A thing that pings particularly badly for me is that unlike the Professor, Jeremy isn't calling out his fanbase for death threats. He's inherently endorsing them.
Jeremy released a video last night basically saying that he only harassed her once in a video six months ago, concedes that it was mean spirited, then says that everyone involved lied about his involvement and wrong doing, specifically naming them up front. He then spends the rest of a 13 minute video talking about the threats he got. He’s been on Twitter asking people to “bring receipts”.
The thumbnail for the video says “YOU LOSE”.
Per Reddit, the main video in question has been taken down.
It’s obvious to me that he simply just doesn’t care.
I totally stand by The Professor here—there needs to be accountability.
Objectively, it's a given that Jeremy's behaviour has been unacceptable (and sustained which is pretty key as well). That's not up for debate.
What's interesting is what can be done about it. Where are we as a community and organisations within the community able to draw a line and say "no Jeremy or troll-person X, that's not OK, here's the door"?
What means do we have to enforce accountability for hatred and insults, not just for this one man but for people in general in the community. Accountability is the strongest and most important facet of this whole debacle. If there is public shaming, insulting and hatred coming from someone, how do we make them accountable for it?
It's a difficult question! It's one I feel we'd all benefit from understanding a little more, maybe it would be reassuring and also a deterrent to would-be harassers.
(and no. This isn't a question of free speech or thought-policing, this is making people understand unequivocally that they've done something hurtful and they need to reconsider their behaviour).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
First off, I was just reading up on every source that was available to me and had multiple discussions with some comrades in the online community about this.
I have a few opinions and observations.
1. The harassment was definitely not the sole factor in Christine Sprankle leaving the MTG Community. In fact, she has endured much, much worse. It's a problem with Cosplay in general. I went to a convention once, where there were cosplay women. I admired their work, complemented them, and for some others I even complemented them as to how beautiful they were as well. I know my comments weren't taken to a sexism, or male stereotypical creep. There is a way, and a socially polite method of simply giving those compliments and going about your business, or attempting to politely meet up in future social events. I met up with some of these women at an after party, I was told what I did was relieving for them. I truly felt that sad at that moment, that just basic dignity and politeness were something rare these women see.
2. There is too many political factors entering the world of MTG Simply put, MTG is on a downturn, we all don't like thinking it, but there is so much going on that's giving Magic a worse name - I understand this is doomsaying a little bit, but looking at booster boxes of Iconic Masters in the shape of a U is pretty insane, and it's not even the worst thing that's happened in this year for the company. Why Cosplay for a company that can't even promote their sole product or promote any decent lore?
In the first 10 minutes, TWoo specifically brings up a very correct point to paraphrase
Quote from Paraphrase of TWoo »
"So you've catered to this market for your entire existence, then get mad at them for playing your game?"
Politics interfering in Sports (specifically the NFL this year), Physical Fitness, and the Entertainment industries have had a large decline in their revenue. Wizards of the Coast needs to simply state that they do not endorse any kind of harassment or discrimination and wipe their hands clean. They should not interfere, we have seen this situation in a similar vein before. For all those who don't remember Drew Levin pushed Zach Jesse out of Magic. https://twitter.com/drewlevin/status/598024023486894080
Look at how awful that situation was. Here is the Reddit Thread; https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/35q0yx/in_light_of_recent_discussion_a_post_by_zach_jesse/
We can't keep going like this as a community, we can't keep prosecuting people based on our emotions. I'm not saying what happened is right, or that people need thick skin, but to overreact to the situation is probably some of the worst options we could be doing.
Public Mod Note
(Wildfire393):
Zach Jesse is still off-limits for discussion
However, this noble goal of self-reflection you espouse is undermined when the rules of engagement boil down to "agree or don't post."
If someone can't agree that hatred and misogyny have no place on MTGSalvation, then there's no place on MTGSalvation for them. Speaking in defense of those things is not "healthy discourse" and we aren't going to play some kind of false equivalency game and pretend otherwise.
The problem is this: who defines "healthy discourse" and "false equivalency"?
Of course this site is private property and can admit or kick out anyone you please. But, can you not see how taking a position(as RxPhantom said) of "agree or don't post" is just mentally lazy? Not to mention it does nothing other than create a useless echo chamber AND feeds the far right narrative of the intolerant Left.
And don't even start to tell me this site isn't biased. It's philosophically Left down to its bones.
