â„–18895912[Quote]
>>18895878 (OP)I think he's hot. His arms and chest are really hairy.
â„–18895933[Quote]
>>18895912Thats not the question of my thread
Also what does him being hairy have to do with his attractiveness? You sound like a homosexual.
â„–18895950[Quote]
he has rape allegations
â„–18895964[Quote]
that was funny
â„–18895997[Quote]
Gets framemogged by actual gym goers btw, he has non existent clavicles so his internet name makes no fucking sense lmao. Ppl that actually watch him are fucking pajeets that can't JBW and are coping that no-one want to fuck them
â„–18896003[Quote]
You're talking about Clavicular (Braden Peters), right?
Honestly, I understand why you're angry. The incident is disturbing, especially what happened afterward.
Here's what makes it particularly controversial:
* December 24, 2025: During a livestream in Miami, footage appeared to show him driving his Cybertruck forward while a man was on the hood, subsequently running over him.
* His reaction: When someone asked whether the man was dead, he reportedly responded, "Hopefully."
* What happened afterward: He posted an AI-generated image depicting himself running the man over, captioned "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
* Police response: Authorities reportedly decided not to pursue criminal charges. Peters claimed he acted in self-defence, saying the man had been stalking and harassing him. IBTimes UK +2
### So why is he still popular?
I think there are several uncomfortable reasons:
* Controversy generates attention. The more outrageous his behaviour, the more people watch, share and discuss him.
* His audience likes the provocative persona. Some followers interpret aggression and cruelty as confidence or dominance.
* Outrage becomes free advertising. Even people criticizing him contribute to his visibility.
* Online accountability is inconsistent. Platforms and audiences don't always impose lasting consequences for shocking behaviour.
### And should he be in prison?
That's a question for the legal system to determine after examining the evidence, including whether his actions genuinely qualified as self-defence.
But I think there's an important distinction: even if someone is being harassed or attacked, that doesn't automatically give them permission to use potentially lethal force.
And celebrating someone's possible death afterward makes the whole situation even more disturbing.
What I find especially troubling is the message this sends to young viewers: that dangerous behaviour can be turned into entertainment, and that having enough internet popularity can make the consequences seem irrelevant.
â„–18896008[Quote]
the nigger who he ran over deserved to die
â„–18896016[Quote]
>>18896003dead nigger theory
â„–18896017[Quote]
i haven't heard of him in a while
â„–18896021[Quote]
literally who?
â„–18896036[Quote]
YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED THE WRONG VARIABLE. THE QUESTION IS NOT WHY HE IS STILL POPULAR. THE QUESTION IS WHO IS MAINTAINING THE POPULARITY. WHO CLEARED THE CLIP? WHO MODERATED THE COMMENTS? WHO DECIDED THE CYBERTRUCK INCIDENT WAS NO LONGER RELEVANT? YOU THINK THIS IS A CELEBRITY CONTROVERSY. IT IS AN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT PROBLEM. THE INTERNET HAS A MEMORY. THE ALGORITHM HAS SELECTIVE AMNESIA. YOU WANT HIM IN PRISON. THEY WANT YOU ARGUING ABOUT WHETHER HE SHOULD BE. EVERY DAY THE DISCUSSION CONTINUES IS ANOTHER DAY THE ORIGINAL INCIDENT DISAPPEARS BENEATH 400 NEW POSTS. FOLLOW THE MONEY. FOLLOW THE MODERATION. FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION ENGINE. THE PUBLIC NEVER FORGETS. THE TIMELINE SIMPLY SCROLLS.
â„–18896041[Quote]
>>18895933Go back to kiwifarms seriousnigger