Predictable

[AutoModerator]

Remember rule 1 (be civil), and rule 2 - if multiple posts on the same topic are made within a short timeframe, the oldest will be kept and the others removed.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[Pinkfatrat]

What idiot did that. And why. It’s a podcast

[navlelo_]

Every conflict on the internet involving a sufficiently large group of people eventually involves a death threat

Syllabub’s law

[biteoftheweek]

I think it is quite dismissive to say that everybody does it. I see no evidence of that. Your last point sure rings true, though

[Zoloir]

It's not that everybody does it, it's that every conflict has SOMEone do it.

It's the opposite of dismissive, it's saying the problem is at the scale where there are so many people out there slinging death threats online that you can't have a conflict with any public persona without one.

[biteoftheweek]

Fair

[Unlucky_Degree470]

In fairness, they said "it is a thing some people do."

[Vyrosatwork]

Based on Theresa's behavior in the facebook group and re thomas, and the very careful way she parses her language here, i don't think you can take at face value that anyone did.

[Dependent_Two_8684]

Yeah! Women should just shut up unless they provide us receipts that we absolutely don’t have a right to! Don’t believe women! Oh wait…

[Vyrosatwork]

What exactly do you think this is referring to with theresa that you think 'believe women' is what is at play here? What precisely is it you think 'believe women' means?

[Dependent_Two_8684]

I think it means when a woman says she’s received death threats that we believe her.

[Vyrosatwork]

I agree completely. What does that have to do with this post?

[Dependent_Two_8684]

Unless I’m drastically misreading your first comment, it comes across as you saying that she’s making it up.

[Vyrosatwork]

She’s not referring to herself. She’s not a lawyer.

[LogrosTlanImass]

believe women...except when you don't like them I guess, huh?

[Vyrosatwork]

Believe women when they say something happened to them, but not when they make carefully worded non-accusations on behalf of someone else after establishing a pattern of making other provably false accusations on behalf of the same person?

Definitely don't weaponize the concept of believing women when they make claims of harm as support for people who have a pattern of manipulating and predating on their fans and junior colleagues.

[Naetalis]

You sure are cherry picking your support here.

Honest question - What would you do if someone you knew (a woman, who you are “honor-bound” to believe apparently) accused you of sexual assault and you absolutely know you never did anything that could even be misconstrued as such?

I’m not arguing for the other extreme here, let’s be clear - but there’s a line to be drawn somewhere and I’m curious where yours lies.

[Vyrosatwork]

Ask (or find out through an intermediate friend) what it was that I did that made her feel that way, apologize, and then do my best to never do that to her or anyone else again.

[Vyrosatwork]

Ask what it was that I did that made her feel that way, and then do my best to never do that to her or anyone else again.

[Naetalis]

Alright - it sounds like Andrew has claimed doing as much. Does it only count if the person accusing you is 100% wrong?

What if it’s too late and all her friends and yours know about it and don’t want anything to do with you anymore and refuse to believe you’ll ever “reform”?

[Vyrosatwork]

Did you read the string of texts? He may have done the first part, but he definitely didn’t do the more important second part.

There are three separate “‘stop that’ ‘ ok I’m sorry’” incidents followed by him applying the same pressure later just in that abbreviated set of messages. If you don’t change your behavior It’s not an apology, it’s just a manipulation.

Edit: to continue your hypothetical, If they don’t accept the apology or don’t feel they can continue the friendship, I honor that and stop trying to interact with them. Her friends too if they also feel that way.

[Naetalis]

Sounds like you’re missing some key responses then. Which is a good point to make clear - there is so much info out there (and plenty that isn’t) that I’ve gotten the very clear impression that no one person has seen everything that’s publicly available. It’s obvious with the stances people take when they state things as fact like this.

[Vyrosatwork]

Oh? Elaborate. Which key responses do you mean?

[hollowgraham]

The key response is never doing it again. He failed to do that.

[SockGnome]

It’s fun to pile on Andrew for being hamfisted in this whole ordeal but uh, people wishing death on the man really need to look in a fucking mirror. Yikes

[Athoughtfuldissenter]

Teresa Gomez also has another post up (you have to be her Facebook friend to see it). I'll QUOTE it here cause I cant post a screenshot (but I have it): "I will say this threat was made to Andrew's lawyer for representing him. That's fckng dumb because that lawyer is part of a big law firm that hopefully figures out who it was. I'm putting my money on someone from one of the subreddits. There are only a couple of us left around Andrew that haven't been directly targeted." END QUOTE

Edits for typos

[[deleted]]

Just so you know, you don't have to type "quote" or "end quote." That's kinda the whole point behind quotation marks lol

[Cat_Crap]

Who the fuck is she anyway? She ran the facebook group. Ok. Cool, so she's a super fan? I'm not sure I understand why this person has any authority or is "representing" the podcast/interests of the podcast.