1. The harassment was definitely not the sole factor in Christine Sprankle leaving the MTG Community. In fact, she has endured much, much worse. It's a problem with Cosplay in general. I went to a convention once, where there were cosplay women. I admired their work, complemented them, and for some others I even complemented them as to how beautiful they were as well. I know my comments weren't taken to a sexism, or male stereotypical creep. There is a way, and a socially polite method of simply giving those compliments and going about your business, or attempting to politely meet up in future social events. I met up with some of these women at an after party, I was told what I did was relieving for them. I truly felt that sad at that moment, that just basic dignity and politeness were something rare these women see.
This might sound a way, but I think that if I were bold enough to dive into cosplay, I'd go into it with the full expectation that people would treat me with disrespect as I can't think of many cultures that are kind to adults donning costumes outside of specific events or holidays.
Question to everyone who doesn't agree with the "agree or don't post" bit. And again, as per usual of me posting in this thread, I am posting without my mod hat.
Why would anyone agree with a stance of "Harassment is okay" ? Explain that one to me, then get back to the "red vs blue" deal.
In the meantime, don't forget that Jeremy has deleted a lot of the more damning stuff, and we don't know what kind of private messages Christine or The Professor had recieved by him or his cronies. At the same time though, anybody sending harassment Jeremy's way is in the wrong as well. The best thing we can do is let his crap bleed to death, discuss it here, but don't take the fight to him.
After all, you run into the age-old adage of "Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Or, in this case, he'll feel vindicated, sic his cronies somewhere else and that's that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Look dude, the guy dun wrong. Clearly, unambiguously there's no sound argument to be had in favour of his actions (although there's been some unfortunate attempts of course).
The discussion should be centred around what happens next. That's critical, because it will probably come to define many people's understanding of how hatred and shaming is dealt with in our community.
If you're genuinely still stuck on the "... But did he though?" part of all this, you should take a moment to reflect and trawl though the (now rather mountainous) examples of sustained negativity and personal attacks that have come from him.
It's one-sided because we're not debating whether attacking people is wrong. What you should care about is what comes out of all of this in the wider, more aggregate sense, in order to facilitate a more supportive and welcoming community. What are we able to do about this, to get some kind of accountability and allow people to feel safer and respected. Those are the terms of this discussion, not some garbled mess about 'sides' or political philosophy. Making hateful people accountable isn't a political idea, so don't try to make it one. It's basic decency and respect for others.
We may never know the entire truth. Conspiracy theory time.
1. Jeremy harasses Sprankle.
2. Jeremy and Sprankle pulls off an act to help Sprankle to get more Patreon money.
3. WOTC tells Jeremy and Sprankle to create this drama to divert attention away from the card quality issues and declining attendance within the game.
There are two types of hockey players that are usually hated. Those who throw cheap shots with intent to injure, and those who dive, or fake an injury, in order to draw a penalty on the opposing team.
Instead of sending death threats, why not do what hockey fans do. Let Jeremy play in official tournaments, and while he is playing against an opponent in the tournament, surround him and boo him. Yeah, that should teach him a lesson... or not.
On that same note, if Sprankle went on stage to show off her costume, and a large number of the audience booed her, I wonder how she would take it? If booing someone is considered harassment, then I don't know what is. We get guys like Roger Goodell and Gary Bettman get booed all the time.
This is why the early 2000s were the best, well the 90's included too. We have theme decks, instead of dumb intro packs and planeswalker decks. We have the two player starter set. We have $50 games and not $80 games. We do not have social media. In order to do what Jeremy did, he would have to either go on internet forums, or say it directly. No Youtube back then too. We had MSN messenger, and the only people you could cyber bully would be members of your contact list, usually your friends, but by the time of the aftermath of the cyber bullying, that person no longer is in your contact list.
The problem is this: who defines "healthy discourse" and "false equivalency"?
...
Not to mention it does nothing other than create a useless echo chamber AND feeds the far right narrative of the intolerant Left.
The first post simply states the baseline that Jeremy is offensive and is actions were harassing. They also pre-emptively blocks some common line of argument known to be inflammatory. It tries to avoid getting the thread locked for descending into a sludge fest.
I find it very hard to believe you cannot possibly hold a discussion without resorting to the few limitations imposed. Should I say that inability is a sign of mental laziness? See how that just sounded? Then again, you chose to insult the mods by calling them mentally lazy right off and went directly for the cliché of echo chamber.
If thinking Jeremy is an harasser is being intolerant, I'll take the label. (And laugh it off.)
I also find the idea that the kind of people who enjoy Jeremy could ever change their mind from an internet discussion. They never have and rather enjoy trolling anyone who would engage them.
First of all, I do not envy the mods at all in trying to keep this discussion going. Really, if I were in your shoes I'd probably just have locked any threads that came up on this. Thank you for trusting the community enough to at least try.
