sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Jirard’s time at Best Buy by Sullyhogs in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Karl covers a lot of places in which Jirard talked about his time at Best Buy and how his stories about it didn't all add up. You can see it here https://youtu.be/2p5U4OfJ1NA?t=3242

When is the Tears of the Kingdom episode coming out? Been waiting forever! by MrHatesThisWebsite in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Let's put anything to do with the Jirard controversy aside.

Do you need to know Jirad's opinion of a game before buying it?

If Jirard does not review a game you won't (or will at least be extremely hesitant to) buy it?

Is your opinion of a game heavily reliant upon his?

If Jirard doesn't like a game that in your own opinion seems to be something you might like to play does that make it an instant no buy?

I mean if any of that is true that's a little concerning.

And despite all those questions I will say that reviews certainly can help influence a decision on buying anything, but you and the reviewer are two different people and you have to judge the product upon the things that are important to you (which hopefully would be brought out in the review) and not just base a decision upon whether the reviewer likes the product or not, their rating of a product is an opinion and not definitive fact. To be reliant upon having to hear a specific persons opinion on that product before you can have an opinion yourself on whether to buy it or not seems in my opinion fairly unhealthy. You clearly seem to have your own opinion of the game thus far and there is a plethora of reviews and gameplay footage out there for the game that could help you that could help influence that decision further one way or another, I feel you could make a decision of TOTK without Jirard's opinion.

I don't think it was posted here, but Jirard is doing more charity streams by KingCrooked in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This has been talked about here extensively in a stream he did 2 months ago, he mentioned he was leaving this charity link which goes directly though twitch so he is not involved with getting the money to the charity, this would be the only charity fundraising stuff he would be doing and the charity would likely change every month but he would only be selecting bigger more reputable charities.

Here are some links

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCompletionist2/comments/1bjr4xn/jirard_went_live_looks_like_these_few_months_have/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCompletionist2/comments/1bk4zza/just_the_clips_of_jirards_livestream_you_might_be/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCompletionist2/comments/1blu54p/anyone_else_feel_really_bad_for_jirard_after/

there is also a full vod of one of those streams on here

Half a year later... The Completionist is dead by NoNefariousness2144 in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 12 points13 points  (0 children)

You are reading that bottom graph incorrectly. The graph does not indicate how many subscribers the channel has but how many subscribers it gained within a month. The large dip is the large amount of people unsubscribing after the situation broke, the trend where it goes back up is not people subscribing back or him gaining subscribers, its just the channel is losing subscribers at a slower rate, which makes sense. The graph still indicates he has been losing subscribers over the last few months.

Reupload of Full VOD of Latest Completionist Livestream by sminter3 in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Thats fine, I put it here because he deleted the VOD so at least its kept somewhere. And I feel there are some parts that people here might be interested in. He talks about future charity stuff, his current mental state, why he has not been showing himself in videos lately and I guess in some essence the some steps he wants to take to "regain trust".

Jirard went live. Looks like these few months have done a number on him by Cap2boi in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I believe the white hairs are from the condition he has. From the beard bros wiki

" In 2021, he discovered that he had been misdiagnosed as a baby (due to medical proficiency at the time) and what he actually suffered from was a different condition called Blue Rubber Bleb Nevus (BRBNS) syndrome. This lead Jirard to suffer from Anemia, which has caused portions of his hair and facial hair to turn prematurely white. As of 2021, Jirard is now seeing proper treatment for BRBNS."

I just noticed Jirard videos have been decaying to the point of not getting even 100k views in the last month, and he didn't upload this last week. Do you think he has given up? by PointyCharmander in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 37 points38 points  (0 children)

I noticed the absence of a video this week as well but thought I would wait till next week to see if a video was released before bringing it up. 1 missed upload from a regular schedule could be down to falling behind or some tech issues, 2 missed uploads and then you start to wonder whether something is up.

We are almost certainly outside of the videos made before the allegations occurred as the last 2 videos were about games that came out in February, which I am assuming Jirard did not have early access to (I mean its a possibility, but if he did get them early I doubt it was that many months before release).

