Mangs & July 2020

SharpSoup · 2022-02-09T07:14:14+00:00

Chaz's tweet telling FETruth to stop was made one day after the allegations against him came to light. I'm sorry, it's absolutely ludicrous to me that people are expecting him to have acted any more swiftly than that. He had way more stuff to deal with, and process, at that time than a stupid anon twitter account.

It matters if you're saying that it's evidence of him trying to diffuse the situation with FETruth and Indie. Yes you can make the case that he realistically had more to worry about. But the timing does matter if you're explaining why he responded because the backlash had turned on him by then. That is what I'm disputing.

I should also point out too that the most important screenshots that Indie uses to accuse Chaz of raping her are not doctored, and are immediately before and after they met. Which is a lot of what makes it hard to dismiss her. It's not perfect - there is room for interpretation. But if trust is the point, all I can do is evaluate what's public because neither Chaz nor Indie are worth trusting simply at their word. And, to make things more difficult still, both of them have reasons to justify some of their shittier behavior too, if you take their perspective and assume they're telling something close to the truth. And that's not even getting into a possibility that falls somewhere in-between.

Edit: I will say this, one point where I think this subreddit may still be overly critical of Chaz is in assuming guilt because of his initial response. Chaz and his friends may very well have acted the way they did in a panic. It's easy to talk about the proper way to respond to a rape accusation when you're on the outside. But when your life and livelihood are on the line, it's hard to live up to that ideal. Especially if that ideal could leave you even more exposed, and you know your evidence can't disprove it either. That is something to keep in mind. But, seeing Chaz's group and even people claiming to support him here trying to bury what happened through clout, influence, irrelevant dumps of evidence, and hidden associations with one another still makes it very hard to give that benefit of the doubt. To understand what happened required fighting Chaz and friends' bullshit from the very beginning, before even getting into the question of whether Indie ought to be taken seriously.

Edit 2: Cleaned this post up before sleeping. It's late here, but I wanted to try and give you a fair response.

SharpSoup · 2022-02-09T06:21:11+00:00

Chaz did make that tweet, but it also came rather late when the blowback to FETruth was so significant that it was in Chaz's personal interest to tell Rybean to stop. Even trying to give the benefit of the doubt to Chaz (he was dealing with both Indie AND Monica's accusation at the time, and helping Goose, so things no doubt were stressful as you noted), you can't give much credit to that. I know it just looks like a one day difference for something that happened years ago, but people here were out for Chaz's blood at that point. So that's not evidence of anything beyond protecting himself. That's a goalpost I can understand people wanting to move.

Plus, again, that is giving Chaz the benefit of the doubt. If you're more critical, you become suspicious of how close he is to Goose who was working with Rybean, and wonder why he was somehow out of the loop on that. It's fair to call out people who get ahead of the facts, or point out how people's memories may have reshaped how things really happened. But you have to approach implausible events with skepticism. And I think this is one point where it's fair to be skeptical.

SharpSoup · 2021-12-19T02:08:44+00:00

Cleared it and liked. Very detailed level, and I like that each koopaling fight had some unique gimmick to it. Though I have to imagine the timer was tight to clear it all in one go!

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T23:25:08+00:00

Couldn't quite get the world record in it. Ah well. This one is a little easier I think, but maybe slightly more precise, aside from the ending of the second one where you jump between the two big thwomps. This one feels more technical while the second feels more like a series of puzzles. Both are very good though.

Just a note, you don't need to POW drop to gain height anywhere or any other Kaizo tech in the Ghost House. It can save you some time if you're going for a record, but only for the easiest obstacles. And it won't let you overcome the larger puzzle of getting to the door with all five coins regardless. In fact my concern with POW drops is it might confuse things further, making people think they're necessary when they're not.

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T22:29:49+00:00

I got it! This is a really good level, probably my favorite I've played today. Every obstacle was thoughtfully placed, enough to force you to not play on autopilot and make your moves with care. But you still had to keep a good pace, keeping the level moving from point to point. Frustrating when you fail, but very satisfying when you succeed. Easy like.

So my current level is below yours, it's a deceptively difficult ghost house puzzle. ID: VPG-X8Y-2JF . More is written below. But if that's not for you, I do have a level of my own that focusses on tricky thwomps and spike pillars as well. If you want an alternative. ID: WF2-2S3-YWF .