Second, it seems like Jeremy hits all the usual notes of anyone being confronted with certain types of antagonizing behavior. Trying to create a false equivalence between himself and those who criticize him, trying to equate the criticism of his behavior with censorship... and the way he seems to draw directly from the /pol/ and /r/The_Donald lexicon really isn't helping his case.
if anyone was still unconvinced, this guy has officially gone off the deep end. He just released a new video (I won't link it) which compares the efforts of a few members of the community to flag his patreon, to the actions of Hitler.
yep, within only a couple of minutes of the video beginning, he compares the actions of a handful of community members tired of trolls and hate, to those of a maniac who was responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people....... actually insane, lol.
I guess /thread?
(the comments under the video are actually scary though. so much hate!)
Even though I think that on a very base level, there is some nefarious double-edged victimization going on when you, as an attractive woman, choose an easy, high paying, self-deprecating job posting selfies or seminudes or nudes on the internet, which adds an additional deception layer when you are a cosplayer who might even have no interest in the subject matter but are there to birth your own easy money... its unwise to think you're going to convince anybody, especially on Twitter in an argument. And you know what? It doesn't matter enough for you to care, and that's good enough for me not to go around harassing people. Live and let live, you know?
Public Mod Note
(Wildfire393):
Warning for trolling
Even though I think that on a very base level, there is some nefarious double-edged victimization going on when you, as an attractive woman, choose an easy, high paying, self-deprecating job posting selfies or seminudes or nudes on the internet, which adds an additional deception layer when you are a cosplayer who might even have no interest in the subject matter but are there to birth your own easy money... its unwise to think you're going to convince anybody, especially on Twitter in an argument. And you know what? It doesn't matter enough for you to care, and that's good enough for me not to go around harassing people. Live and let live, you know?
Considering Sprankle actually played the game on a Game Knights episode of The Command Zone, I'm inclined to believe she has some interest in the subject matter.
The rest of this I'm currently not in a position to confirm or deny.
Considering Sprankle actually played the game on a Game Knights episode of The Command Zone, I'm inclined to believe she has some interest in the subject matter.
I think she's great, honestly. She's the good side of something that normally isn't good.
So I'm going to willingly take another infraction to make my point, and my case here, because it has to be made.
Coming into any discussion, if you set the rules, "This happened, don't deny it" but refuse to provide the necessary proof that this has happened, then it's not a discussion at all, it's an echo chamber. I was told to watch The Professor's video, so I did. It doesn't answer my question.
My question was very, very simple: where is the proof? The claim is made that Jeremy personally led a targeted, prolonged campaign of harassment against Christine. I decided to do a bit of digging, and aside from a handful of tweets spread over months, which give his opinion that I could understand in the context he provided (mainly, that socially-awkward people will flock to protect someone who is moderately attractive), and a single video and one stream in which she was mentioned, I cannot find it. I simply can't. I cannot seem to find this much vaunted evidence that everyone says exists. Or doesn't exist. Because it was apparently...deleted? Why is it that people in this day and age can master the art of social media, but don't understand screencaps and archive.is? Why is it that we have to "listen and believe" when this comes up, but when pushed for the evidence to support the claim the people asking for the evidence are suddenly the bad guys? I come from a "trust, but verify" mindset, in everything I do, because sometimes people can lie, and other times people pass on what is going on, which is hearsay.
The Professor makes a good case for Jeremy being an edgelord and an ass. Guess what? That's not proof of him leading a crusade (No no...what do the American pig-dogs call it? Right, peacekeeping!) against a single individual. In my postings on Reddit, my blog postings, and videos on my YouTube channel I've gone after Studio Wildcard for performing shoddily, and providing a subpar product despite the hype they provided. SidAlpha has gone after Alex Mauer and Andrew Watt recently in the wake of spurious claims. We have been more focused on our respective targets than he has on Christine, and yet it wouldn't be harassment.
More to the point, if Jeremy is held accountable for people doing their own thing and attacking people, when he did not instigate any attacks (making a video does not indicate responsibility for creating a hate mob), does this mean that if he provides actual evidence of targeted harassment against himself by followers of Fournier, Christine, and even The Professor? Will you then launch a thread like this against them, or will it be a, "That's completely different"?
Make no mistake: I do not, in any way, condone targeted harassment campaigns by anyone. However, you have to provide the evidence to support your accusations, something I don't believe has been done in this. As such, taking a preponderance of the evidence, Jeremy is an ******** sometimes, but that doesn't make him the Hitler of targeted harassment.