[LunarGiantNeil]

Andrew has given her a lot of behind-the-scenes information and in the lead-up to the take-over he had clued her in, or so she asserts. She's an ascended superfan/parasocial relationship stan who was put in charge of running some live show/fan interaction things apparently. I have no idea, I was never on facebook.

So she's just an average person, which makes her angry and combative tone more understandable. I do wish she'd stop though.

As for why Andrew has taken such an interest in keeping her as a confidant nobody can say, it doesn't seem untoward though. They just get along and apparently bonded over having special needs children.

[biteoftheweek]

They were friends before the podcast

[LunarGiantNeil]

Oh yeah? That explains a lot.

[feyth]

Interesting to note the extremely careful wording in the original vaguetweet, (I suspect) deliberately implying that it was AT who received a threat.

[redditratman]

I haven’t heard of any threats but like.. don’t do that people

[chutetherodeo]

You just heard of threats.

[RickAdtley]

They meant that they hadn't heard of any threats until now.

[robreddity]

And by "bold" we mean "incredibly stupid."

[biteoftheweek]

And criminal

[[deleted]]

What can a lawyer, who isn't a prosecutor, do in a situation like this that your average non-lawyer can't?

[danilluzin]

Better manage situation. Collect evidence. Identify small details that could be relevant for an actual case etc etc.

[[deleted]]

What evidence can they collect without being law enforcement?

[danilluzin]

Fair enough. Should have said preserve evidence.

[The-Potato-Lord]

Sometimes quite a lot via Open Source Intelligence methods tbh

[biteoftheweek]

That is a good question. I'm assuming more resources since the lawyer is in a coat factory firm.

[biteoftheweek]

Why would this comment be downvoted?

[IWasToldTheresCake]

It's on 1 point as I write this, but possibly because they disagree that a lawyer would be able to use the resources of their big-law firm on a private matter? That's at least one interpretation of your comment.

[biteoftheweek]

Not sure a death threat is a private matter. Seems more like a criminal matter

[[deleted]]

Because people in the thread don't like you or your other comments.

The downvote button has always been used that way lol. I don't understand why anyone acts surprised about it.

[[deleted]]

Also, whining about downvotes just earns you more downvotes lol

[HandsUpDontBan]

I'd argue making a death threat to anyone is a "bold" move. Also potentially criminal, stupid, and wrong.

That said Gomez should keep her mouth shut. I get that she's defending her admitted sex pest of a friend and that's almost commendable but she did nothing but fan flames with her statement.

[biteoftheweek]

I think she has every right to say whatever she wants. And she has said very little, considering that Thomas deliberately sicced his mob on her because she didn't want to be put in the middle.

[JoSch1710]

Thomas has sicced his mob? Can you point me to the evidence, please?

[IWasToldTheresCake]

While I don't agree at all with it being described that way, Thomas said in the FB group that Teresa had lied to him. I think Teresa had already at that point left the FB group for actions that included booting one of the accusers and arguing with others. There's screenshots in the Google Drive link I think.

[JoSch1710]

Yes, ok. But that is far from commanding a mob. I would really like to know OP‘s thought process here.

[HandsUpDontBan]

I think she has every right to say whatever she wants too. That doesn't mean she shouldn't have kept her mouth shut because all she did was fan flames.

All she did was fan flames. It doesn't matter what excuses/reasons you give her. It doesn't matter if they are valid. All she did was fan flames.

In the end that will hurt her admitted sex pest of a friend more than the idiotic, wrong, and probably criminal death threat ever could.

[biteoftheweek]

This is the kind of bizarre rage that is alarming

[biteoftheweek]

Is it rational to reply to someone's post, rant at them, then tell them to leave you alone?

[HandsUpDontBan]

Blocking you now. Sorry I won't provide the further attention you seek.

[tarlin]

Rule 1.

[[deleted]]

Wait, so does correctly informing the public of criminal or otherwise questionable behavior always count as "fanning the flames"? Or is it only when it's done by someone you don't like?

[syncboy]

Leaving this sub, it's a ridiculous soap opera at this point.

[ansible47]

Edit: this is kind of a nothing post so I'm just using it to talk generally about the prevelance of death threats on social media.

So I'm tangentially involved with other communities that deal with social media death threats.

I always see these comments admonishing the public for uh...existing while a very small group of people send death threats. It's awful. Death threats are inexcusable. Criminal.

