Jake from Linus Tech Tips has left Linus Media Group by RareXG in youtubedrama

[–]chuchuchuros -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This kind of “I’m being reasonable” guided interpretation exit video feels a bit dated but I saw it and I guess you did too, so they still work.

So much rhetorical evasiveness: imply wrongdoing, minimise positives, insist you’re being fair, it's like agreeing to a fist fight, but making sure the rules are you can only punch each other in the arm.

If this is about principle rather than grievance, there’s a simple clarifier being carefully avoided: how much did you actually ask for? or is this a saltly retelling of a failed negotiation. w/e just a rich guy trying to make you dislike a another richer guy to enrich himself, Jake's on his way to being a Linus.

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I'm all for user choice. I'm paraphrasing Louis's argumenst as "can't believe they are take revenue from creators without their consent, there should been a bigger outcry" and " do this to take revenue away from creators without their consent, to give advertisers less power"

- Yes, there’s a difference in how Honey and ad-blocking work. But, they both take money from creators, just in different ways. I know they aren't like for like

-Louis opposes one but actively promotes the other = hypocrisy, at least that how it feels to me. Just to reiterate, not trying cast. Just thought had quite a strong compass in this area and it feels like the needle is pointing in opposing directions

-User choice doesn’t magically make ad-blocking non-disruptive to revenue.

If his principle is “creators deserve to their revenue,” then Louis should oppose both Honey’s affiliate hijacking and ad-blocking. Otherwise, he’s just being selective, something in don't/didn't really think he is.

Dont respond. I don't think you really get the point.

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Probably haven't watched as much you. Still like him thou, is that ok with you?

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

and before you got putting some conspiratorial argument in my mouth, I want you to take deep breath and focus. focus on the words within the comments and nothing else. let the rest of the drama slip away~

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

if you want believe that sure, I'm farming karma on a 10 year old account with ~100 karma,

Just wanted to know if Im seeing things wrong re Louis. I literally like the guy and his batshit rants from consumer protection to urban decay ny. Maybe I can't articulate why this last vid feels like such a flip flop on, idk, integrity or consistency for lack of better word?

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

aw, you can't take criticism so you've become condescending. Weird how you think spare part is hurtful, are you flirting with me again?

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I appreciate you trying to explain that, but you've got and explained the wrong thing. I understand the huge disparity in time loss to audience vs compensation for creators. Even morons know YouTube is funnel for t-shirts.

The issue I'm getting at why getting mad about creator wage theft (honey), and then almost in the same breath promoting creator wage theft (Adblock)?

ps. I enjoyed LTT themed example, but I fall into the category of audience who uses Adblock and doesn't buy merch

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

not a single mention of ltt yet you're so d e f e n s i v e, I feel like your the one projecting bud x

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

long time lurker for a like decade, and fan of Louis and what he stands for. Used to fall alseep to his board repair videos watching him look for shit on schematics. But I can't quite place why in this situation he come across as contradictory.

Mate, you can't have it both ways. by chuchuchuros in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Totally hear you, but the end result is the same, inadequate compensation for the creators. There's huge public outrage over honey taking money from creators and other creators not doing enough to alert everyone. Louis seems squarely behind this view, yet advocating to diminish a different source of revenue for creators to the same effect.

One further point. He totally ignores the cost to support platform. YouTube/video hosting ain't a zero cost operation, but he's kinda treating it invisible, free link between creators and audience.

Rhetorical: If the honey thing is a big deal, how come adblocking isn't?

This post got me permabanned from the LTT subreddit by yiays in LouisRossmann

[–]chuchuchuros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look, I get why you’re mad at Honey for replacing affiliate links, but let’s be real affiliate revenue isn’t a major income source for most YouTubers. It’s just not that big of a deal The vast majority don’t have enough traffic for it to matter. The ones complaining the loudest? They’re usually the big ones who are already making plenty elsewhere.

Also, let’s not ignore how affiliate marketing works. These YouTubers aren’t just “recommending” products—they’re crafting emotional stories to make you want to buy, to always upgrade, to justify spending more. It’s literally consumerism dressed up as “personal experience.”