And for the record, Jeremy makes an interesting case for her having started this because her Patreon numbers were shrinking (related graph: https://imgur.com/a/tkFqk). I'm not saying it's true, but it's interesting from an evidentiary standpoint.
Public Mod Note
(Wildfire393):
At this point you're being intentionally obstinate.
But, can you not see how taking a position(as RxPhantom said) of "agree or don't post" is just mentally lazy? Not to mention it does nothing other than create a useless echo chamber AND feeds the far right narrative of the intolerant Left.
It's not mentally lazy when the discussion in question is hatred on one side, and non-hatred on the other. This isn't a discussion about, say, whether Flip It Or Rip It (which Sprankle played to much backlash) is a bad thing or not. This is a discussion about an incident of coordinated harassment. Intellectual laziness would be some kind of "both sides have equal rights to equal time to present themselves" nonsense, without evaluating whether one side even deserves a platform. And in this case, we as the staff have decided that bigotry, hatred, and harassment do not deserve a platform on our site.
And don't even start to tell me this site isn't biased. It's philosophically Left down to its bones.
Of course the site is left-wing. As Content Manager, I can even tell you that there's an explicitly feminist leaning towards front-page content—not that you'd really notice, since we don't really publish anything where that matters (although I've touched on such issues briefly in How To Handle "That Guy"). And Jeremy is That Guy ramped up to 11. On top of that, I've personally rejected article submissions that attempt to bring pro-Gamergate comparisons into discussions of social issues within the Magic community. Furthermore, the whole "reality has a liberal bias" meme does have solid ground because, politically, the American right wing has moved so far to the right that discrimination is utterly normalized under their philosophies.
Spouting harsh criticism and hate on people for what they do or enjoy doing is pointless and more about the critic than their target.
The best thing the community and WOTC can do is ignore haters. Those targeted need to report all harassers on their individual media so moderators can hopefully ban and restrict them. This is the slow but proper way to mitigate the emotional damage these angry wee hate monsters do. It's very sad that anyone has to endure death threats. If you don't like something, ignore it.
Wotc I'm sure will not give angry hatebears product and promotional opportunities and as users we're responsible to not give them hits with views or comments.
I do feel like WOTC is lazy in not coopting the cosplayers who skillfully invest time and money basically promoting their product at personal expense. If they employed a handful of cosplayers to go with them to events (and even participate in them) it would likely be a promotional boon that wouldn't cost them much.
Instead they think taking away promo cards from FNM and forcing people to play on the day they want them to will increase participation and sales...
Don't give harassers what they want. Attention. Words don't shame them, being ignored does.
My question was very, very simple: where is the proof?
there's a mountain of proof that's been dug up by different people, and is there to be found if you look for it. You've even seen some of it yourself. The mods here opened up a forum for discussion, they aren't obliged to provide the initial evidence (I mean, it might help, but they aren't obliged).
the tolarian CC video (which you saw) shows this guy attacking multiple people over a prolonged period of time, publicly bashing and shaming people in a highly toxic way "bcause jokes" or "because memes". He uses some of the most derogatory language i've seen from a member of the community. This is not acceptable behaviour.
the "crusade against one person" was never an actual accusation (you mentioning it here is the first time i've seen it tbh). The accusation was of being a toxic guy who engages with people in a hurtful, inflammatory manner. Several people have spoken out and said that his attacks have brought with them a flurry of additional hate from his fanbase, including death threats, and have shared that the effects of this public bashing and undermining behaviour have been very negative on them personally. That should be enough of a hint to stop, but the fact that he kept going with insults and bashing was the problem. You yourself said that he, on multiple occasions over an extended period, said nasty things about or to more than one person, backed up by an audience that followed suit and continued the harassment long after his videos or tweets had been posted.
you acknowledged the proof right in your own comment, dude.
So I'm going to willingly take another infraction to make my point, and my case here, because it has to be made.
Coming into any discussion, if you set the rules, "This happened, don't deny it" but refuse to provide the necessary proof that this has happened, then it's not a discussion at all, it's an echo chamber. I was told to watch The Professor's video, so I did. It doesn't answer my question.
My question was very, very simple: where is the proof? The claim is made that Jeremy personally led a targeted, prolonged campaign of harassment against Christine. I decided to do a bit of digging, and aside from a handful of tweets spread over months, which give his opinion that I could understand in the context he provided (mainly, that socially-awkward people will flock to protect someone who is moderately attractive), and a single video and one stream in which she was mentioned, I cannot find it. I simply can't. I cannot seem to find this much vaunted evidence that everyone says exists. Or doesn't exist. Because it was apparently...deleted? Why is it that people in this day and age can master the art of social media, but don't understand screencaps and archive.is? Why is it that we have to "listen and believe" when this comes up, but when pushed for the evidence to support the claim the people asking for the evidence are suddenly the bad guys? I come from a "trust, but verify" mindset, in everything I do, because sometimes people can lie, and other times people pass on what is going on, which is hearsay.
