Should I trust what this person says or not?

I see him saying similar things on various forums.

I am by no means critical of everything he says, rather most of them are very helpful to me.

There is only one thing that always makes me wonder.

"Hang no pieces, hang no pawns and you are 1500"
Is this true?

I think that’s a bit high. There needs to be an increase in chess knowledge and skill too.

He was just overemphasizing a point.

Yes and no. One could argue that without blundering you could even become a master, since most chess games are decided by a loss of material. However, it is very hard not to blunder when you find yourself in a miserable position due to a lack of positional understanding... So tactical skill and positional kowledge usually go hand in hand. 

Trust no one

Tygxc is solid.

Regarding the comment, it is common sense:  low-rated (inexperienced) players tend to hang pieces and move pawns (because they would not look for a better move) frequently, both adversely affect the game's outcome.  "Winner is the one who makes the next to last mistake".  

If you develop and commit to a pre-move checklist,  you will hang fewer pieces, make fewer mistakes and win more games (i.e., increase your rating).

Learn and understand the principles of piece development (not study openings).  Do not move pawns without good reason, especially in front of King.  Self-analysis of games.

It is not difficult to get to 1500 or higher quickly.

In the most literal sense it's completely false, but it has a small bit of truth to it.

As Finegold says, if you're 1800 at chess and 800 at blundering then your rating will be 800. Not giving away pieces is necessary to improve, but it's not sufficient. You need some general knowledge and playing experience too.

Well I think all that advice was solid except for one point I disagreed with. They said watching GothemChess not useful. I disagree. In my opinion many if not most of Levy's videos have been a help to me. And he also plainly shows that the same bad habits and mistakes we all make are very common even in higher ranks. I've even seen Magnus blunder. But you can learn things by watching Levy. If nothing else he can show you how not to feel defeated and like giving up.

The only thing I despise about his channel is the click-baity titles and thumbnails. If I can force myself to click on a link, I usually enjoy the video. Unfortunately, many times I just close his page without clicking anything.

yeah its true, if yall would look for your oppoments options agianst your position and look at what his recent move just did, after that look at your options, free pieces, or good checks. if none, find a good developing or improving move

Good basic advice that disregard that humans are not machines and telling "you lose weight by eating less" is actually pretty pointless. Do nothing else beside playing and analyzing your games is great for finding and removing your bad habits... it is also a shortcut to losing interest in chess if it is your hobby instead of main occupation. 

I really think this post has some good advice for lower rated players especially. I hope some of them take a look at it.

Levy acts really-really excited about every other move. Other than that I'm not sure what his videos are about lol. He's just always really excited.

tygxc is credible. I like their style of posting with the pluses. The way they break down their response point by point. The way people react to them like they're all upset about what they posted. This OP even started a thread about them. Just goes to show you what an influencer tygxc is.

I've always said, "90% of chess is not dropping a piece."

Most nonsense generates a polarized reaction. People who think the person is interesting know nothing about the topic, and people who think the person is talking nonsense are experts.

This extends beyond chess, but for another chess example we have the backyard professor. He has a small cult following in spite of talking a lot of nonsense. His followers were beginners who didn't know any better.

tygxc talks a lot of nonsense, sometimes the fact that he's talking nonsense is a matter of record i.e. you can look up the real quote and see he's wrong. For example he's often misquoted Magnus Carlsen as saying 1800s blunder every move. Carlsen never said that, and the quote can be traced back to a troll forum topic.

This is basically his MO. He finds an absurd quote, and then parrots it over and over. The most infamous example of this is his views on solving chess.

His posts are similar to another poster that roamed the forums years ago (kindaspongey). Often, his responses are dogmatic, lack nuance, or are wild exaggerations and/or misrepresentations of the truth.

The example you give is a good one. Yes, he is correct that if you do not hang material, your rating will improve quickly; however, that is easier said than done. Most 1200s do not hang a piece in a single move very often, but they will miss 2, 3, or 4 move tactics (and that happens all the way up to 2000+). Seeing those tactical patterns requires drilling tactics. So, yes, avoiding material losses is a big way to improve, but it is not as easy as he makes it seem.

Another example is when he was saying the Evan's Gambit is basically refuted (it is not) because White gives up a pawn (and "a pawn is a pawn").

In short, he is wrong about as often as he is right, which makes his advice to lower rated players rather useless as they will not be able to tell the difference in the good and the bad.

I’m afraid I must disagree with the comment about @kindaspongey, as they send more information and less analysis than tygxc. I do agree otherwise though, take a pinch of salt

I said similar, not identical ;-)

But yes, the point being take what they say with a very large helping of salt. In fact, if anyone gives you advice that goes against conventional wisdom and doesn't seem to make sense to you, it likely is not good advice.