Read it Here:
https://www.fruityrumpus.com/forums/t/the-uhc-situation?page=1
The thing about Miles' post is that it reads like someone trying to get ahead of the backlash without actually touching the substance of what they're being accused of. It's full of tone management, soft disclaimers, and long digressions about who's ''really'' in control of what, but when you strip all that away, what hes actually doing is reframing the UHC mess into a story where Gio was just stubborn, paranoid, and trying to keep ''clout,'' while Andrew was benevolent and simply wanted to ''work with'' the project.
He keeps stressing ''I was just a liaison'' like that somehow absolves him of responsibility, but if you're the one carrying the terms of negotiation, interpreting those terms, and delivering them to the other party for over a year, you're not a bystander, you're an active participant. The way he positions himself as both central enough to know what happened and peripheral enough to be blameless is... convenient!
The repeated reassurance that “Homestuck isn't disappearing” is almost a strawman. Gio's blog was never built around the idea that Andrew was going to delete the comic. It was about sustained, bad faith pressure to bring the UHC under Andrew’s control, and the legal leverage used when that failed. Whether another fork exists is irrelevant to whether that pressure campaign happened, and Miles doesnt actually deny it happened, he just reframes it as normal licensing talks that Gio ''refused'' out of spite or ego.
Theres also this repeated insistence that HICU and FRAF ''aren’t Andrew's goons,'' which sidesteps the actual critique... That the licensing structure itself gives Andrew ultimate authority to overrule, revoke, or dictate terms, even if hes not directly managing day to day. You don't have to be on his payroll to be operating under his leverage. Saying ''Were not controlled'' without addressing the power imbalance is like saying ''My landlord doesnt control me'' while your housing still depends on their goodwill.
Miles' framing of Gio's refusal to sign the licence as ''stalling'' or ''not trying to make it work'' also glosses over the fact that the license terms, as described in Gio's post, would have handed over creative independence and allowed Andrew to seize control at any time. Refusing that isn't sabotage, it’s protecting autonomy. But in Miles' version, that becomes a selfish, destructive move instead of a valid boundary.
And there's a big emphasis on how much the teams have ''poured their hearts'' into making Homestuck fun, and how this whole thing is just a distraction from the good work they’re doing. Thats emotional framing, it turns criticism of a specific abuse of power into an attack on the fandoms joy itself, which makes it harder for people to actually engage with the underlying behaviour being described.
Ultimately the post feels less like a ''different side of the story'' and more like an attempt to reframe the same events in softer language, remove the context that makes the tactics look coercive, and centre the harm to Miles and his teams feelings over the harm done to the independence of the UHC... its damage control.
PFP by Workdailylog on Tumblr