The Professor makes a good case for Jeremy being an edgelord and an ass. Guess what? That's not proof of him leading a crusade (No no...what do the American pig-dogs call it? Right, peacekeeping!) against a single individual. In my postings on Reddit, my blog postings, and videos on my YouTube channel I've gone after Studio Wildcard for performing shoddily, and providing a subpar product despite the hype they provided. SidAlpha has gone after Alex Mauer and Andrew Watt recently in the wake of spurious claims. We have been more focused on our respective targets than he has on Christine, and yet it wouldn't be harassment.
More to the point, if Jeremy is held accountable for people doing their own thing and attacking people, when he did not instigate any attacks (making a video does not indicate responsibility for creating a hate mob), does this mean that if he provides actual evidence of targeted harassment against himself by followers of Fournier, Christine, and even The Professor? Will you then launch a thread like this against them, or will it be a, "That's completely different"?
Make no mistake: I do not, in any way, condone targeted harassment campaigns by anyone. However, you have to provide the evidence to support your accusations, something I don't believe has been done in this. As such, taking a preponderance of the evidence, Jeremy is an ******** sometimes, but that doesn't make him the Hitler of targeted harassment.
And for the record, Jeremy makes an interesting case for her having started this because her Patreon numbers were shrinking (related graph: https://imgur.com/a/tkFqk). I'm not saying it's true, but it's interesting from an evidentiary standpoint.
The problem is that Jeremy was smart enough to delete a lot ofnthe offending content before this blew up massively on social media sites. I normally wouldn't give much creedence to this argument, except that in this case I personnally read some of the tweets he put out recently that have been deleted. Take that as you will, but for me at least, I read enough to know that Christine is honest on this one, To be blunt, Jeremy has made a concerted effort to remove the proof that he was harassing her inorder for him to sell his victimhood complex to people who were not paying attention.
Jeremy is playing the professional victim here, and when he gets called out he proclaims he is being treated unfairly, amd manipulates people like you into it by appealing to common sense rhetoric (wheres the proof?!) while simultaneously removing his contebt that was the proof.
And then we finally get to the end result, where people are justifying his terrible behavior because they honestly believe he is the "real" victim.
Christine Sprankle made one comment at the start of this in why she was leaving. One. She is not playing the victim at all, and the narrative that she is is just plain idiotic. She has stayed out of this mess since it started. The only one playing thenvictim here is Jeremy. And Jeremy is a child whindoes not want consequences for saying some teulybqretched things, so he convinces hapless individuals like yourself that Christine is being a professional victim here. Meanwhile Jeremy has been spring boarded by multiple well-known youtubers, his video viewership has gone through the roof by being springboarded, and he is even promoting people selling shirts with his likeness. He is using this to create a brand, and has brought up his Patreon on multiple occasions. Christine, contrary to the bullocks spewed by Jeremy, never even mentioned her Patreon in any of her posts. At all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The thumbnail for the video says “YOU LOSE”.
Per Reddit, the main video in question has been taken down.
It’s obvious to me that he simply just doesn’t care.
I totally stand by The Professor here—there needs to be accountability.
"There are no two words in the English language more harmful than 'good job'." -Terrance Fletcher, Whiplash (2014)
What's interesting is what can be done about it. Where are we as a community and organisations within the community able to draw a line and say "no Jeremy or troll-person X, that's not OK, here's the door"?
What means do we have to enforce accountability for hatred and insults, not just for this one man but for people in general in the community. Accountability is the strongest and most important facet of this whole debacle. If there is public shaming, insulting and hatred coming from someone, how do we make them accountable for it?
It's a difficult question! It's one I feel we'd all benefit from understanding a little more, maybe it would be reassuring and also a deterrent to would-be harassers.
(and no. This isn't a question of free speech or thought-policing, this is making people understand unequivocally that they've done something hurtful and they need to reconsider their behaviour).
UWR Control
BR Hollow One
I have a few opinions and observations.
