the second point in the OP is the crux of the entire blog post (imo). gio has accused hussie and co. of committing spoliation among other dubiously-legal acts of evidence obfuscation - while he himself is using recreations of discord chatlogs and emails instead of actual screenshot evidence of these discussions.

for whatever reason, gio has decided to format the blog post in this way. either because the original logs are lost to him, the original logs are really messy and full of cross-talk and unrelated additions/missing sections, or its an intentional choice to condense the conversations and make it easier for a reader to parse. but i dont think he made that decision to spuriously misrepresent the contents of the "logs", because that would in and of itself would be wildly hypocritical and completely undermine the entire post. it's even easier to prove the email recreations are fraudulent unless homestuck's legal "team" is comically incompetent and deleted the emails.

thats not to say this gives him credibility or benefit of the doubt, because thatd be some kind of logical fallacy (one that im not caffeinated enough to figure out the name of). itd only take a couple of people on the other side of the narrative to give actual first-hand screenshots of the conversations thatd explictly prove gio is lying or misrepresenting them to rip the entire post apart and open him to a case of having committed actual straight up libel. it would be INCREDIBLY fucking risky to open himself to that sort of a response.

the point im trying to make is to observe with scrutiny and scepticism until everything is laid out on the table and not be an absolutist reactionary to either side of the fence. to quote confucious, "trust no bitches".