After much discussion it turns out to be a case of mis-communicated and misunderstood semantics, which is why I thought I'd make a small post clarifying some semantics.
The whole point of RuthlessTruth is to bring people to check this assumption of having a self, which if investigated with honesty will lead to the realization that it has no substantial reality and merely a mirage.
Why a mirage of self exists in the first place is interesting and has a lot to do with thoughts. Hence the importance of investigating whether the thought of 'I' really means something.
Check out this brilliant piece by Ciaran - Demon Theory - that goes deeply into how insidious thoughts can be and how the reality that thoughts depict of having a 'self' is essentially unreal.
People often fall into debates about there being a 'self' that still exists (and is empty) even though there is 'no you'. Yeah that's true, i.e. if you're referring to the void/consciousness... but that's also incorrect because consciousness isn't owned by anything.
Even to say 'I am That' with reference to the Void is absurd.
Void is just Void. Consciousness is just Consciousness.
That's it for now.
I'm also writing a post on Ciaran's Demon Theory which I hope will serve to combine quite a few things. Have hit many dead-ends but hopefully will make some good progress soon enough. Let's see how it goes.
Until then, stay ruthless. Cheers.