1. The harassment was definitely not the sole factor in Christine Sprankle leaving the MTG Community. In fact, she has endured much, much worse. It's a problem with Cosplay in general. I went to a convention once, where there were cosplay women. I admired their work, complemented them, and for some others I even complemented them as to how beautiful they were as well. I know my comments weren't taken to a sexism, or male stereotypical creep. There is a way, and a socially polite method of simply giving those compliments and going about your business, or attempting to politely meet up in future social events. I met up with some of these women at an after party, I was told what I did was relieving for them. I truly felt that sad at that moment, that just basic dignity and politeness were something rare these women see.
2. There is too many political factors entering the world of MTG Simply put, MTG is on a downturn, we all don't like thinking it, but there is so much going on that's giving Magic a worse name - I understand this is doomsaying a little bit, but looking at booster boxes of Iconic Masters in the shape of a U is pretty insane, and it's not even the worst thing that's happened in this year for the company. Why Cosplay for a company that can't even promote their sole product or promote any decent lore?
This video here is a good example of why people are having disputes with their product just in general.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fz4eSTADVWo
Here is another video where Jeremy talks with TWoo
In this youtube video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygv06qFCA9c
In the first 10 minutes, TWoo specifically brings up a very correct point to paraphrase
Politics interfering in Sports (specifically the NFL this year), Physical Fitness, and the Entertainment industries have had a large decline in their revenue. Wizards of the Coast needs to simply state that they do not endorse any kind of harassment or discrimination and wipe their hands clean. They should not interfere, we have seen this situation in a similar vein before. For all those who don't remember Drew Levin pushed Zach Jesse out of Magic.
https://twitter.com/drewlevin/status/598024023486894080
Look at how awful that situation was. Here is the Reddit Thread;
https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/35q0yx/in_light_of_recent_discussion_a_post_by_zach_jesse/
We can't keep going like this as a community, we can't keep prosecuting people based on our emotions. I'm not saying what happened is right, or that people need thick skin, but to overreact to the situation is probably some of the worst options we could be doing.
The problem is this: who defines "healthy discourse" and "false equivalency"?
Of course this site is private property and can admit or kick out anyone you please. But, can you not see how taking a position(as RxPhantom said) of "agree or don't post" is just mentally lazy? Not to mention it does nothing other than create a useless echo chamber AND feeds the far right narrative of the intolerant Left.
And don't even start to tell me this site isn't biased. It's philosophically Left down to its bones.
This might sound a way, but I think that if I were bold enough to dive into cosplay, I'd go into it with the full expectation that people would treat me with disrespect as I can't think of many cultures that are kind to adults donning costumes outside of specific events or holidays.
I could be wrong though.
Why would anyone agree with a stance of "Harassment is okay" ? Explain that one to me, then get back to the "red vs blue" deal.
In the meantime, don't forget that Jeremy has deleted a lot of the more damning stuff, and we don't know what kind of private messages Christine or The Professor had recieved by him or his cronies. At the same time though, anybody sending harassment Jeremy's way is in the wrong as well. The best thing we can do is let his crap bleed to death, discuss it here, but don't take the fight to him.
After all, you run into the age-old adage of "Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Or, in this case, he'll feel vindicated, sic his cronies somewhere else and that's that.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
They don't, and its been discussed already ad nauseum.
My 720 Peasant Cube
The discussion should be centred around what happens next. That's critical, because it will probably come to define many people's understanding of how hatred and shaming is dealt with in our community.
If you're genuinely still stuck on the "... But did he though?" part of all this, you should take a moment to reflect and trawl though the (now rather mountainous) examples of sustained negativity and personal attacks that have come from him.
It's one-sided because we're not debating whether attacking people is wrong. What you should care about is what comes out of all of this in the wider, more aggregate sense, in order to facilitate a more supportive and welcoming community. What are we able to do about this, to get some kind of accountability and allow people to feel safer and respected. Those are the terms of this discussion, not some garbled mess about 'sides' or political philosophy. Making hateful people accountable isn't a political idea, so don't try to make it one. It's basic decency and respect for others.
1. Jeremy harasses Sprankle.
2. Jeremy and Sprankle pulls off an act to help Sprankle to get more Patreon money.
3. WOTC tells Jeremy and Sprankle to create this drama to divert attention away from the card quality issues and declining attendance within the game.
There are two types of hockey players that are usually hated. Those who throw cheap shots with intent to injure, and those who dive, or fake an injury, in order to draw a penalty on the opposing team.
Instead of sending death threats, why not do what hockey fans do. Let Jeremy play in official tournaments, and while he is playing against an opponent in the tournament, surround him and boo him. Yeah, that should teach him a lesson... or not.
On that same note, if Sprankle went on stage to show off her costume, and a large number of the audience booed her, I wonder how she would take it? If booing someone is considered harassment, then I don't know what is. We get guys like Roger Goodell and Gary Bettman get booed all the time.
