Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok, but who is who?

Okay, so wow this blew up.

While I read through 3+ pages of replies, let me state watching Jeremy's Hall of Fame hissy-fit has been amazing. The neck-beard is strong with little triggered one. I haven't laughed this hard since Dave Chapelle still had his show on CC.

I find the evidence he provided the last few days of people harassing him disturbing.

I know it is the internet and it explodes quite often, but it is a bit more cutthroat that usual.

I am guessing the 8 million players quitting MTG lately must have put some pressure on the monetary gains from the community.

nateprati wrote:
To my knowledge he did not, he himself however was doxed, provided proof, and that he wants people who encouraged that to be banned along with him.

Thats why we arguing that the circumstances he got banned for are not being applied evenly to all parties, just him because more people dislike him.

See this is where we currently are, jeremy is claiming there is no proof that he doxxed or harassed beyond insulaults he broadcasted on youtube/twitter. Because his accuseres massdd flagged his content we can jo longer confirm any acusations. We can confirm however that tons of content creaters on the other side did everything he got banned for to him, and he is reporting them all to wotc expecting them to apply the same "rules and punishments" to them.

Everyone who doxes should be banned. I'm with you there.

So far, there isn't even agreement on the basic facts of the case, and it sounds like all the evidence has been deleted.

So, please tell me who the cosplayer is, why she's important, what his relationship was to her, and what role she played. I would also like to know what kinds of controversial material Jeremy has put out.


My natural bias (as someone who worked retail for 5 Christmases) is always against the customer proclaiming innocence. I think companies should ban more toxic people than hey do. However, I am unfamiliar with this debate and really don't want to make a gut reaction without knowing what's what. Unfortunately, this drama seems even more convoluted than Gamergate. I would love to see a straight forward, full account of each side's version of events. I also want to be prepared for when it spills over into Warhammer and the rest of the tabletop games as it almost certainly will.

Honestly man not making a harsh reaction is all anyone is concerned about.

the cosplayer is cristine sprankle and she is really good at cosplay. There is honestly no good recap of events, you had to have seen it before it got taken down. Which is another problem because we cannot tell how much jeremy deleated himself or got deleated because the content was flagged after the acusation or even if things like doxing occured. He got doxxed, kept a record, made police reports of threats. I dont care for his attitude but this whole thing is clearly not black and white.

Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

A company should be allowed to deny service to whomever they please. It's obviously not good business practice to do it willy nilly, which WOTC has not done.

If you disapprove of this case, stop buying magic cards. Maybe email WOTC why you will no longer be buying magic cards. But saying that WOTC is not allowed to do what they've done is foolish.

I play Hearthstone. I'm perfectly aware if Hearthstone shuts down, or I do something that results in a ban of my Battle.net account, I will lose all of the money I've spent on WoW, Hearthstone, SC2, Overwatch, etc.

Anyone who Doxes, either Jeremy or Sprankle, should be banned as well.

Never said they are not allowed, just that they should not. If gw wanted to ban spikey bitz or arch for arguing online they would have the right to, but in my opinion they should not.

nateprati wrote:
Honestly man not making a harsh reaction is all anyone is concerned about.

the cosplayer is cristine sprankle and she is really good at cosplay. There is honestly no good recap of events, you had to have seen it before it got taken down. Which is another problem because we cannot tell how much jeremy deleated himself or got deleated because the content was flagged after the acusation or even if things like doxing occured. He got doxxed, kept a record, made police reports of threats. I dont care for his attitude but this whole thing is clearly not black and white.

Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

I feel like Arch is poop-stirring on this one. There is no evidence that this stuff is coming to the 40K/Sigmar/Bolt-Action Communities. Watching some of his recent videos, I get the feeling he almost wants this drama to come into our community spaces. THAT scares me.

While WoTC might have overreached, especially with regards to not allowing an appeal-Which I have a new opinion on, I still feel like Jeremy is playing the drama on this one in order to gain support.

I won't debate that part because it's only a feeling, but what I do think is that WoTC has seen what a shitstorm GG was and decided to cut the head off the hydra on this one so to speak before it spirals out of control. IF, and I do mean IF, that is the truth, then I can understand why they did it. But, if he did indeed encourage harassment, after the original tweets and statements he made about her, I could care less about his ban then.

