posting an hours-long video as argumentative material is poor practice for a couple reasons. for one, you're feigning responsibility for the rhetoric you're pushing. if they aren't your words, you can't be challenged on them. of course, in practice, people will simply act as though you're presenting the words as your own, and you can't really dodge that one.
however, it does cause a burden of proof problem. not because proof is nonexistent, but because you've shifted the burden of proof onto your peers by forcing them to construct a basis of fact from a large pool on their own rather than providing that basis on your own. this is clearly bad practice for a number of reasons. you're placing an excessive and unnecessary burden on your peers by expecting them to sift through your reference material rather than you doing it yourself. you're also unfairly skewing the discussion by choosing where those facts come from. but conveniently, even though this is all at the expense of your peers, it gives you a grand opportunity to fallaciously claim a position of expertise and superiority, because you can simply contend that your peers are the ones that don't want to put in the effort.
if you want to use an hours-long video as substance, that's fine, but you have to be the one that points out specific pieces of information from the video and you have to be the one to construct an argument out of those points. the person who made the video isn't here to defend their argument, you're here to defend yours.
Poll