This is why the early 2000s were the best, well the 90's included too. We have theme decks, instead of dumb intro packs and planeswalker decks. We have the two player starter set. We have $50 games and not $80 games. We do not have social media. In order to do what Jeremy did, he would have to either go on internet forums, or say it directly. No Youtube back then too. We had MSN messenger, and the only people you could cyber bully would be members of your contact list, usually your friends, but by the time of the aftermath of the cyber bullying, that person no longer is in your contact list.
The first post simply states the baseline that Jeremy is offensive and is actions were harassing. They also pre-emptively blocks some common line of argument known to be inflammatory. It tries to avoid getting the thread locked for descending into a sludge fest.
I find it very hard to believe you cannot possibly hold a discussion without resorting to the few limitations imposed. Should I say that inability is a sign of mental laziness? See how that just sounded? Then again, you chose to insult the mods by calling them mentally lazy right off and went directly for the cliché of echo chamber.
If thinking Jeremy is an harasser is being intolerant, I'll take the label. (And laugh it off.)
I also find the idea that the kind of people who enjoy Jeremy could ever change their mind from an internet discussion. They never have and rather enjoy trolling anyone who would engage them.
Second, it seems like Jeremy hits all the usual notes of anyone being confronted with certain types of antagonizing behavior. Trying to create a false equivalence between himself and those who criticize him, trying to equate the criticism of his behavior with censorship... and the way he seems to draw directly from the /pol/ and /r/The_Donald lexicon really isn't helping his case.
Thankyou
yep, within only a couple of minutes of the video beginning, he compares the actions of a handful of community members tired of trolls and hate, to those of a maniac who was responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people....... actually insane, lol.
I guess /thread?
(the comments under the video are actually scary though. so much hate!)
Don't read the comments if you don't want to despair.
Considering Sprankle actually played the game on a Game Knights episode of The Command Zone, I'm inclined to believe she has some interest in the subject matter.
The rest of this I'm currently not in a position to confirm or deny.
I think she's great, honestly. She's the good side of something that normally isn't good.
Coming into any discussion, if you set the rules, "This happened, don't deny it" but refuse to provide the necessary proof that this has happened, then it's not a discussion at all, it's an echo chamber. I was told to watch The Professor's video, so I did. It doesn't answer my question.
My question was very, very simple: where is the proof? The claim is made that Jeremy personally led a targeted, prolonged campaign of harassment against Christine. I decided to do a bit of digging, and aside from a handful of tweets spread over months, which give his opinion that I could understand in the context he provided (mainly, that socially-awkward people will flock to protect someone who is moderately attractive), and a single video and one stream in which she was mentioned, I cannot find it. I simply can't. I cannot seem to find this much vaunted evidence that everyone says exists. Or doesn't exist. Because it was apparently...deleted? Why is it that people in this day and age can master the art of social media, but don't understand screencaps and archive.is? Why is it that we have to "listen and believe" when this comes up, but when pushed for the evidence to support the claim the people asking for the evidence are suddenly the bad guys? I come from a "trust, but verify" mindset, in everything I do, because sometimes people can lie, and other times people pass on what is going on, which is hearsay.
The Professor makes a good case for Jeremy being an edgelord and an ass. Guess what? That's not proof of him leading a crusade (No no...what do the American pig-dogs call it? Right, peacekeeping!) against a single individual. In my postings on Reddit, my blog postings, and videos on my YouTube channel I've gone after Studio Wildcard for performing shoddily, and providing a subpar product despite the hype they provided. SidAlpha has gone after Alex Mauer and Andrew Watt recently in the wake of spurious claims. We have been more focused on our respective targets than he has on Christine, and yet it wouldn't be harassment.
More to the point, if Jeremy is held accountable for people doing their own thing and attacking people, when he did not instigate any attacks (making a video does not indicate responsibility for creating a hate mob), does this mean that if he provides actual evidence of targeted harassment against himself by followers of Fournier, Christine, and even The Professor? Will you then launch a thread like this against them, or will it be a, "That's completely different"?
Make no mistake: I do not, in any way, condone targeted harassment campaigns by anyone. However, you have to provide the evidence to support your accusations, something I don't believe has been done in this. As such, taking a preponderance of the evidence, Jeremy is an ******** sometimes, but that doesn't make him the Hitler of targeted harassment.
And for the record, Jeremy makes an interesting case for her having started this because her Patreon numbers were shrinking (related graph: https://imgur.com/a/tkFqk). I'm not saying it's true, but it's interesting from an evidentiary standpoint.