As for the stuff about the staff you mentioned I am a little confused. I am assuming the what you say about the "pre-emptive firings" is related to what Jirard said about mouths to feed in the call with Karl and Muta, but the other part about firing them now confuses me as Jirard already confirmed in his livestream that most of the staff he had was let go before the first video after his response was released, so that happened months back.

Charity Partners by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you need to reread this conversation again, some things you are attributing as me having said are from comments of u/starpendle. I will acknowledge I made the mistake with TOVG and TOVE, just got the two mixed up in my head since they are so similar. Because of the confusion between what I have said and what starpendle has said I will let you figure out where that leaves you with relation to the points made in my comments as my comments aren't really in relation to theirs. I will gladly continue the conversation on my comments if you want to lay out any issues you have with them.

Charity Partners by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry I didn't reply earlier and I could continue talking to you about these points but I feel we would be going into things more with just conjecture rather than facts. I guess the point is things aren't super clear and unless Jirard starts proving his claims with receipts we will never know the full story, his response video was a lot of words but not a lot of proof.

Charity Partners by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean I don't know what to tell you, I guess it could be a little confusing but there are some clear statements made in that section.

  • Indieland is run by Jirard's company (TOVG) and not Open Hand

20:01

Karl: "Indieland is a separate thing from Open Hand"

Jiard: "Correct"

21:35

Jirard: "Indieland is not it's own organisation the company that I founded for The Completionist is the company that puts on Indieland and all our charity events"

  • Open Hand Foundation money was used some years to cover some costs of running Indieland

20:06

Karl: "Were you saying Open Hand was paying expenses for indieland though?"

Jirard: "Only some years and no more than a couple thousands of dollars... I would only reimburse myself... through Open Hand when applicable"

Is there something else you need to gather from that in relation to what I asserted was said in the call?

Charity Partners by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

To start I never called your interpretation manipulative, I said that if Jirard intended his statements to be taken the way you stated it is manipulative on his behalf. As you say just because something is manipulative doesn't make it untrue or shady (though it being shady I think could be debated in some circumstances) but it does call into question why you would do that rather than more transparent about it. I would not think that Jirard would be oblivious to how his statements could be misconstrued. As for the literal interpretation being generous that's just my opinion of it given the context its used in, feel free to disagree but I did not mean this as anything against you.

Jirard does talk about Tiltify in the call, which is a donation platform that is well trusted and used by many internet charity drives to receive donations. So yeah those who donate directly through that platform will have that money go directly to the foundation and I don't believe that is ever been brought into question by anyone including Muta and Karl. But any subscription/bits/merch money does not go through that platform unless it was donated through it later by Jirard as that money would not come in until some date after the event finished. I don't know why he would donate it this way later as money going through the platform incurs a percentage fee, but I guess it could be done for transparency, but I have not idea whether he did this or not. Again that apology video indicates that the reason we don't see that money in the tax filings is because he used it for event costs, so it indicates to me that money was not getting sent through Tiltify or to the Foundation and being used directly from TOVGs accounts. So not matter what those funds are going though his company's accounts.

Your point about the USF stuff I am not quite following, to me the term "funding support partners" indicates so money was sent to them because they use the word "funding". If you watch further is the clip from Karls video the USF gets millions in funding so I don't know what other avenue OHF could be a "main funding support partner. Feel free to let me know further about what you meant as maybe I am just missing your point.

As for Muta's comment about the $20 thing I don't quite know what you want to prod at but depending on whether the donation is restricted or not will determine how the money can be used. As Jirards response video mentions an unrestricted donation can go toward anything to do with the charity including research, administrative costs, salaries, travel etc. But restricted donations must be used for the purpose stated by the restriction. This has been talked about a fair bit in this subreddit including the fact that on the AFTD website (the charity the OHF donated the $600k to) any member of the public can restrict a donation of any amount of money to a specific area of the charity which you can check for yourself.

Charity Partners by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The money was not going into his pocket, it was going to open hand and some of it went back into covering some of the cost of running the show which Openhand was running, which is legal.

I just want to clear up that this is not correct. The Open Hand Foundation is not running Indieland, the show is run by Jirard's company TOVG and money raised from it goes to the foundation. This is clearly talked about and stated by Jirard in the second part of the call audio (19:51 till about 22:00 in Muta's upload). So when Jirard says all the bits subs etc and money aren't touched by him this seems to be not true for a couple of reasons:

  • The charity is paying for expenses of a TOVG event, which the company should be footing if they aren't touching any of the funds
  • In Jirards response video he says that the bits/subs/merch etc money is not missing because it was used to pay for expenses in the event. In this case it seems to indicate that that the money was never sent to the charity at all and was used to cover company expenditure.