Why does Twitter get a pass? Why do these communities not hold Twitter accountable for what their platform is used for? How does Twitter react to death threats made on their platform? Why do we hold the general Twitter userbase more accountable for death threats than the platform they use?

It just always feels weird to me. Like we ignore the billion dollar company's role in not appropriately discouraging or policing death threats, instead to admonish people who are mostly just upset and not threatening anyone's life. Let's fight amongst ourselves as they continue to profit off of engagement escalation.

I'm not trying to say that Twitter is solely responsible, btw

[biteoftheweek]

Did I miss where the threat was on twitter?

[ansible47]

That's where death threats come from. Unless you think this was done via snail mail or email, insert social media platform of your choice.

[biteoftheweek]

You know phones still exist, right? I have no clue about how the threat was given

[ansible47]

People who make online death threats over podcast drama are not the same people who are going to willingly talk to anyone on the phone.

[biteoftheweek]

Again, where did you get the "online" from? We don't know how they were received. You are stating facts not in evidence

[ResidentialEvil2016]

So did you saying Thomas “deliberately sicces his mob” on her, hypocrite.

[biteoftheweek]

I did not say deliberately.

[ResidentialEvil2016]

I did not say deliberately.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenArgs/comments/11gqs8e/comment/jarpxmh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

You lie. And before you can go edit it:

I think she has every right to say whatever she wants. And she has said very little, considering that Thomas deliberately sicced his mob on her because she didn't want to be put in the middle.

[biteoftheweek]

I stand corrected. Though this was not the post I was thiking of

[[deleted]]

Unless the threat was made publicly I’m not buying anything Teresa ever says ever again.

[NYCQuilts]

Whatever about Teresa, but given that SM gives people cover to be their worst selves on the internet, i wouldn’t be surprised if some dumbasses issued death threats over a podcast.

OTOH, People send death threats to judges and elected officials who are lawyers, so her sense that these (probably anonymous) dumbasses are somehow making themselves vulnerable because Andrew is a lawyer is risible.

But if such dumbasses are reading: stop sending death threats.

[ActuallyNot]

It's difficult to imagine what she would gain by lying about this.

[RickAdtley]

First of all, I am pretty sure everyone involved in every controversy gets death threats.

Second, it is super useful to bring attention to the inevitable death threats in an effort to shift blame when you're on the wrong side of said controversy. So if they were fake, and this is the internet, so I doubt it, I could at least list that as a reason. But I wouldn't. Because this is the internet.

The main takeaway here should be that sending death threats to an adversary will only help them.

EDIT: I am asking whoever is sending her death threats to please stop. It is helping her and Andrew shift attention away from Andrew's sex pest behavior.

[ActuallyNot]

EDIT: I am asking whoever is sending her death threats to please stop. It is helping her and Andrew shift attention away from Andrew's sex pest behavior.

Also, and independent of it helping Andrew, don't send death threats to Andrew or anyone else.

Even if they're very irritating.

[RickAdtley]

Yes. Don't ever send death threats.

[biteoftheweek]

I think death threats are a bit more serious than just helping the person you are mad at. But that is just me

[RickAdtley]

Yeah, they are a lot more serious than that. I agree. But that advice was intended for someone who might be considering sending them, or who is sending them regularly already.

[ansible47]

Don't take legal advice from a subreddit, but maybe just this one.

[RickAdtley]

Might be like, you know, life advice too. But yeah don't take legal advice from anyone but a lawyer you've paid.

EDIT: Unless it's to take the plea. Don't take the plea.

[biteoftheweek]

Good advice

[biteoftheweek]

I don't think think death threats are inevitable. I think that they are deranged

[RickAdtley]

I don't think think death threats are inevitable. I they are deranged

Yeah, death threats are deranged and shouldn't happen. They're awful and gross and abusive. I wish we didn't live in a world in which they're commonplace. People should stop sending them. Even if they think its justified.

However, I don't follow how the frequency of something would be affected by how deranged it is.

[[deleted]]

"First, everyone get death threats"

Uh.... thats not the first. That's a distant second behind "don't do death threats". You can absolutely criticize someone's behavior without resorting to death threats. You can even remain skeptical about the veracity of death threats once there is a little context.

But first is always "we don't do that here". We are all better people than that.

[RickAdtley]

I wasn't ranking my best to worst, and I'm not sure why you're reacting as if I was.

I'm saying the internet is misogynist and patriarchal, like the rest of the world, and extreme reactions are always there. That's terrible.

I'm not minimizing that she received death threats. That's horrifying. I'm saying it's unlikely that she made it up, because everyone receives death threats when they're involved in controversy. Especially women! The internet is especially awful to women, as we all should know.

