Whats frustrating about this whole discourse is how fast it's been derailed into personal attacks, pronoun discourse, and vague moral character assassinations instead of actually engaging with the substance of Gio’s post.
First off: yes, parts of the UHC codebase are still accessible. That does not magically mean ''nothing happened'' or ''Gio is lying.'' The central point of his post isn't ''every byte is gone,'' its that he was forced to take down his own hosted version under threat of legal escalation from Hussie's side, and that this happened after nearly two years of documented manipulation, hostile takeover attempts, and bad faith legal threats. The fact that other forks exist is irrelevant to the fact that his fork, the one most widely used and properly maintained, is gone because keeping it up would have meant risking a lawsuit.
This is like saying ''a protest was never shut down because some people stayed on the sidewalk'' — it’s missing the point entirely.
Second: the ''no evidence'' claims are Dishonest. The blog contains timelines, direct quotes from chats, and consistent accounts of who said what and when. They're text logs because thats the format those conversations existed in, pretending this makes them inherently less legitimate than screenshots is ridiculous. NDAs and private communications were a deliberate part of Hussie's team's strategy, so of course there’s not a pile of publicly shareable PDFs stamped by a court clerk. If someone truly ''was there,'' then the question should be whether their recollection aligns with the documented conversations, not just “I was there so trust me instead.”
Third: the transmisogyny accusation being thrown around is deeply suspect here. In the actual post, everyone, including Hussie’s own team members, consistently uses he/him pronouns for Hussie. Pretending that this is some fresh moral failing to justify ignoring everything else is either a deliberate misread or a bad faith attempt to shift the conversation away from the allegations. If there are genuine concerns about Gio’s conduct toward trans people, they should be substantiated with specifics and evidence, not dropped like rhetorical grenades in the middle of a conversation about Hussie's abuse of power. Right now, it just looks like an ad hominem to delegitimize a critic.
Fourth: the ''history of lying/doxxing/etc.'' claims are exactly what the blog warns about, vague, unverified allegations deployed to poison the well so no one has to address the content of his reporting. Even if Gio had a checkered past (and that’s still a big ''If'' given the lack of receipts here), that would not erase what's in the current write up. Arguments should live or die on their own merits, and dismissing someone entirely because ''nobody important likes them anymore'' is playground politics, not an argument.
Finally, and this is the most important part, all of this noise serves Hussie. Whether people realize it or not, derailing into personality debates, pronoun accusations, and ''grading'' the writing quality is exactly the kind of deflection that lets the central issue slide out of view. Hussie has a long, documented pattern of controlling behavior, retaliation against criticism, and weaponizing legal tools to harm people in his own community. The UHC situation fits perfectly into that track record. That's where the focus should be.
Because at the end of the day, the question isn't ''Do you like Gio?'' or ''does a public fork still exist?'', its:
Did Hussie and his team use NDAs, divide and conquer tactics, and legal threats to try to seize control of a fan led project?
Did they follow through on retaliation when they didnt get it?
And does this match a broader pattern of how they’ve treated collaborators and critics before?
PFP by Workdailylog on Tumblr