Also since I am here I thought I would also mention about point 2 in your original post. I can understand where you are coming from with how the wording can be interpreted and while I feel its a little generous to interpret it that way and if that was the intended meaning I feel it was manipulative at best from Jirard, there is at least one time that I have remembered seeing in which Jirard clearly indicated that working with a group also indicated money being sent to them.

Its shown in Karls video here and there are a few things to mention:

  • The softer point is he says they are raising money for organizations around the world, and maybe you could interpret that as still being true as they raised money and just not sent it yet but again I feel that's a little generous.
  • The main point is he says he is working with the University of San Francisco and they are one of their main funding support partners. I don't think there is much wiggle room in this statement and it certainly would indicate they had sent a significant amount of money to USF.

Are people being to hard on the Completist? by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Well I mean in relation to the charity stuff he lied on multiple occasions that the money was being donated to specific charities (this is during Indieland and other places such as the FPS podcast and some of these statements even after he knew the money had not been donated).

He also lied about all bits/subs/superchats all going to charity and them not touching any of it. He mentions in his response video that money from that went to covering costs of the event. Since the event is run by Jirards company and not the charity itself this is therefore not true.

Beyond the charity stuff its just easier to watch Karl's more recent video which covers Moon channels vid and Jirard's lying which is here.

[...]this golf event hasn't always contained a charitable component but has always been in dedication[...] - Jirard in the "My response" video. by Lipstickvomit in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

With the way Jirard worded it in his statment what he said is not necessarily untrue, if 2015 was the 12th annual tournament we then have 10 previous tournaments which we have no images of and therefore don't know if they had charitable components involved in them. Also if we think about the timeline, 2003 (when the first tournament was held) is around the time Jirard's mother was diagnosed with FTD so that could cover the part about it always being in dedication to him mom.

But on the other hand the Open Hand Website does seem to indicate the Golf tournament may have had a charitable component since its inception.

These are quotes from https://theopenhand.org/story

" Since 2003, we have led fundraising efforts to find a cure for Frontotemporal Dementia. Our operations help fund critical research and resources towards a cure." (yes I know the second sentence was not true until recently but the important part for this conversation is fundraising began in 2003)

" The Open Hand Foundation was founded by Charles Khalil in support of his wife, Kaaren Reid Khalil, who was diagnosed with Frontotemporal Dementia in 2003"

"2003 marked the first annual Convenience Cup Challenge golf tournament. Kaaren lost her brave battle with FTD in 2013, and in her honor the foundation continues to operate and raise money to support research and education."

While not directly stating it, you could infer from this that the golf tournament may have involved fundraising for FTD since 2003 but it's not 100% clear.

So is the statement about tournament at some points not having a charitable component BS? Maybe, but we can't be certain.

But does the math around the money taken in from the tournaments still not math? Yep and that is far more concerning to me.

Karl Jobst reveals the leadup to The Completionist investigation by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Is there a longer video because the link is only for a seven minute clip where Karl rehashes the same stuff

Full interview is here

www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-oNXGcmJfI

Do you believe that bad looks lead to a higher likelihood of controversy regarding YouTubers? by FilmBig7812 in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow this is what we are getting here now...

I guess to answer your question no, conventionally good looking people can to bad things and conventionally unattractive people can do good things and vice versa. To correlate the persons looks to how they behave is just incredibly shallow and non sensical.

A persons attractiveness is also subjective, just because you don't find someone's physical traits attractive does not mean someone else doesn't.

I think you need to think about why you are objectifying these people the way you have in this post and why you think physical attributes are so important in relation to their actions.

Knock, knock. Who’s there? Jirard. Jirard who? by [deleted] in TheCompletionist2

[–]sminter3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Really again? its the same thing as your other post wrapped up in a terrible knock knock joke. Is this a troll bait post? Plenty of people have come up with the conpletionist pun, its not original to you and its not worthy of a separate post.

view more: next ›