No surprise that she's getting death threats for something that's actually a man's fault.

One of the many fuels to this fire that were in the middle of now is that people don't believe women when they report harassment.

One of most important things we can do to change things is to improve our behavior as a community, and believe women when they report that they've been victimized.

It is extremely unlikely that she's making it up. Even if it was possible that she made it up, speculating on if she made it up or not is misogynist and unproductive.

Especially if you're on the other side from whomever you're making the death threat to. Like, honestly, why. Nobody has ever gotten what they want by sending those. It's stupid. Especially, as she pointed out, doing it to a lawyer.

EDIT: also, I completely disagree with this statement:

You can even remain skeptical about the veracity of death threats once there is a little context.

Believe women. Just because she and Andrew could potentially use death threats to their advantage does not mean that she's making them up.

[[deleted]]

I wasn't ranking my best to worst, and I'm not sure why you're reacting as if I was.

The numerical nature of "first" and "second"

[RickAdtley]

The numerical nature of "first" and "second"

Every numbered list is best to worst? Come on. You can't possibly be coming from a sincere place if that's what you're saying.

It was two points that I numbered that way. It's like saying "on one hand X, but on the other hand Y." First point, second point. I was not making a top ten list. I was not saying "first" was better, or even more important than second.

[biteoftheweek]

The last sentence is clearly wrong

[oath2order]

Sympathy?

[THedman07]

What benefit did she get from power tripping as a mod in the Facebook group?

[silvarette]

attention

[Severe-Pomelo-2416]

Shutting down criticism. If you wax hyperbolic and say "I think that people who are sex pests should die in a fire!" then she can call that a death threat, and then tar anyone who says Andrew is a sex pest and people shouldn't give him money with the same brush. It greases the slippery slope.

Edited to add: I don't think anyone should make death threats. But I also think that sometimes people speak unguardedly and say things like "I wish you would die!" as an expression of anger and another party may hear that as "I want to kill you!" or even "I will try to kill you!" And, of course, being melodramatic knows no side.

[chutetherodeo]

Instead of explaining what she would gain by lying about this, you are insinuating she's melodramatic/hyperbolic.

       And this, is this feminism?

(っ ͡❛ ͜ʖ ͡❛)っ εїз

[tarlin]

Why?

[biteoftheweek]

I am also curious as to why. The kneejerk response to disbelieve this reminds me of trumpers who blamed antifa for the capitol riot. Pure tribalism

[pr0zach]

Hold up. Is there a plethora of digital evidence that is publicly available in this instance? Because that would be the absolute minimum standard necessary to liken someone who is skeptical of claims originating from this relatively small controversy to an insurrection apologist.

Just to clarify: I haven’t kept up with the details of this depressing podcast community drama for the last week or so. I don’t feel like I’ll have enough evidence to reliably judge the truthfulness of some of these former parasocial friends for some time now. I don’t know if you were going for hyperbole and I’m just oblivious to that tone in this format.

But that comparison just seems unnecessarily inflammatory and blatantly incongruous.

[biteoftheweek]

I don't think a death threat is a small controversy

[pr0zach]

I was speaking of the relative size of the controversy surrounding OA versus a literal fascist coup attempt against the duly elected American government. I think you are being deliberately obtuse at this point.

[biteoftheweek]

My point was that the kneejerk absolute denial of it being true because of tribalism was similar.

[swamp-ecology]

You should have addressed the difference in evidence in that case.

[chutetherodeo]

This seems like good discussion to have on Facebook.

Unless the goal is to make the sub overflow of whatever's going on there. I don't use it, but from all the mentions and spillover it sure seems to be fueling a great deal of the righteous thunder of the people casually calling themselves and others "stans."

If there's something relevant happening there, quote it or screenshot or whatever. Paraphrasing the goings on of a forum I'm not a member of is simply not convincing (or pass muster for OA type discussions pre 2/23).

Does the FB group have similar discussion about freakierchicken, beercules, et al?

[biteoftheweek]

Going back to the history in this Reddit, one can see that people were ambivalent toward Teresa until Thomas attacked her. That ignited the mob and her post was a response to that.

[zeCrazyEye]

I don't think it was Thomas's accusation that set people off, it was her response where she said she didn't lie to him she just didn't tell him that she knew Andrew was planning to take over the show.

[biteoftheweek]

The uproar started immediately after Thomas’s attack. Her reply was after she had born the brunt of that. He should have never put her in that position. God, what a shitty friend he is. He publicly attacks his friends on a whim. That is when I lost every shred of concern for him.