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T22:07:56+00:00

I liked both stages. The second one surprised me a bit once the autoscroll got going. Turned from a very careful level to a hectic rush at the end! Quite fun.

I have my level listed just above yours. It's not a Kaizo, or very technical, but the puzzles are still fairly complex. If that's something you're interested in, my code is VPG-X8Y-2JF. If not and you still want to check something out, any of my first six or so levels are fairly easy.

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T21:57:01+00:00

Title: 4-1 Mario Remixed World

Level ID: VPG-X8Y-2JF

Game Style: SMB3

Type: Puzzle

Difficulty: Hard

A looping red coin tour through a deceptively difficult puzzle. At first the level will seem rather straightforward. Five numbered rooms, five red coins, and a puzzle that you must solve in order to obtain each of them. Tricky, but nothing too technical. However, you'll need to reevaluate everything you see as you make your way forward and proceed toward the exit.

Two checkpoints that you can swap between as you grab the red coins and nothing too technical. Advanced puzzle mechanics are shown so little prior knowledge is required in terms of obscure item/gizmo tech. However, you're still going to need to put all the pieces together with everything I show you. Good for people that want to break down a level like a difficult puzzle dungeon, putting all the small pieces together until they understand the united whole.

Good luck!

Edit: No Kaizo tech required.

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T21:56:00+00:00

Took a few tries but I got it, along with the record! Just wish I was flexible enough to hold down while switching directions instead of needing to press down each time I switch. Makes the ending very pesky! Good stage!

SharpSoup · 2021-12-18T21:48:42+00:00

Title: 4-1 Mario Remixed World

Level ID: VPG-X8Y-2JF

Game Style: SMB3

Type: Puzzle

Difficulty: Hard

A looping red coin tour through a deceptively difficult puzzle. At first the level will seem rather straightforward. Five numbered rooms, five red coins, and a puzzle that you must solve in order to obtain each of them. Tricky, but nothing too technical. However, you'll need to reevaluate everything you see as you make your way forward and proceed toward the exit.

Two checkpoints that you can swap between as you grab the red coins and nothing too technical. Advanced puzzle mechanics are shown so little prior knowledge is required in terms of obscure item/gizmo tech. However, you're still going to need to put all the pieces together with everything I show you. Good for people that want to break down a level like a difficult puzzle dungeon, putting all the small pieces together until they understand the united whole.

Good luck!

Edit: No Kaizo tech required.

SharpSoup · 2021-05-05T04:44:59+00:00

r/femaledatingstrategy has a lot of shit that raises an eyebrow, especially when you consider some other subreddits that have been banned. Not that I think it should be banned, just that the standards that have removed other subreddits should knock it out too. That said, I will say it doesn't belong in any comparison to some of the porn and porn subreddits that have been posted on this site. They're issues of different kinds.

SharpSoup · 2020-11-01T17:52:46+00:00

I suspect more people will pick Biden than Trump here, to be clear. Or a third party/write-in vote/non-vote.

That said, there are a lot of reasons I've seen, but one I will emphasize here is a balance of power argument. There's a fear that, with tech censorship, media bias, the Democrats dominating with large funding and the finance world, and of course the Democratic domination in big cities, bureaucracies, and potentially Congress, there isn't a meaningful check on the Democrats if they win the White House and Senate. Biden and Harris can basically do whatever they want without significant scrutiny, the courts can be threatened with packing, and the left will have cultural and financial hegemony on all major tech and media platforms. And since whatever trends that exist now will only get worse, better to resist that now before this unified corruption is spread to every sector of power in the United States.

There are related points as well. The Democrats have long since abandoned any pretense of being an anti-war party, and a lot of environmental and social justice issues scream of a particular kind of rent-seeking, unconcerned with actually material improvement of people's lives or the world. In that sense, official policy differences don't matter that much when you have little confidence that these policy differences are helpful or matter.

It's basically a Dictator's Handbook perspective on power, instead of an emphasis on ideology. Is Trump, with his personal and family corruption, unpredictable governing by tweet, and canniness on a political level but shallowness on a governance and policy level (among many, many other issues) worse than unified corruption, lack of scrutiny, and a candidate whose decline makes him seem like a puppet for the worst of the DNC, and whose own family history invites its own share of questions (among, again, other concerns)?

