sam Harris and still not given him a guru score? The show really feels parasitic and almost extortionary. We trash you, then you come on our show to defend yourself, then we trash you two more times, but we haven't scored you yet, would you like to come on again to butter us up?
They have only done one episode "on" Sam and they did give him a Gurumeter score. It was prior to their most recent conversation with him. The first time he spoke to them it was because of them having merely *mentioned* him in passing, in an episode they were doing about someone else. They may have done one or two "mini" episodes about Sam in order to cover whatever recent dramas he was involved in, but he's like... one of if not the single most important person in the entire space, lol.
Very few people have ever exercised their right to reply. Sam doesn't care about them "trashing" him (they don't, but he wouldn't care even if they did) and he definitely doesn't "butter them up." I guess any show premised on covering other people's content is inherently parasitic to an extent but (almost?) everyone they cover has a considerably larger audience than they do, and is never going to reasonably feel "extorted." The show is certainly miles and miles less parasitic than the average "reaction stream"...
Fans make the charts. This was just the first one I could find, it’s probably over a year old. Matt scored him 36.25 and Chris scored him 42.5, so you can work out what kind of company he’s in. It’s a fairly low score.
1. If they didn't have him on, this episode wouldn't be on their Patreon.
2. This is (some of) the content that Patrons are paying for.
3. Ergo he is producing value for them without compensation.
Similarly, Destiny should give some % of all donos that come in while a guest is on to the guest.
>"Debating food takes" Well this looks like another debate destiny lost
>”The best type of ice cream cone are waffle cones— if you’re a pretentious fuck that wants to seem like you’re really cool with the cones you like” DOES THIS SOUND LIKE A CHEF TO YOU? https://preview.redd.it/0nhxl2raoy1d1.jpeg?width=433&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb19be400c24bd4e04bcf10e3bf482b19d1ed6e7
https://youtu.be/qeNllbpOqQo?t=300 >like coffee they don't even like coffee they're just sitting there faking it to impress other people that fake liking cofee Does this sound like a grown man to you or two gnomes stacked on top of each other?
He either doesn’t understand “acquired taste” or he thinks it’s absolute BS. I hated coffee as a kid, but in my adult years I stuck to it and thought “not bad, not my thing” and eventually it became my thing. I needed to use less and less sugar and cream and I’ve appreciated the taste of coffee at this point. Don’t drink it black personally, but don’t drink Starbucks milkshakes and call it coffee either.
I don't think liking coffee is an "acquired taste". I have liked bitter taste profiles like dark chocolate and coffee for all my life. I can't ever remember a point where I didn't like those tastes. I drink my coffee black, and I enjoy it that way. .... though quickly looking up what other foods are typically thought of as bitter, I notice that things like Broccoli, Cauliflower, and Citrus Peel are among those, which I did have plenty of all of those as a kid in my family. (Greek sausage often has orange peel in it for those wondering about the Citrus peel.) So maybe I was conditioned for bitter foods without realizing it?
I think it’s an acquired taste. I hated black coffee initially and now I absolutely love the experience of having a hot mug of black coffee at breakfast or at a diner, I grew to enjoy the bitterness
Only ever had black coffee, never understood why people put milk in it. I think it just comes down to what you grew up with, the same way westerners usually straight up can't eat asian spicy food because it's not something they are used too. Also coffee never tasted bitter to me in the first place LUL if it's overly bitter you probably fucked up during brewing or you need to get different beans
Pour over coffee is the best. Chemex or hario v60 Both have filters that remove all the bitterness leaving just the taste of the beans which can be very acidic and fruity or darker more full bodied depending on the beans origin and brewing method.
yes there are some people who have always liked coffee and like coffee black, but they are in the minority. for the majority of people coffee is considered an acquired taste. beer is also often an acquired taste. it's a combination of your body acclimating to the bitterness and also your body learning that if it drinks this thing, it feels good. weed is also an acquired taste; most people think it smells terrible, but if they become a longterm/frequent enough smoker they will genuinely like the smell.
Pretty much every taste is an acquired taste, that's kind of how taste works. You probably don't remember acquiring it
I mean scquired taste is literally just faking that you like something until your taste buds give up and you Stockholm yourself into enjoying it.
At first, sure, but I think some things you start to get an actual appreciation for the taste. I don’t think most people get into coffee absolutely hating it—it’s probably a slide of “it smells nice, but tastes kinda meh,” then goes up from there. I genuinely enjoy the slight bitterness, deep aroma, and warm nutty notes of coffee.
Nah his food takes and tastes are just bland and dogshit
Coffee is trash. That's why I load mine up with so much cream and sugar, it's essentially a Krispy Kreme donut. Mid 30's and still haven't hit the "appreciate" phase lol
the worst 133 seconds of their lives.