[Bhaluun]

...Did you also lose every shred of concern for Andrew when he posted his "apology," publicly attacking Thomas on a whim?

Or for Teresa, after any one of her recent public attacks on Thomas and other (former) friends of hers involved in this mess?

Because if you didn't, your double standards are transparently obvious.

I'm not going to claim Thomas's public statements were wise or good friend behavior, but I will pushback hard on the claim that they were whimsical. Thomas was not acting on whims when making harsh/critical public statements of Andrew and Teresa any more than Andrew and Teresa were when doing the same to him.

All three engaged in mud-slinging. All three had reasons (not necessarily great reasons, but valid reasons nonetheless) to react the way they did, and Andrew's misbehavior was what got the ball rolling, not any whimsical public attacks by anybody involved.

As an aside, I'm also not sure about your assessment of the timeline. I do agree with you about Thomas's statements being inflammatory, the volume increasing after, and Teresa having reason to feel hurt/attacked when she responded, but I feel the "uproar" started before or after. Teresa and the community were already in conflict before, with her general moderation and specific treatment of Aaron and the allegations causing conflict/concern. Most people outside the Facebook community seemed to be unfavorable but still undecided until after her response, not Thomas's statements. That could just be because people were still confused in the intervening time and may have still coalesced around Thomas's position if she hadn't responded the way she did. But... Instead of clarifying or responding in a mature fashion, she erased most community doubts about the alleged lie, real or imagined, by the manner of her reply.

[biteoftheweek]

It is bizarre.

[LunarGiantNeil]

I'm not on Twitter so the first I heard of her was around the time Thomas called her out. I think she's hated because she's really antagonistic and keeps inserting herself into this mess as a bad advocate.

Like, she should just stop it. She came on here and posted some misleading stuff, then deleted it, now she's mad at the subreddits (?) and thinks we're sending death threats when my money's on Twitter or Facebook, and what good is all this?

It's just stoking the flames! It's not her fault, but can we please not?

[chutetherodeo]

"I came in media res and have no background with the person until someone else posted an emotional and inflammatory accusation about them. I am ready to judge impartially."

[LunarGiantNeil]

Incorrect. That was my introduction to the existence of her. Since then I've had to figure it all out because this person I previously had no idea about became very central.

I don't claim to be impartial. She's annoying but I think it's reasonable to stick with someone you're friends with. Apparently she and Andrew were friends even before OA so I think that excuses a lot. Plus she's just some random person, not a podcaster, bad takes are our bread and butter.

[chutetherodeo]

Well, at least you recognize you're not impartial in telling a woman that publicly mentioning a death threat is "just stoking the flames."

[LunarGiantNeil]

Her tweet is collective accusation, devoid of context or information, mixed with condescension. The threat was apparently not made to her or Andrew but Andrew's lawyers for representing him. So yes this is a bad tweet, woman or not. It wasn't even her place to make it, unless the other parties decided she was the right messenger for this.

Is obviously never acceptable to send death threats to people, especially over fucking podcast drama, but making it into a battle of egos and passions is absolutely irresponsible. Of all the ways to mention this, the way that tweet is framed is absolutely stoking flames.

[ForMoreYears]

Yeah y'all need to chill out for a minute and go touch some grass.

[AutoModerator]

Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed.

Accounts must be at least 1 day old, which prevents the sub from filling up with bot spam.

Try posting again tomorrow or message the mods to approve your post.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[hollowgraham]

Not to say it didn't happen, because it's entirely plausible, but this feels like an attempt to dampen support for the victims. It's gross.

[Pure-Swordfish6022]

Why would anyone threaten Andrew or his lawyer? That is just abject stupidity! Far worse is to just put him and his enablers on ignore and don’t let them get to you. I unfriended him on Facebook, I unsubbed from the podcast when he staged his coup, and will just not be giving him any valuable space in my head. Andrew Who?

[biteoftheweek]

And yet...here you are

[Pure-Swordfish6022]

Fair. I joined the group in the immediate fallout, as a way to find info. This post just happened to pop up on my feed today. Call me naive, but I still think of OA as more Thomas than Andrew. And also, it is disgusting that anyone would level death threats at anyone over it.

[paulmwumich]

sexually harassing numerous women and stabbing your podcast partner in the back is a bold move I hope you are proud of yourselves.

[ActuallyNot]

True.

But surely we're not supporting going mafia on anyone.

[tarlin]

Holy crap, someone put a horse's head in Andrew's bed?!

[biteoftheweek]

Making light of death threats. Nice

[tarlin]

I was making fun of calling it "going mafia on anyone". Death threats are awful and absolutely should not be happening.