 Togusa wrote:

nateprati wrote:
Honestly man not making a harsh reaction is all anyone is concerned about.

the cosplayer is cristine sprankle and she is really good at cosplay. There is honestly no good recap of events, you had to have seen it before it got taken down. Which is another problem because we cannot tell how much jeremy deleated himself or got deleated because the content was flagged after the acusation or even if things like doxing occured. He got doxxed, kept a record, made police reports of threats. I dont care for his attitude but this whole thing is clearly not black and white.

Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

I feel like Arch is poop-stirring on this one. There is no evidence that this stuff is coming to the 40K/Sigmar/Bolt-Action Communities. Watching some of his recent videos, I get the feeling he almost wants this drama to come into our community spaces. THAT scares me.

While WoTC might have overreached, especially with regards to not allowing an appeal-Which I have a new opinion on, I still feel like Jeremy is playing the drama on this one in order to gain support.

I won't debate that part because it's only a feeling, but what I do think is that WoTC has seen what a shitstorm GG was and decided to cut the head off the hydra on this one so to speak before it spirals out of control. IF, and I do mean IF, that is the truth, then I can understand why they did it. But, if he did indeed encourage harassment, after the original tweets and statements he made about her, I could care less about his ban then.

100% this i completely agree

nateprati wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

nateprati wrote:
Honestly man not making a harsh reaction is all anyone is concerned about.

the cosplayer is cristine sprankle and she is really good at cosplay. There is honestly no good recap of events, you had to have seen it before it got taken down. Which is another problem because we cannot tell how much jeremy deleated himself or got deleated because the content was flagged after the acusation or even if things like doxing occured. He got doxxed, kept a record, made police reports of threats. I dont care for his attitude but this whole thing is clearly not black and white.

Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

I feel like Arch is poop-stirring on this one. There is no evidence that this stuff is coming to the 40K/Sigmar/Bolt-Action Communities. Watching some of his recent videos, I get the feeling he almost wants this drama to come into our community spaces. THAT scares me.

While WoTC might have overreached, especially with regards to not allowing an appeal-Which I have a new opinion on, I still feel like Jeremy is playing the drama on this one in order to gain support.

I won't debate that part because it's only a feeling, but what I do think is that WoTC has seen what a shitstorm GG was and decided to cut the head off the hydra on this one so to speak before it spirals out of control. IF, and I do mean IF, that is the truth, then I can understand why they did it. But, if he did indeed encourage harassment, after the original tweets and statements he made about her, I could care less about his ban then.

100% this i completely agree

But, I do want to be 100% clear, I'm not accusing him of doing this. I don't know what his motives might be. I just get that feeling from the tone of his videos.

Also, something I wanted to comment on. Earlier someone mentioned how great his "lore" videos are. I wondered if that person realizes that Arch literally just reads the 40K wiki for his videos. I found a lot of his lore interpretations to be very misleading and off when it comes to what actually appears in the BL books...

Nothing super important, it just rubbed me the wrong way when I realized he was doing this.

Now Hambly on the other hand, he's become just absolutely vindictive. His last two videos really strike me as the ravings of someone who is not in full command of their faculties, and he as an almost impulsive need to be as mean spirited towards those who he believes have harassed him. His comment section on most of his videos related to this matter have just become pits of extremely toxic behavior. I'm talking Competitive Overwatch levels of toxicity. I feel like these videos are only going to hurt him in the long run. I mean, even if he does get the ban reversed, does he think that the community is going to want to have anything to do with him after this mess?

nateprati wrote:
Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

No, they're most likely "worried" because it fits their ideology to play the victim, much as gamergate had nothing to do with ethics in game journalism. There is literally nothing GW can do to hurt ArchWarhammer. I mean, what are they going to do, ban him from their stores that nobody should want to go to anyway? Ban him from the events at GW HQ that the vast majority of players are unable to attend? GW doesn't host WOTC-style sanctioned events where any hypothetical ban list could apply, and the third-party store events and private gaming clubs that host the majority of 40k/AoS have zero obligation to pay attention to what GW thinks of someone.

 Peregrine wrote:

No, they're most likely "worried" because it fits their ideology to play the victim, much as gamergate had nothing to do with ethics in game journalism. There is literally nothing GW can do to hurt ArchWarhammer. I mean, what are they going to do, ban him from their stores that nobody should want to go to anyway? Ban him from the events at GW HQ that the vast majority of players are unable to attend? GW doesn't host WOTC-style sanctioned events where any hypothetical ban list could apply, and the third-party store events and private gaming clubs that host the majority of 40k/AoS have zero obligation to pay attention to what GW thinks of someone.