It's not mentally lazy when the discussion in question is hatred on one side, and non-hatred on the other. This isn't a discussion about, say, whether Flip It Or Rip It (which Sprankle played to much backlash) is a bad thing or not. This is a discussion about an incident of coordinated harassment. Intellectual laziness would be some kind of "both sides have equal rights to equal time to present themselves" nonsense, without evaluating whether one side even deserves a platform. And in this case, we as the staff have decided that bigotry, hatred, and harassment do not deserve a platform on our site.
Of course the site is left-wing. As Content Manager, I can even tell you that there's an explicitly feminist leaning towards front-page content—not that you'd really notice, since we don't really publish anything where that matters (although I've touched on such issues briefly in How To Handle "That Guy"). And Jeremy is That Guy ramped up to 11. On top of that, I've personally rejected article submissions that attempt to bring pro-Gamergate comparisons into discussions of social issues within the Magic community. Furthermore, the whole "reality has a liberal bias" meme does have solid ground because, politically, the American right wing has moved so far to the right that discrimination is utterly normalized under their philosophies.
The best thing the community and WOTC can do is ignore haters. Those targeted need to report all harassers on their individual media so moderators can hopefully ban and restrict them. This is the slow but proper way to mitigate the emotional damage these angry wee hate monsters do. It's very sad that anyone has to endure death threats. If you don't like something, ignore it.
Wotc I'm sure will not give angry hatebears product and promotional opportunities and as users we're responsible to not give them hits with views or comments.
I do feel like WOTC is lazy in not coopting the cosplayers who skillfully invest time and money basically promoting their product at personal expense. If they employed a handful of cosplayers to go with them to events (and even participate in them) it would likely be a promotional boon that wouldn't cost them much.
Instead they think taking away promo cards from FNM and forcing people to play on the day they want them to will increase participation and sales...
Don't give harassers what they want. Attention. Words don't shame them, being ignored does.
there's a mountain of proof that's been dug up by different people, and is there to be found if you look for it. You've even seen some of it yourself. The mods here opened up a forum for discussion, they aren't obliged to provide the initial evidence (I mean, it might help, but they aren't obliged).
the tolarian CC video (which you saw) shows this guy attacking multiple people over a prolonged period of time, publicly bashing and shaming people in a highly toxic way "bcause jokes" or "because memes". He uses some of the most derogatory language i've seen from a member of the community. This is not acceptable behaviour.
the "crusade against one person" was never an actual accusation (you mentioning it here is the first time i've seen it tbh). The accusation was of being a toxic guy who engages with people in a hurtful, inflammatory manner. Several people have spoken out and said that his attacks have brought with them a flurry of additional hate from his fanbase, including death threats, and have shared that the effects of this public bashing and undermining behaviour have been very negative on them personally. That should be enough of a hint to stop, but the fact that he kept going with insults and bashing was the problem. You yourself said that he, on multiple occasions over an extended period, said nasty things about or to more than one person, backed up by an audience that followed suit and continued the harassment long after his videos or tweets had been posted.
you acknowledged the proof right in your own comment, dude.
The problem is that Jeremy was smart enough to delete a lot ofnthe offending content before this blew up massively on social media sites. I normally wouldn't give much creedence to this argument, except that in this case I personnally read some of the tweets he put out recently that have been deleted. Take that as you will, but for me at least, I read enough to know that Christine is honest on this one, To be blunt, Jeremy has made a concerted effort to remove the proof that he was harassing her inorder for him to sell his victimhood complex to people who were not paying attention.
Jeremy is playing the professional victim here, and when he gets called out he proclaims he is being treated unfairly, amd manipulates people like you into it by appealing to common sense rhetoric (wheres the proof?!) while simultaneously removing his contebt that was the proof.
And then we finally get to the end result, where people are justifying his terrible behavior because they honestly believe he is the "real" victim.
Christine Sprankle made one comment at the start of this in why she was leaving. One. She is not playing the victim at all, and the narrative that she is is just plain idiotic. She has stayed out of this mess since it started. The only one playing thenvictim here is Jeremy. And Jeremy is a child whindoes not want consequences for saying some teulybqretched things, so he convinces hapless individuals like yourself that Christine is being a professional victim here. Meanwhile Jeremy has been spring boarded by multiple well-known youtubers, his video viewership has gone through the roof by being springboarded, and he is even promoting people selling shirts with his likeness. He is using this to create a brand, and has brought up his Patreon on multiple occasions. Christine, contrary to the bullocks spewed by Jeremy, never even mentioned her Patreon in any of her posts. At all.