>>21238753It's about the percentage of people subbed to the person actually give a shit about the channel at a time. How else would you explain a channel that has 700k subs and gets less than 400 viewers on new streams? Tons of early Japanese indies have numbers like that. Those are objectively what dead subs are. It's an extreme example but it's just to show the concept. It's about the proportion. It's not as malicious a claim as you think it is.
>>21239115eack