Oh please seen both articles, the one by Feminist 40k on BOLS and this one on spikey bits, how were these articles not playing victim and not calling for ideological control over the community more so when they were faced with neutral valid concerns in the comments the reaction was to censor and delete anything challenging the article until they could not do so and closed the comments section.

Oh the comments section was mean, well yes, it was, as it is on many of the articles there that they did not close the comments section, regardless, they could have followed up with a new article addressing such concerns but this never happened and they could have done it because they swiftly followed up the second article with a hit article against Arch warhammer, I am sorry but if one calls for fundamental changes in the wargaming community, then they must be prepared for a big debate, have all their opinions challenged and be ready to accept some of them may be wrong and most of all communicate with everyone.

I would really love to see a debate about it.

Arch is worried about ideological power politics invading his hobby and frankly he is right because it happens and it happens in many hobbies at this time, I guess even hobbies are not safe from the ambient political struggle any more, oh well... Contrasting his stance with the people who oppose him he is quite more moderate and logical in what he says. seriously in less than a month we have moved from "lets change fundamental lore so it fits to our political view" to "lets ban people for extreme thinking" what on earth extreme thinking even means?

Also who said Arch Warhammer reads lore from wiki? sorry this is absurd, he even references when his lore comes from rogue trader era material or when the references were retconned or there are multiple sources referring to the same event with different narrative, he does way more work than simply reading the wiki article.

Now how on earth was gamergate not about, among many other things, game journalism representing one and only one political ideology and attacking all who opposed it, gamergate is well documented by all the sides that participated and a few neutral sources making a one dimensional cardboard cutout from such a massive multidimensional beast and try to sweep it under the rag with simplistic explanations of what happened is a disservice to what happened and how the gaming community and other communities can benefit from what happened.

As I said before directly discussing about gamergate s a political discussion that does not directly fit here but I dislike seen it represented with such simplistic approach.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
the one by Feminist 40k on BOLS

Nope. I don't generally pay attention to sites with such a poor signal to noise ratio as BOLS. TBH it's a miracle that they actually posted relevant content for once, regardless of its political alignment. But unfortunately you'll have to provide screenshots or something, if you want me to respond to this point. I can't answer something where the comments in question have been deleted, and honestly I can't say I'd care about digging through BOLS comments even if they still existed.

As for the article itself, are you referring to this one (the top google search result for feminist 40k)? I don't know about the comments, but the article itself doesn't seem objectionable at all.

seriously in less than a month we have moved from "lets change fundamental lore so it fits to our political view" to "lets ban people for extreme thinking" what on earth extreme thinking even means?

First of all, you seem to have missed a key point of that article: that GW changes "fundamental lore" all the time. Primaris marines are just as much of a lore change as female marines would have been, especially when GW has all of the other chapters immediately acknowledge the wisdom and superiority of the Ultramarines' new toy instead of slaughtering them all as foulest blasphemy against the Emperor's creation.

Second, what on earth does banning even mean? There is no 40k authority to ban people, so what exactly are people going to be banned from? The comments section on BOLS? I'd hardly consider that a loss...

Now how on earth was gamergate not about, among many other things, game journalism representing one and only one political ideology and attacking all who opposed it, gamergate is well documented by all the sides that participated and a few neutral sources making a one dimensional cardboard cutout from such a massive multidimensional beast and try to sweep it under the rag with simplistic explanations of what happened is a disservice to what happened and how the gaming community and other communities can benefit from what happened.

Gamergate was not about game journalism because it was a well-known fact for decades that game journalists were little more than a paid marketing department for the major publishers, with a promise (implicit or explicit) of favorable reviews in exchange for the early access to games that the journalists needed if they wanted to publish anything on time. Everyone knew that the reviews were a joke, that even badly flawed games would get a "B+, good game that will be even better once a minor issue is patched" review. None of the factual claims made about the industry were in any way new or interesting. And yet where was the outrage over it, over the past 20-30 years? Virtually nonexistent until they found a target that aligned with their existing anti-SJW crusade. Then suddenly "ethics in game journalism" was a very important subject that needed immediate attention. And suddenly people who admitted to having zero interest in gaming, or even viewing gamers with contempt, embraced the issue as a way to continue their crusade. It was such a blatant ideological campaign that I can't believe that anyone could possibly think that its supposed claims were in any way honest.

