OF COURSE YOU CAN DMCA SOMEONE BECAUSE YOU DONT LIKE THEM

@Autumn Gio reached out multiple times to WP asking for any comment on the Hiveswap articles and never recieved a reply. Sarah Z initially added an annotation to her first video in response to WPs complaints and then created a second follow up video showing WP and andrews side of the story, though noting that it still did little to disprove any claims in the article.

okay so gio definitely told sarah z to not try to reach out to anyone actually working on the project - that's really interesting to note! this guy really does turn everything he touches to dust.

Sarah also explicitly says in her second video that WP people reached out to her but they were 'clout chasers' so she ignored them lmfao. Sarah's an idiot.

Also Sarah acts like Gio, who is clearly extremely biased, is equivalent to an inside source who worked on hiveswap.

Sarah Z’s video contains Cindy’s emails from WP as well as a long correspondence from Andrew Hussie showing as many details as he was willing to provide. There was little else that WP provided about the situation to share and Sarah Z kept a very neutral and polite tone throughout despite being threatened with a bogus lawsuit.

'neutral tone' lmfao brother what the fuck are you talking about. Genuinely are you delusional?

(i was backreading a bit lol)

I kind of see Gio's articles akin to a burn book. It's a little hard to "disprove" something about yourself when the thing you want to take down is filled with incredibly petty attacks of character and shit that doesn't actually have anything to do with your business or that the person writing it can prove has anything to do with your business. Most of the gripes in both of Gio's articles center around the way that Hussie treated him legally by trying to get him to sign an NDA to get the licensing agreement finished, or going around him to just work with Bambosh. Which is why I just don't agree with the idea that because Hussie's lawyers "backed off" from the idea of going after Gio for those articles in the first place that it is proof that they are "true".

Would Cady from Mean Girls be able to "disprove" she's a "fugly slut" lol?(ref to a movie) Probably not. Libel cases are also really difficult anyways because of this, and it's not uncommon for people to try to get bad things spoken about them on the internet offline and failed. But a lot of people assume failure means everything said about them is true, which isn't the case because there's a lot of reasons such cases fail.

The opinion blogger and the Tumblr drama youtuber collab was very impartial and neutral and ALSO ALSO it had a whole trans person as a co-writer so it definitely isn't biased checkmate liberals

@elegantSpinstress again, Hussie admitted to most of the claims in the article himself. He paid TOG to work on act 7, he closed the NYC studio quickly without informing employees, and he refused to credit various artists who worked at the NYC studio when Hiveswap act 1 released. Many of these things are not insults and could be disputed or factually disproven.

It is also Regina Georges constitutional right to call Cady from Mean Girls a "Fugly Slut" publicly if she so chooses, so there's also that. Freedom of speech and all that.

@autumnwyvern

"so I don’t know When you watched the video but the disclaimer about taking things with a grain of salt was only added After people complained that her primary source of information was gio. "

I rewatched it just yesterday after seeing everything go down again and even in the original video (around the 51 minute mark when she's discussing the Hiveswap stuff) she says "Some of these sources are anonymous, so take everything I’m about to say with a grain of salt. I will say that a lot of the smaller claims are backed up 

but still, y’know, don’t take this as 100% fact unless there is a source there.

I also don’t want to get sued for reporting on this, so I’m not going to make any definitive statements about what happened here; rather, just that this is what gio, and the people involved who gio allegedly spoke to have reported on."

So, I don't think that's a fair statement to say she only made a disclaimer after people complained about gio. That's a quote in the original video that starts discussing everything gio posted.

It should also be noted that Sarah's original video features exerpts given by IPGD at the time as well, not simply parroting gio as the only source. She never makes any definitive conclusion.

okay but then she proceeds to hold his testimony up to the same standard as a firsthand source so. Maybe she should take her own disclaimer?

saying "hey this is hearsay" and then presenting it in your video and essentially running with it as truth doesn't stop it from being shady in its own right, regardless of "legality." when I find a youtuber and tell them all the bullshit (with one or two "verifiable" statements) I want they can also say that and act like they're doing due diligence.

but i think this has all gotten away from the point (because it's easier to argue over it) which is: Hussie DOES, actually, have the right to distance themself AND HIS COMIC/BRAND from people who cause them trouble.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. gio seems to be at the time of the video one of the only people who had compiled any kind of information regarding the whole hiveswap mishandling and the behind the scenes affairs. i dont exactly see that as being held up as "on par" with a firsthand account because she prefaces how its not firsthand and that some of gios sources are anonymous. the only stuff she seems to be definitive about are the things which list primary sources. she never quotes gio as a primary source for anything here.

@pearls I was talking about a disclaimer that was added to the description after the fact, apolocheese for not making that obvious (i thought saying it was added after the fact would have implied that but if u can edit videos after they are released without having to take them down and reupload them then thats new 2 me. who has only used youtube for some school projects and toreba wins)

I don't really have much else of worth to add on this other than that i dont know if we're taking the video in the same amount of good faith because from where i see it, sarah then asked for clarification on what parts were hearsay or just plain wrong and was never given any answer, simply just vaguely told shes wrong and had to accept that as fact after already experiencing a legal threat from a staff member.

I can appreciate hussie trying to keep things chill after, but they didnt exactly contradict anything sarah said beyond saying "its not true and just trust me".

that whole period of homestuck online was incendiary on all sides and the brunt of it was always shouldered by the face of the current story which was unfair. i don't think talking about hiveswap's mishandling should be seen as malicious.

It's a bizarre amount of entitlement imo to be, as an outsider, demanding information about this. Imagine if you were the a person involved and a rando on the internet demanded your boss provide them explicit details of your work environment and possibly even specifically airing out wrongdoings you may have had in the company on the internet because this fucking dipshit demanded it.

cindys original email to Sarah Z complained that she had not reached out to WP for details. Hussie reached out to Sarah Z trying to smooth things over. The reason Sarah Z asked any questions is because Hussie and WP opened the dialogue. If WP wanted to stay quiet about the whole thing they had every opportunity to do so

Right because if they were quiet about this you wouldn't be here deepthroating Gio.