>>54998813I don't know how serious you are but I'll treat you as if you're serious and respond to each point bit by bit. Don't take it in any bad way or whatever, I just wanna understand this better.
>1. I can get used to the voice, but she really needs to do something about her audio to reduce the sibilance. It is gratingThis is fair and valid I actually have nothing to say to this.
>For one thing her manner of speech just simply makes her sound dumb, not like a credible presenterIs that not what an autistic person has to go through? Any form of presentation or fact bringing, lecture, lesson, etc, is all going to end up sounding like information splurging coming from an autist, especially one further down the spectrum.
If you truly don't believe she's not autistic, I don't know what to say there.
>And she is lousy at connecting pieces of information in a natural way for the viewer. It gives the impression that she is only half-informed herself and struggling to recite a list of facts.She said it herself that she's winging some of it no? Some of this stuff is things she's been through before while others have straight up been going through google to reinforce what she said.
>Her content feels overly reliant on shock value in one way or another. That includes the obvious like a stream dedicated to showing the audience gross-out pictures or making jokes/comments on crass topics. And maybe not 'shock value' but similar in that it is transparently designed to provoke audience response, her chat interaction in which she regularly plays into the community's relationship fantasies, and blatantly carries the implication that she wants to fuck the chat. All of which to me is off-putting.The latter part of what you said I can see as valid, some viewers don't want this sort of thing from the streamer / vtuber. But I don't see the "shock value" part.
What part of seeing microscope slides is for "gross-out", jokes / comments on crass topics, ok I get it may not be for everyone. But I don't know, the first half seems kind of like a stretch to try and reinforce the second half. If you only said
>her chat interaction in which she regularly plays into the community's relationship fantasies, and blatantly carries the implication that she wants to fuck the chat. All of which to me is off-putting.Then I would have not bothered to argue this point like the 1st one.