Who said primaris lore was a good thing? primaris are what normal space marines should have been from the start and their lore should have never existed, regardless of that, changing the lore to sell bigger marines is quite different from changing the lore because a certain political view demands it.

As to what extreme thinking is, I don't know I asked because Spikey bits editor invoked it on his follow up article as if everybody knows what extreme thinking is.

I never said gamergate was about game journalism selling out, I think most people acknowledge that if it had stopped at reporting that game scores are fixed it would have died out, but attacking gamers the way it did attracted most normal people who would not have bothered otherwise, an you are either 100% with us or against us mentality never wins anybody especially in a fantastical multi shaded grey world we live in, nothing is black or white and of course the majority of unaligned people will side with the side that does not attack them directly, right or wrong.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Who said primaris lore was a good thing? primaris are what normal space marines should have been from the start and their lore should have never existed, regardless of that, changing the lore to sell bigger marines is quite different from changing the lore because a certain political view demands it.

The point is that people reject the idea of female marines because "the lore is sacred, GW can't change the lore", when in reality GW views the lore as nothing more than a marketing tool to be changed whenever they need to sell a new box.

I never said gamergate was about game journalism selling out, I think most people acknowledge that if it had stopped at reporting that game scores are fixed it would have died out, but attacking gamers the way it did attracted most normal people who would not have bothered otherwise, an you are either 100% with us or against us mentality never wins anybody especially in a fantastical multi shaded grey world we live in, nothing is black or white and of course the majority of unaligned people will side with the side that does not attack them directly, right or wrong.

It really says something about the gamergate crowd that "people who can't behave like decent adults should not be tolerated" is considered an attack on them. I'm a gamer and I didn't see anything even remotely resembling an attack on me in the stuff that the gamergaters were outraged about. But that's probably because I'm not a mysoginistic who thinks that "free speech" means I'm entitled to harass people I consider "SJWs" without any consequences.

Lore is an interesting part of any and every IP, some parts are malleable, some parts are fundamental, some parts can change some cannot and companies have learned the hard way how messing with basic can create massive economical damage.

40k lore states clearly there are no female marines and frankly not many took an issue to that back then and now, changing it only to push an agenda for "representation" risks disenfranchising the fans of the lore and that can be of great economic impact.

The main question is why change the lore? why change marines? simply because they are the iconic pieces? one can create new lore they do not need to change already established lore, look at stormcasts, that is a nice subtle organic change and nobody really cared when stormcasts started to have female warriors.

Even Primaris are better organic integration to the lore that simply making female marines and Primaris are a really bad lore integration.

On Gamergate, I am sorry you are wrong, there was never a simple "behave like decent adults", the written articles were aggressive and pushed hard against every gamer here lies a problem with moral ideology, its entirely subjective and no one is superior, what the journalist pushed clearly was not what the majority believed to be request to behave as a decent human but as an attack on their persons, and clearly the writing did not changed the minds and remember Gamergate was fuelled by the neutrals, they did not push an agenda they reacted, not convincing them, worse making them stand against the ideology means there are flaws if not in the ideology, definitely in the communication.

Lastly free speech is not a free pass to "harass" it is a freedom to express ideas and ideology and criticism on somebody's ideas event he fundamental ones, however harsh, is neither an attack nor harassment.

Everybody has the right to their ideas and to express them, however wrong they may seem to some or many and everybody else has the right to criticise however harsh said ideas.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
40k lore states clearly there are no female marines and frankly not many took an issue to that back then and now, changing it only to push an agenda for "representation" risks disenfranchising the fans of the lore and that can be of great economic impact.

40k lore also clearly stated that the primarchs were dead or missing. 40k lore also stated that marine geneseed was the peak of humanity, and tampering it would be unforgivable heresy, until GW wanted to sell new space marine kits. If GW can change the lore to add primaris marines then changing the lore to add female marines would be no more of a change. In fact, it would be almost exactly the same sort of change as primaris marines: alteration of the geneseed to create a new form of space marine.