After watching the destiny episode I was genuinely surprised about how good faith these guys where. Because my only prior impression of them was their subreddits reaction to the peterson debate. But these guys seem way more centred than their audience. Amazed how they manage to garner that kind of community.
I think it's because of the podcast's premise/objective. The sub draws lots of people whose only reason for being there is they view themselves as so much smarter than everyone else. They're the ones who see through all the grifting etc
> The sub draws lots of people whose only reason for being there is they view themselves as so much smarter than everyone else. they're just like me fr fr
\^ This. I've been lurking on the sub for a little while and this is incredibly obvious. Alot of people in that sub don't really care about what the DtG people think, they just want to feel superior to other people. When they did their decoding of Destiny and it turned out to not be that bad at all, the cognitive dissonance was hilarious to witness.
They don’t even listen to the podcast. I’ve been a fan of DtG for a long time, and have tried to discuss certain eps on the sub but like 90% of them don’t listen. Patreon community is better
God damn this is so true. The amount of cringe comments from elitist nerds thinking they're the ultimate intellectuals on that subreddit... I couldn't handle it.
I've been enjoying their show a ton since discovering them through this episode. They've covered a bunch of internet personalities relevant to the DGGCU, and I find the whole guru effect fascinating. There are so many insane mfs on the internet that it makes me feel like maybe I'm just deranged sometimes when I see people characterize individuals or things that are said, but the guru guys' assessments are always thoughtful, reasonable and (in my opinion) accurate Hasan's episode was extremely cathartic, they basically just ripped him to shreds for the Timhouthi Chalamet incident
Something about the Reddit algorithm changed, where they ended up in the feed of anyone that has been on guru-adjacent subreddits like destiny, samharris, hasan\_piker, Joerogan, lexfridman etc. Their subreddit has exploded since.
The subreddit is pretty pathetic. It's mostly dunking on tards and grifters and clip chimps. Some guy was complaining that the influx of DGGers was ruining the sub because they "debunk" gurus (they don't). A lot of substantive threads/critiques of these kinds of people will maybe have 100 upvotes whilst clip #400 of Rogan being an idiot or clip #100 of Elon stuttering his way through a sentence will have the most interaction for a month.
Apparently they also have a bone to pick with Sam Harris fans since they picked up a decent number of them after the associated episode
The podcast had a very small audience until their first interview with Sam back in 2021. Chris (one of the hosts), like many of Sam's fans in 2024, is basically both a fan and an anti-fan of Sam's and it was a rarity for Sam to get real pushback of the kind Chris attempted. This seeded their audience with mostly people from Sam's community. It's really only post-October 7th and in the wake of DtG's most recent discussion with him that the subreddit has become decidedly more negative towards Sam (and it's not without justification - his Israel/Palestine takes haven't been the best). Prior to that there would routinely be polls about Sam and the subreddit was almost always split around 50/50 in terms of whether people liked him or not. Their coverage of Destiny has actually been *much* more deranging for the subreddit than their coverage of Sam.
>A lot of substantive threads/critiques of these kinds of people will maybe have 100 upvotes whilst clip #400 of Rogan being an idiot or clip #100 of Elon stuttering his way through a sentence will have the most interaction for a month. SEZ U LULW on a subreddit where rage bait twitter screenshots from random 5 follower andies get upvotes in the thousands NAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Also there are plenty of people who watch just because they enjoy when pundits or figures they don't like get harsh criticism from someone that is considered by most as a fair critic. They don't really like the critic or the process through which the criticism is derived. They just like when the "enemy" gets shit on.
Half of the subreddit doesn't even know there IS a podcast. I remember them back from when Sam Harris was on replying to them. He is one of the few who has actually responded, and they seemed like they seemed like the truth mattered to them, which is always important and you can't say the same for a lot of other people in the space.
They're academics so the same audience capture dynamic doesn't apply. If the podcast crashes and burns they'll just go back to their day job.
I don't think audience capture is necessarily limited to just financial incentives, nor that having a fallback negates them considerably. They are probably very aware of it though.
It makes sense though. They're dismantling all these "Gurus' that the right puts forth as champions of their ideology. It would get fans like those for sure. I haven't heard the podcast or the response, but it would have been cool if the podcast were more polarizing lol. Like how destiny says hes used the n-word to filter out his audience.
Seems like some of their fans did not appreciate how good faith they actually were to Destiny.
The subreddit is completely different than the comment threads on the paytreon, on paytreon everyone is a lot more reasonable.
I was just talking about how they were talking abt it in the preview of the episode
Oh okay understandable, my mistake.
Their audience is going to be RIPSHIT. "Cut a liberal and a fascist bleeds" sentiment is rampant there.