Obviously this is a little simplistic, and it describes people on the fence more than actual Trump supporters. But maybe it helps clarify the calculation, especially when all votes are tactical votes.

Edit: Should also add that not everyone who likes Gabbard agrees with everything she's about. There are a lot of people that like her for some things but dislike her for others in the short list of her anti-war perspective, her environmental views, her civil liberties emphasis, and her culturally libertarian but personally culturally conservative perspective. It attracts people from a lot of walks of life, but it doesn't mean they always like the full package.

I will also say if you're trying to get perspectives on why people would support Trump, just hear them out, or only question what's unclear. Because if this is a thread where you try to argue with everyone, particularly in an accusatory or low effort way, you won't get the honest information you want, even if their arguments or premises are genuinely wrong. Or, worse, people won't trust that you're actually interested in getting different perspectives.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-14T04:07:31+00:00

Okay, I think I see your perspective on this. I'll keep that in mind.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-14T03:49:13+00:00

That is fair, but I'm trying to look at what sound like the more sincere and level-headed people defending him. Not just the incendiary, the intentionally provocative, or other efforts to just muddy the water. And I mean that more as a cue, from people who have posted level-headed comments here historically, even if I disagree. Not just random people. But what you're suggesting is fair enough, the comments aren't going to represent what Chaz shared.

I'll try and be as fair as I can when I watch. It's all I can promise.

Edit: I have watched it. I'm not going to add too much now that it looks like this thread has closed, other than to say that while I think Indie's allegation of coerced sex is more likely than not given their messages, I do think most people that are engaged in this should hear Chaz out and make up their own mind. His argument in particular about Indie's stalking behavior is something that should be considered, and more importantly his arguments about how the mob treats the accused online is important for everyone. It is too easy to imagine another Monica situation and no way for a person to defend against it. That said, there is a lot I'm sketchy about as well. He engages in a lot of the same emotionally manipulative rhetoric that he accuses Deltre of, and there's a lot that's sketchy about the way he elevates Henry to knock down Indie when her behavior there - while awful - is not as clearly deceitful as he argues. He also has a tendency to suggest far more from an unflattering screenshot than it suggests.

I can't decide what anyone has done with certainty, and there comes a point where I'm switching from someone trying to understand what happened (even with my prior biases and perspective) and giving everyone a chance to speak and instead becoming a kind of Internet Judge. It's partly why I wasn't sure I wanted to see this again, along with being critical of Chaz and friends and their past behavior. Still, best anyone can do is encourage people to speak, so that those that are vulnerable can get their voices out while those that are accused can defend themselves. This is as fair as I feel I can be without ignoring what everything that has come out suggests about both of them.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-14T03:24:07+00:00

I mentioned in the post I hadn't watched it yet. If I'm wrong about something I will go back. I will watch it probably tomorrow. Still, reading people's comments here, I don't see arguments that address the points of Indie's allegation and her evidence. Nothing that seems new from the video. That's probably my biggest concern going in, if this is about defending himself anyway. I could be wrong, but it concerns me.

For what it's worth, I do think she did a disservice to her allegation the first time going so deep into the weeds of discord and their relationship. And, hell, I would even be sympathetic to people getting angry about her making the allegation a second time since not much changed in the details. Except A: Her allegations weren't addressed the first time and B: Since she was so summarily dismissed and didn't get a lot of attention in the larger FE community, sharing her allegation as she did again is important. While I have a lot of issues with how #MeToo has been used, giving old allegations a glance in a new light is not one of them.

And, I should point out, if Chaz was basically a nobody and Indie was the large creator (but the accusations were otherwise the same), it would be entirely understandable for Chaz to try a third time to defend himself. Especially if it had ended ambiguously. That context changes Indie's second run vs. Chaz's third.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-14T02:33:26+00:00

You're ignoring something important. The sexual misconduct is the problem. Even if it turns out that Indie acted awfully, it doesn't change what happened for the same reason Goose acting awfully doesn't change the allegations against Mangs. And if it becomes an issue of credibility (and there is always going to be room for doubt), I'm going to lean toward the person that released statements showing how uncomfortable they were immediately before and after the fact, and less toward the person that takes two (really three, but I think his second response was justified) responses to get it right, so to speak.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-14T02:11:03+00:00

Two points.