The main question is why change the lore? why change marines? simply because they are the iconic pieces? one can create new lore they do not need to change already established lore, look at stormcasts, that is a nice subtle organic change and nobody really cared when stormcasts started to have female warriors.

Why change the lore to include primaris marines? Why change the lore to bring primarchs back? Why change the lore with all that awful fall of Cadia nonsense? It's ridiculous that people accept lore change after lore change after lore change from GW, but suddenly when it's a hypothetical lore change that goes against their anti-SJW opinions the lore is sacred and can't be changed.

On Gamergate, I am sorry you are wrong, there was never a simple "behave like decent adults", the written articles were aggressive and pushed hard against every gamer here lies a problem with moral ideology, its entirely subjective and no one is superior, what the journalist pushed clearly was not what the majority believed to be request to behave as a decent human but as an attack on their persons, and clearly the writing did not changed the minds and remember Gamergate was fuelled by the neutrals, they did not push an agenda they reacted, not convincing them, worse making them stand against the ideology means there are flaws if not in the ideology, definitely in the communication.

Again, if you saw yourself as a target by the writing in question then you have only yourself to blame, and you should take a long hard look at yourself and your moral principles. I am a gamer and I didn't see myself as a target at all, because I am not guilty of the behavior that was being criticized. I mean, FFS, this is the community that came up with the concept of "TFG" and uses is constantly, are you really going to suggest that there is no poor behavior to criticize? Or that it's impossible to say that TFG needs to be removed from the community without everyone else feeling persecuted?

Lastly free speech is not a free pass to "harass" it is a freedom to express ideas and ideology and criticism on somebody's ideas event he fundamental ones, however harsh, is neither an attack nor harassment.

You're ignoring the fact that part of the behavior being criticized was actual harassment of "SJWs" that certain people didn't like, not just disagreement. If you read "don't harass people" as "don't criticize them" instead of "don't send death threats to people you disagree with" then that's 100% your problem.

 Peregrine wrote:

nateprati wrote:
Thats why arch and other gaming content creators are worried and sparked this whole thing with spikey bits.

No, they're most likely "worried" because it fits their ideology to play the victim, much as gamergate had nothing to do with ethics in game journalism. There is literally nothing GW can do to hurt ArchWarhammer. I mean, what are they going to do, ban him from their stores that nobody should want to go to anyway? Ban him from the events at GW HQ that the vast majority of players are unable to attend? GW doesn't host WOTC-style sanctioned events where any hypothetical ban list could apply, and the third-party store events and private gaming clubs that host the majority of 40k/AoS have zero obligation to pay attention to what GW thinks of someone.

Omg back to this hyperbolic bs. If a ban list for gw acomplished nothing, why make one then? And at this point "purge them in the strees!" Peregrine i dont care what you think about lore, others, gaming, gamergate and i hope gw never does either. We agree on nothing, you cant drop things, be bothered to look into them, empathize with others or critically think about anything rational. I fear the day any company conciders your opinions for policy

-and since i wish not to see you again, to you i say goodbye

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Who said primaris lore was a good thing? primaris are what normal space marines should have been from the start and their lore should have never existed, regardless of that, changing the lore to sell bigger marines is quite different from changing the lore because a certain political view demands it.

This is where you have it wrong. They don't change lore for political views. When they change lore "following" a political view, is just because they think that way they will win more money. At the end of the day is all about money, thats why GW has said that they want more female representation in their universes without "alienating their present player base".

So personally, for me, theres only two options: Or you oppose lore changes, or you don't. But opposing ones that you think are made for political reasons but accepting the ones made for economical reasons is just hypocrisy, because, theres not a political interpretation behind everything?


And Arch-Warhammer for me is just the other half of the problem of politics invading hobbies. "Omg he is fighting agaisn't the feminids that are invading us!" Ehm... no. As the say goes "Two will not discuss if one does not want to". If all that politic is invading the hobby is because theres two halfs that love to push their personals agendas on everyone else. Most of the people just don't even bother with that. Thats what most people in this political discussion fail to realise. The "casuals" are the biggest part of the player base. They don't care about "politics". They follow something if they like it, and they'll stop if it stops appealing to them.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

nateprati wrote:
To my knowledge he did not, he himself however was doxed, provided proof, and that he wants people who encouraged that to be banned along with him.

Thats why we arguing that the circumstances he got banned for are not being applied evenly to all parties, just him because more people dislike him.