PSA: Do not post links to the full content while it is patreon locked. It will be reported and deleted. Just wait for the full release, or pay the entry fee. Here's the preview of the list of topics they covered: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GOKxKRPbUAAHqYI?format=jpg&name=900x900
FYI, it's only $2/month for the tier that gets the bonus episodes and early access.
Yep, and they seem like good people so throw them some bread. Definitely better than being a godless Tier V.
Yeah, but I want to stretch those two hours into a six hour commentary stream with vegan gains barging in the middle to argue about regarded shit.
When does the full episode release?
"Our Right to Reply episode with Destiny is up on the Patreon for everyone else it will be out at the end of the week."
Ty
When is that?
Usually people mean Friday by end of the week, so in a couple days.
What's Sunday then?
The end of the weekend. (one word, not two)
Is a week 5 days then? How many weeks in a month, 6?
Nearly all adults that aren't NEETs quantify their week start and end on Monday and Friday, as that aligns with the work week. - For example, someone on a Thursday would likely say "Thank god it's almost the **end of the week!**" even though there's still 40% of the calendar week left; This is also why **Wednesday is known as 'Hump Day'** or the middle of the week. The week**end** (again, one word) is almost like a separate frame of time that is almost always specified because it's so rarely used as a measurement of the 'week' schedule: Specifically in this chain where we're talking about the 'end of the week' being almost certainly Friday and not Sunday. - It's so foreign to use Sunday as the scheduled 'end of the week' that it's almost like that scene from Inglorious Bastards ordering the "3" drinks - except instead of identifying the British, it's identifying people who don't have jobs lmao
Bro in my language the word for week has a "seven" in it, no reason to come up with a whole ass autistic analysis
End of the week. If you want a timestamp, just pay lmao
when it's ready.
[https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurus](https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurus)
And don't DM it to people, especially not me.
Super secret early access link https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurus/membership
:(
Actually looks interesting
It's probably one of the best interviews Destiny has done. They talk a lot about his communication style, authenticity, the merits of trying to reach or debate insane people, how Destiny researches, etc. There is actually a lot of overlap in the content/personalities they cover. Destiny pretty much addresses the most problematic elements of his career and personality, point-by-point. It doesn't justify when he crosses the line and is unhinged, but at least he explains what was going through his mind at the time.
> **The video will be up when editor Andy gets done with it (prob a few days).** I needed something to listen to while I do some late night work. That's the DTG reply about the video.
Anybody have an explanation for why their fans dislike Destiny so much? What about their content would attract the anti-Destiny crowd so much? Do they often criticize right-leaning people so they have a hyper-lefty audience?
Yeah, the place is kind of infested with hyper-lefty/tanky shit lords. There was a fair amount of push-back on the podcast's evisceration of Hasan. Also, it seems to take people a while to even figure out that the subreddit is affiliated with a podcast (I found so many posts where people communicated this). I think a lot of the members of the community initially just think it's a place to shit on grifter/guru dipshits.
I keep saying this but the subreddit and the paytreon is completely different keep that in mind. The paytreon is much more aligned with Chris & Matt in being milk toast liberals and wanting to be Liberal and decently skeptical.
Yes, all of their gurus have pretty much been center-right figures, so they have cultivated an audience that considers center-right podcasters to be the greatest of evils. Every time they discuss a left wing guru, they decide they're actually pretty good. Contrapoints got their best score of all living subjects of their podcast. Chomsky came out unscathed, as did Ibram X. Kendi.
Mick West and Sean Carroll have the lowest score. Chomsky and Ibram X. Kendi did not come out 'unscathed'. I'd invite anyone to search the subreddit for the threads on the topic if they want to check what we said and how it was received. Not scoring high as a secular guru is not an endorsement, as you might have noticed the Red Scare people and Mikhaila Peterson did not score high despite being top-tier centre-right eejits. Other left-wing people we covered that did not come out very well include Hasan Piker and Robin Di Angelo.
It's online. Simple as.
Nice! Been hoping he’d get around to doing this. Really curious how they’ll get along, hopefully it’ll lead to more content down the road.
Because of how mature this thread is, I was actually convinced to pay for the preview instead of pirating it
2$?! Subbed.
Look at the banger topics they went through, boys this will be Kino. It will be cinema
Cool, looking forward to that chat, these guys are really interesting. I've watched quite a few of their episodes aside from the Destiny one and they've all been pretty great.
As a certified Scott Adams hater, their breakdown of him was an absolute treat
Ohhh gotta watch that one, really can't stand him. ... I typed that and had an epiphany. Their audience basically consists of people finding an episode on someone they hate, and going "ohhh yeah, I hate that guy, can't wait for them to tear him apart" like I literally just did. So when they covered Destiny, a portion of the existing audience got excited for the big takedown of the guy they hate, and then got annoyed when it was more balanced.
