Cut out all the useless bullshit in the essay, left in the parts of relevance. Actually that was a lie, I gave up on trying to argue with you last time and cut out some shit I either didnt read or felt was pointless to include. This is what you should of said.
-- I stand by my previous points and chose to ignore your use of SOCIOPATHIC TENDENCIES (((my apologies, I dont know how to bold))) and choose to instead direct half my argument towards the use of "psychopathic or- -tendencies" (((notice how I cut out the sociopathic part, thats how im assuming you read it))) and also am choosing to ignore the 2 to 14 ratio, of which you used psychopathic twice and sociopathic fourteen times. I am also choosing to ignore all common sense and show I fail to have a grasp on the english language by stating that essentially, if a human is walking LIKE a dog then they must very well BE a dog. (((That is how your psychopathy argument sounds btw.. pretty fucking bullshit that you would bring it up after I even clarified that I didnt mean he was a sociopath just behaved slightly as one)))
Secondly. Baiting vs advertising. I could play out an entire scenario but im not gonna waste my time or your time. You know damn well where my opinions fit and know that your reply was useless and wont change anything. Yet you still replied. Would you call that advertising or baiting? Well I definitely didnt advertise a want for a reply, in fact I didnt even put the server ip in the description of the video. Wait no, I said that wrong didnt I.
Now consider the real world. How many advertises tend to target children? Hundreds if not thousands every day. From cereal to candy to toys to fast food. Goldfish, Nesquik, lucky charms, mcdonalds, most of us can think of dozens. And yet, none of them have the ability to connect to their child the way a favorite youtuber does. Thats why so many sponsorships push hundreds of thousands of dollars onto youtubers, they understand the success rate can be exponentially higher.
To me, any ads that target children are just as bad, they abuse the gullible minds of young inexperienced kids for profit. The same thing Skeppy does daily. IG youre right, my word choice is off, my arguments on the other hand stand strong. Stop trying to twist my words and bring up "psychopath" like it was anything more than an exaggeration meant to prove a point. Focus instead on the EULA argument you continuously ignore.
What's interesting is: How do you walk like a dog? Also If you have an argument it's important you read all of what is being said for it and against it. If you're going to just "oh this seems bullshit, let's move ahead", which was evident in your response to my argument, totally lacking any point value. On the other hand it's just so hypocritical to see you say that I'm the one holding onto your wrong use of the word, where in reality you just stressed on it for about half of your previous response and I just mentioned it in 3-4 lines. I seriously don't understand how that behving like a sociopath/psychopath doesn't make you a little of one, in anycase you have again missed what I meant. It's not about whether he has those tendencies or is a psychopath, it's more about that the word didn't fit with your argument. Please move on from that point, it serves no purpose to your actual argument and was merely intended as simple correction to the words you used.
Moving to your other arguments presented...
Right so at first I believed you didn't understand some of the things I said, but it turns out you weren't actually reading them but instead occupying yourself counting how many times I used a word. But I assure you I am reading every single statement you made so far, so please play out the scenario you talked about, if it's really proving your point. I also seem resigned to the fact that you really don't know how to use some words or what they imply. No you did not bait or advertise to me, to reply to you, honestly it was more along the lines of "An idiot making of fool of themselves , let me join them and make a bigger fool of myself by arguing with them", however I appreciate that you finally made it clear that your opinion on things won't really change, just wish you had stated this earlier, from your first thread so I didn't indulge in a pointless argument where you're not even reading half the things being said and deciding on your own (without reading them) that they serve no relevance.
Now since you finally actually came to your true point of "advertisements" being wrong and specifically for little kids who could be influenced easily. Let's just say a few words: Now your argument doesn't just extend to one youtuber in particular it extends to a bigger group of people. Then it is reasonable for me to expect that you're not just making this thread on InvadedLands, but many other platforms as well. This actually has two aspects to it, something like being two faces of the same coin. While some ads may make you feel inadequate about yourself until you buy whatever they're selling, you need to also see that all businesses to flourish require some extent of advertising. How else would people know that they exist? Becoming a Youtuber is a career choice, infact in contrast to other businesses viewers actually have a choice to choose the content you want to see, and have full right to stop using it whenever you want without spending a single dollar. Yes youtubers influence people to do a variety of things: intentionally or unintentionally, but we can't really shove all the blame on them as such if their viewers start doing stupid stuff. The only time they are to blame is when they encourage that sort of activities. Today some people are so sensitive or atleast they pretend to be, almost anything you say can interpreted in a way you didn't mean it to be. The main point however is you were never forced to go buy something from anyone. Advertising your server ip doesn't really hurt anyone especially if it's on your own channel.. It also serves other purposes such as associating you with the server. It comes to same point again: It's perfectly ok to advertise, but again nothing I say would change your opinion so you might as well just drop this.
When we talk about an age group of 13+, most of them are old enough to realise atleast the very basic of how things work in the actual world; they realise responsiblities there are going to have in the future, the under 13s may lack a bit of maturity in handling things due to a lack of experience. All those children at that age and below it are guided by their parents, their needs and desires being looked after by them, you need not to worry about any kid spending something wrongly or being misguided when they have their parents watching over them.
But understanding that you probably didn't even read what I said above, I am concluding what I said:
To put it simple, a counter-point to your only seemingly valid argument: Nobody no matter what age was forced or excessively provoked to go buy something from him, nobody was scammed from something they bought from him. The services are there for anyone who wants them, and just so people know that they exist, they can be advertised if the owner of the services wishes so.
It just seems that you have deluded and convinced yourself of certain things, without actually thinking them through and relating them with the everyday world. Now onto your EULA statement, again it's something that you need not worry about getting adressed. Mojang isn't blind, they know how general servers operate and it is said they have blacklisted servers with excessive p2w. But before that you need to clarify what else you actually have an issue with: is it Skeppy's YT or the IL server, since the former has nothing to do with the EULA . Since you've just been attacking his youtube considerably more than actually anything against the server I don't really see what the EULA has to do with anything with the arguments. If you meant the server as well for selling ranks, you need to realise this is just how mc servers operate and that Mojang understands that to some extent. There's no right or wrong in this matter. If someone violates the EULA excessively it's in Mojang's interest and business to see what they want to do about it.
Lastly I'd like to add that it seems that this argument is going nowhere and as you have already said your opinion would remain unchanged no matter what , so I find any further argument pointless. You've made yourself pretty clear.