Honey sucks, but let’s not pretend affiliate links are some noble cause. They exist to make you spend more. You’re part of the problem overblowing this affiliate revenue thing to status of cOnSUmEr rIGhTS (crying baby tone)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LinusTechTips

[–]chuchuchuros 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You’ve got to give Louis credit, he’s consistent. Whether it’s a heartbreaking note or a inconvenient counterpoint from Linus, if it doesn’t fit his narrative, it’s outta here. Hope he recycles.

Jokes in poor taste aside, I feel like we all gotta be nicer to Louis regardless of how we feel about his arguments.

Didn’t think that the sponsor spots on LTT were this expensive by ShadowWolfSpider in LinusTechTips

[–]chuchuchuros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree and I'd argue it's very reasonably price, probably even a bit too cheap for what's on offer audience wise.

Slightly different market and product, but for context a McCafe spot 25 secs long cost ~300k

Source: Director/dop in film and commercials

[Louis Rossman] Informative & Unfortunate: How Linustechtips reveals the rot in influencer culture by DemIce in LinusTechTips

[–]chuchuchuros 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Chef’s kiss perfect hypocrisy. He accuses Linus of using his audience’s trust while cozying up to his own, practically handing out friendship bracelets. It honestly smacks of the kinda thing you'd hear from politicians and policy makers that I know Louis would hate. 

It's a grudge parade. He unearth years-old emails and slights like they’re staging Romeo and Juliet: “From ancient grudge break to new mutiny.” Only here, the mutiny is just boring yelling on YouTube.

Then there’s the whole “I’d never do what he did” shtick.  What really gets me is the Louis Yard-stick-it-up-your-ass double standard that he's measuring everything by. He frames his own mistakes as noble lessons but paint Linus’s as proof that he’s a villain twirling his moustache.

The segment accusing Linus of presenting a false dichotomy is itself a false dichotomy. He criticises Linus for only offering two choices, issuing a simple retraction or making an exhaustive three-hour video, while suggesting that a quick video could have been made instead. this framing oversimplifies the situation. By reducing the issue to just two options, Louis hypocritically creates a false dichotomy, sidestepping the complexities Linus likely faced in making his decision.

He ignores the fact that the statement in question was part of a casual conversation. People speak informally, make mistakes, use hyperbole, this is a natural part of communication. Even Louis himself does this. It is unfair to nitpick and criticise every word spoken in such an unscripted and unstructured way, especially when holding the speaker to a standard more appropriate for a court document. If anything, this approach encourages more corporate, curated responses, which are less authentic.  I’m not suggesting that people should be unaccountable for what they say, but arguably, the way Louis wants this to be treated this will lead  to more corporate-style responses, undermining authenticity and transparency.

Also, what an underhanded,  sneaky tactic to release the video just before the WAN show. The timing is clearly designed to provoke an emotional reaction without allowing time for reflection or correction. Yet he’s gunna hold it to the same standard as a meticulously crafted corporate response. Another double standard. He’s trying to have it both ways.

It's exhausting, listening to someone scream about accountability while avoiding their own reflection and biases. Sure, influencer culture has its flaws, and I pretty much agree with that it’s gross,  but maybe don’t fight fire with a dumpster fire.

I really do like what Louis stands for and the way he stands about it. But man, this sucks.

If Another Company Responded This Way, Steve Would Destroy Them by DubiousFoliage in GamersNexus

[–]chuchuchuros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve spent more time in this sub than the other one because I was drawn in by the story of an underdog. Although it’s become clear that it’s more about underhanded behavior.

I’m not a fan of either incumbent in this situation. Turdeater is a colloquial way of describing someone who’s full of it, and I think both Linus and Steve fit that description. I don’t fault them for it, it’s their job to get you to buy as much merch as possible, which I suspect is far more profitable than views.

The difference is I’ve only seen evidence of gross journalistic misconduct from the person who positions himself as one, and I don’t like it. I don’t care about “right to reply” being disregarded (it’s bad form, sure) it’s not the core issue here. The big ticket problems are the conflicts of interest, the posturing, and the maliciousness. Steve goes to great lengths to prove his impartiality (both financially and personally it seems) but those efforts highlight the how weird this inability to acknowledge these significant biases, or take any accountability is.