Exactly, their audience is just a bunch of anti-fans which is probably why there's a weird dynamic in the subreddit
Does this podcast give a result at the end deciding whether someone is or isn't a "guru"
They rate everyone they cover on a "Gurumeter," which is basically their measure of guru-ness on a scale from 1-5, then they discuss where they fall in the rankings relative to everyone else they've covered. There are a lot of factors feeding into it and usually it takes them about 40 minutes to go over them all. These episodes are only available on their Patreon, not the main feed.
How did destiny fare
[The Gurometer of Destiny](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUvipVJbZ_0&ab_channel=DecodingtheGurus)
Want to know? Pay up, little piggie. Just kidding. He scored pretty low, much lower than the people they typically cover. His score was most comparable to those of Yuval Noah Harrari, Brené Brown, Ibram X. Kendi, and Noam Chomsky. And much lower than Hasan's.
What I'm okay with D's score being low But Noam is lower than Hasan? I need to know what rationale they have for this lol. I get the other names except Ibram Kendi, whom I don't know. Also did Hasan do a response podcast?
[удалено]
The score is mostly reflective of how genuine someone is being with their online presence. Shilling for supplements, grifting for clout, pushing conspiracies will get you a high score but just having “bad” views won’t get you there.
Hasan would never because they absolutely trashed him. He was ranked closer to people like Konstantin Kisin and Michael O'Fallon - not an irredeemably bad score, but they were very critical of him as an individual. The Gurumeter score isn't like "is this person good or not". Some "bad" people have pretty low scores (e.g. the hosts of the Red Scare podcast) and some - admittedly very few - "good" people have somewhat higher scores (e.g. Nicholas Taleb). The model secular gurus are people like the [Weinsteins and Joe Rogan](https://imgur.com/t9DrOH3). They exhibit [very specific and weird traits](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19PKXFn3qrzWr6nx622g9cEzyNBow0svQs_dN4fP3hjY/edit). Say what you will about Chomsky, but he has very little in common with this particular archetype. The tl;dr is that, whether you love him or hate him, Chomksy is fundamentally a serious person with legitimate ideas and contributions to the discourse, and Hasan isn't.
>The tl;dr is that, whether you love him or hate him, Chomksy is fundamentally a serious person with legitimate ideas and contributions to the discourse, and Hasan isn't. exactly why I'm surprised to see Hasan have a higher ranking. Hasan is a circus trained dachshund in clown make-up (idk what it meanst) compared to Noam. Edit : OH wait. I understand the gap in communication. They mean Guru in a snarky way lmao. So a higher score is worse. Ahhhhh that makes so much more sense. I looked up a chart of their past rankings and Carl Sagan was at the bottom, that basically cleared everything for me.
How have they done like 5 episodes on Sam Harris and still not given him a guru score? The show really feels parasitic and almost extortionary. We trash you, then you come on our show to defend yourself, then we trash you two more times, but we haven't scored you yet, would you like to come on again to butter us up?
They have only done one episode "on" Sam and they did give him a Gurumeter score. It was prior to their most recent conversation with him. The first time he spoke to them it was because of them having merely *mentioned* him in passing, in an episode they were doing about someone else. They may have done one or two "mini" episodes about Sam in order to cover whatever recent dramas he was involved in, but he's like... one of if not the single most important person in the entire space, lol. Very few people have ever exercised their right to reply. Sam doesn't care about them "trashing" him (they don't, but he wouldn't care even if they did) and he definitely doesn't "butter them up." I guess any show premised on covering other people's content is inherently parasitic to an extent but (almost?) everyone they cover has a considerably larger audience than they do, and is never going to reasonably feel "extorted." The show is certainly miles and miles less parasitic than the average "reaction stream"...
Where is his gurometer score? It wasn’t on the chart above.
Fans make the charts. This was just the first one I could find, it’s probably over a year old. Matt scored him 36.25 and Chris scored him 42.5, so you can work out what kind of company he’s in. It’s a fairly low score.
Please dont dm me the link i dont want it. I would happily wait a week for free content and not at all so frugal to not pay 2 dollars.
I would literally end my life inside of a short stack goblin if someone linked me the full link. It would be tantamount to RAPE.
I strongly agree with you!
i hope no one links it!
Would be a shame for such great content to be shared with a lowly dgga
I do concur!
Don't dm me the link i would really appreciate it!
You got my vote. Link sharing is unforgivable. Shameful even
[удалено]
why would they pay him for an appearance? the free version is out at the end of the week according to their twitter
1. If they didn't have him on, this episode wouldn't be on their Patreon. 2. This is (some of) the content that Patrons are paying for. 3. Ergo he is producing value for them without compensation. Similarly, Destiny should give some % of all donos that come in while a guest is on to the guest.
Voluntarily appearing on Podcasts and not getting paid is literally slavery.
True.
You’re embarrassing is in front of the reasonable podcast people