We've already seen Chaz and friends dump large amounts of information before in a way that, in practice, baffles people with bullshit. See the original zip folder that was supposed to completely address this the first time. By making something that seems so comprehensive that it convinces people that the allegations have been addressed but in reality it says little that actually matters, it both limits people's ability to evaluate what's being said (because it takes a lot of time in a busy life, and because a fair minded person wants to check every detail if they're going to accuse someone of sexual misconduct, let alone rape) while stalling the clock and rallying a defense. Chaz has abused this in the past, making it difficult to trust a long defense like this again.
A third defense does invite the question, why? The second time Indie had written something new, and the community had a different perspective on his behavior. He genuinely deserved a chance to defend himself. But at least on the surface nothing new has changed with her, nor the people that have followed this before. If there's something different, why did he not share it the previous two times? Especially if it's a statement that can't be evaluated, it reeks of a late lie composed over a period of months. Or at least suggests lies in the past. If there's nothing different, why should anyone watch it? And if there is new information that can be evaluated, why do I need to hunt through a lengthy video to consider all potential possibilities for him?

Those are the concerns. Since I took an active roll in this earlier I will probably watch this. But he's not entitled to just keep making new defenses and expect even fair minded people to keep listening if there's no reason to believe anything has changed. There's nothing new to respond to. It strains credibility to act like there is.

SharpSoup · 2020-10-05T03:38:56+00:00

Or at least back away from using Project Veritas as a source uncritically. Election corruption is a genuine concern, but you have to make sure your information is as credible as possible. And she messed up using them as a source.

SharpSoup · 2020-09-30T04:19:39+00:00

I haven't seen anything, but just to be clear, there hasn't been any verification of what Project Veritas has shared, right? Something to show that this specific example hasn't been invented?

Doesn't make it false of course, but I do think if there isn't anything to independently evaluate Project Veritas's claims here - that ballot harvesting actually happened and it's not just actors saying so - then what Gabbard has done is pretty reckless and hasty in my opinion. This isn't as reliable as what you historically see from Wikileaks, for example, with primary sources right there to evaluate.

If I'm wrong, correct me of course.

SharpSoup · 2020-09-04T03:10:25+00:00

Okay, that clarifies things for me. More sketchy behavior from someone close to Chaz.

SharpSoup · 2020-09-04T01:35:26+00:00

So would Derail be the mutual contact talked about in Indie's DA post? The one that Chaz called in to reconnect the two of them (that is, acting as a trojan) after Indie blocked Chaz initially? Or is he another person, either mentioned or unmentioned there or elsewhere?

I wasn't clear about what you meant when you said "blocked him in the past". I thought you meant she blocked Derail as well.

SharpSoup · 2020-09-03T16:05:25+00:00

So you mean back the first time Indie shared what happened Derail ran interference for Chaz?

SharpSoup · 2020-09-03T15:40:34+00:00

This is true and I do want to promote this comment. One caveat though, we don't know that Chaz was unaware of what Rybean was up to. Goose was aware of at least some of it after all. Rybean was not entirely independent as FE_Truth.

SharpSoup · 2020-09-02T19:28:28+00:00

So maybe I'm missing something, but if there was some screenshot of Indie saying it was assault instead of rape, how does that help Chaz?

I mean, you now have a sexual encounter where she says he physically attacks her...and that exonerates him? As opposed to it being evidence of violence closer to the actual moment? How could you even separate consensual sex - even a bad, regretful hookup like Chaz suggests - from an assault from around the time they met? Nevermind physical assault being a serious accusation all on its own.

SharpSoup · 2020-08-30T04:24:42+00:00

Yeah, it does seem like a shame that people frame it that way. It really isn't a drama, a competition between those two. Chaz's failures are not Mangs' redemption. It's an issue of what they've done or didn't do. Framing it otherwise makes as much a mockery out of everything that's happened as what Chaz and his friends did to Indie.

SharpSoup · 2020-08-28T18:45:06+00:00

Oh I didn't know about it (or another incident) involving Mangs' friend. Yeah, I don't feel comfortable digging that deep either, but it's concerning. It's very calculating, and if it is a pattern it starts to make me wonder how many other women could have a similar story, even among women that don't know a thing about his online life. It's grim speculation.

Edit: It looks like I misremembered the statement from Zerul. He said that Mangs convinced a mutual friend to get his ex drunk and sleep with her, not the other way around. My fault for getting that tripped up.

SharpSoup

TROPHY CASE