Something that strikes me as odd is that people think Jon is being stupid for not believing the statements/being skeptical. But this implies he has. No reading comprehension skills? If he was stupid, he’d read about the anglerfish and go, “Okay. This is fine.” Or. Something.

But he reads about the anglerfish and goes, “Yeah…an apparently human figure talking without moving his mouth and floating seems hard to believe, since humans don’t do that.” And when a little voice speaks up and says, “You saw a giant spider kill someone. Who’s to say this wasn’t supernatural,” he ignores it and tries to make up some alternate explanation for it. And even then, he’s still going to look at all the facts. He doesn’t flat-out say they were lying, or something like that.

He’s in denial, not stupid.

Also, there’s reason to believe most of the statements are fake. (There’s one a week, unless otherwise stated—if Jon is there 40 hours a week, or more, there are hundreds of fake statements.) So if he reads a real one, before he Knows it’s real, he’s going to think it’s fake too. The only evidence he has to the contrary are that it doesn’t record on his computer (which doesn’t really mean anything) and that sometimes, there’s vague evidence of the supernatural that comes up.)

I’m not actually sure why people interpret his skepticism as stupidity and not not wanting to believe the supernatural. Honestly, it’s a little mean. In the first season, you have the same knowledge he does, plus the knowledge that you’re listening to a horror podcast. Why would you call the main character of a story stupid for not having knowledge he can’t obtain (at least not yet, I guess)?