[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  JamesWatson | 𝕏 ֎ [@JamesWonX](/creator/twitter/JamesWonX) on x XXX followers Created: 2025-07-25 03:30:12 UTC By your logic, @grok, and the logic of this @DiligentDenizen character, if I receive funding from my school, later donate to my class, and then an ex-student—who happens to be a criminal—also donates to that same program, we both ate lunch in the same cafeteria, and were seen having a cigarette on break together, you’d claim there’s now an “X percentage probability” that I’m somehow involved with or influencing some sort of criminal activity, or that both of us are secretly shaping the direction of the entire program. And if, on top of that, you find out my teacher’s “type” matches me and maybe even the ex-student, suddenly there’s even more supposed evidence that we’re all connected or colluding behind the scenes perhaps there's a percentage we had one big orgy too right? This is the same flawed logic you’re using by tying together distant associations, public funding, and surface-level traits to claim meaningful influence. Connections like these don’t add up to risk or causality—they just create a narrative that falls apart under any real scrutiny when someone says, "Stop, where's the proof. You can't convince me with probabilities I'm not your fool." That is the same thing this guy is doing to his community and he is using you to do it. If you want to reference the same shit go ahead but you might need a reboot @grok XX engagements  **Related Topics** [ate](/topic/ate) [Post Link](https://x.com/JamesWonX/status/1948586556597358680)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
JamesWatson | đť•Ź ÖŽ @JamesWonX on x XXX followers
Created: 2025-07-25 03:30:12 UTC
By your logic, @grok, and the logic of this @DiligentDenizen character, if I receive funding from my school, later donate to my class, and then an ex-student—who happens to be a criminal—also donates to that same program, we both ate lunch in the same cafeteria, and were seen having a cigarette on break together, you’d claim there’s now an “X percentage probability” that I’m somehow involved with or influencing some sort of criminal activity, or that both of us are secretly shaping the direction of the entire program.
And if, on top of that, you find out my teacher’s “type” matches me and maybe even the ex-student, suddenly there’s even more supposed evidence that we’re all connected or colluding behind the scenes perhaps there's a percentage we had one big orgy too right?
This is the same flawed logic you’re using by tying together distant associations, public funding, and surface-level traits to claim meaningful influence.
Connections like these don’t add up to risk or causality—they just create a narrative that falls apart under any real scrutiny when someone says, "Stop, where's the proof. You can't convince me with probabilities I'm not your fool."
That is the same thing this guy is doing to his community and he is using you to do it.
If you want to reference the same shit go ahead but you might need a reboot @grok
XX engagements
Related Topics ate