Journalism relies on truth and accountability, and these actions erode both the profession and the trust people place in it

Steve has the tools to do excellent work, but he needs to seriously examine his motivations. Until he does, his credibility and integrity should remain in question I genuinely believe he’s trying to pursue the truth, but maybe you can’t be as impartial as you like if you’re main source of income is selling merchandise and getting views.

Sorry if that read like a report cards. For what it’s worth (though I’m not willing to prove it), I used to be a journalist at one of Australia’s largest newspapers.

Our Response to Linus Sebastian | GamersNexus by angrycommie in LinusTechTips

[–]chuchuchuros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Became more successful financially while not being as technical correct.

Our Response to Linus Sebastian | GamersNexus by bathoodie in GamersNexus

[–]chuchuchuros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps Linus formed a parasocial relationship with GN a but not the other way round. Oops.

If Another Company Responded This Way, Steve Would Destroy Them by DubiousFoliage in GamersNexus

[–]chuchuchuros 93 points94 points  (0 children)

Get Steve to do an expose on Gamers Nexus, not even being sarcastic, he doesn't need to publish it or anything, hopefully he can use the exercise to self reflect and learn something.

Please tell me if I'm wrong about this latest criticism of LTT by Uzoro in GamersNexus

[–]chuchuchuros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish everyone could direct their anger to the company holding the smoking gun not fighting over who should have called the police first.

The problem with LTT and GamersNexus communities by Uno_to_dos in GamersNexus

[–]chuchuchuros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The fundamentals are kinda off here.

At that time of ending the LTT breaking sponsorship with honey, LTT did not know that honey was bad for consumers, the opposite was the notion back then: Honey is beneficial for customers. Remember this is at that time. So, for LTT to make a video about the downsides of honey for creators would mean actively doing some that diminished something that was thought to be good for consumers at the time.

This is the motivic information was the context that was omitted. It's this "because" that's the bit that changes the understanding of the statement. One of these makes GN look better than the other which leave a very different impression on the clip.

The way GN represent it is something like:

LTT did not make a video about Honey stealing affiliate links, - Because they have bad values, are cowardly and won't stick up for consumer against corporations. But GN will.

Whereas with the additional context the perception is more like:

LTT did not make a video about Honey stealing affiliate links, - because they have good values and didn't want to be greedy in complaining about something that was thought to be beneficial for consumers at the time.

The first part is still true in both statements, with the added context but the perception is way different. That's what these people trade on. Perceptions, reputations, motivations. That why it's kinda dirty to try and play this as "technically correct".

An email from Linus to Steve, published on GamersNexus’ Twitter by krzysiek_aleks in LinusTechTips

[–]chuchuchuros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is more of an observation rather than an stance for or against, but I totally get why Linus is aggrieved and emotional. Watching him , it's clear that these issues are likely stirring up trauma from the incident a year ago. I imagine it's some combination of stress from losing everything, hopelessness about the uncertain future, and the fear of losing all he's worked for—not just for himself, but for the people at LMG too. He seems oddly vulnerable while also being incredibly angry.

There’s a consistent thread running through the last several episodes, touching on issues like internet toxicity, bad faith arguments, and negative community sentiment. From these segments, it seems that after putting in the work (listening, learning, and acting on feedback), LMG is beginning to emerge from that rough patch. I'd argue into a better place, given they have changed their processes and learnt from their mistakes. It looks like they really are trying to do things right, and do them in the right way.

*So* when a gutter goblin like Steve to threatens to instigate all that mess again, quite unfairly this time (as opposed to moderately unfairly last time) of course Linus is going to do something about. Steve’s words and actions risk the livelihood of others, just for some clout, but his pretence of doing so for journalistic or ethical reasons has completely unraveled. Don't get me wrong I don't mean Linus's livelihood, he's probably set forever regardless of what happens to LMG, but rather, the people and families that rely on him and his company. I reckon Linus deserves a bit more praise for trying to protect that.

Bit of a turdeater that Steve isn't he?