See this is where we currently are, jeremy is claiming there is no proof that he doxxed or harassed beyond insulaults he broadcasted on youtube/twitter. Because his accuseres massdd flagged his content we can jo longer confirm any acusations. We can confirm however that tons of content creaters on the other side did everything he got banned for to him, and he is reporting them all to wotc expecting them to apply the same "rules and punishments" to them.

Everyone who doxes should be banned. I'm with you there.

So far, there isn't even agreement on the basic facts of the case, and it sounds like all the evidence has been deleted.

So, please tell me who the cosplayer is, why she's important, what his relationship was to her, and what role she played. I would also like to know what kinds of controversial material Jeremy has put out.


My natural bias (as someone who worked retail for 5 Christmases) is always against the customer proclaiming innocence. I think companies should ban more toxic people than hey do. However, I am unfamiliar with this debate and really don't want to make a gut reaction without knowing what's what. Unfortunately, this drama seems even more convoluted than Gamergate. I would love to see a straight forward, full account of each side's version of events. I also want to be prepared for when it spills over into Warhammer and the rest of the tabletop games as it almost certainly will.

Sprankle is a Cos-player and like I previously said her costumes are well made and clearly labours of love , she generally turned up at larger Magic events dressed as characters from the Magic fluff, this obviously draws attention to the game and she's regarded by WoTC as a valuable asset / rolemodel/ whatever. However all the time and materials along with travel costs meant she runs a Patreon to fund it, which is fine having done live-action roleplayd the amount of time kit takes to make is a serious commitment

About 6 months ago on a live-stream Jeremy said, in his usual blunt fashion, said he felt she was exploiting the younger male demographic and her efforts were essentially training wheels porn, rude and incorrect and maybe more a dig at those funding her, he's touched or referred to it a few more times on YT, he also bashes a fair few other MTG content createors and cultivates a somewhat abrasive persona largely to bait his 'opposition'

Recently she's quit the cosplay, and cited Jeremy as the reason due to his ongoing harassment (note neither side has really come with 'the smoking gun' either way), and the internet being what it is it snowballed, helpfully a distraction from the ongoing card misprinting debacle and WoTC banned him from their organized play programme (not touching the MTGO issues its a terrible bit of crap-ware and anyone throwing money at it is daft)

Shaming cosplayers is a huge red flag, though. His training wheels porn comment would have gotten him kicked out of any sci fi, comics or anime convention around here no matter how much he paid for admission.

nateprati wrote:
If a ban list for gw acomplished nothing, why make one then?

I don't know. I'm probably not the best person to answer that question, given the fact that I haven't advocated for GW making a ban list. I'm just pointing out that, if GW decided to do so, it would be laughably ineffective and anyone worrying about it is either paranoid or merely pretending to worry for the sake of promoting their political agenda.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Shaming cosplayers is a huge red flag, though. His training wheels porn comment would have gotten him kicked out of any sci fi, comics or anime convention around here no matter how much he paid for admission.

that wasn't the exact quote but broadly the gist, and the stream was from his home, which incidentally the anti lobby have stuck details and pics of on the intertubes seems only fair bans all round for anyone involved in that, doesn't really change the discussion just clearing that up, he looks like a sizable chap but suspect we'd be discussing 'contentious MTG Youtuber vanishes after Cosplay spat' if it was F2F

 Galas wrote:


So personally, for me, theres only two options: Or you oppose lore changes, or you don't. But opposing ones that you think are made for political reasons but accepting the ones made for economical reasons is just hypocrisy, because, theres not a political interpretation behind everything?

I oppose lore changes I am for lore progression, 40k lost me with necron's introduction in 4th edition, the only retcon I ever liked was their retcon because they put them again in line with the rest of the 40k universe and removed the "chaos gods in real space" powerful Ctan.
given the recent story-line primarchs reemergence and the fall of cadia are story progressions and are... not that great but acceptable, primaris is a "soft retcon" that in my opinion is unacceptable, I understand they wanted an excuse to finally update the space marine figures to the stature they should always have been but were afraid of the backlash this would create, I would rather have them man up and say these are the new sculpts of the marines and never had done the Primaris storyline.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Shaming cosplayers is a huge red flag, though. His training wheels porn comment would have gotten him kicked out of any sci fi, comics or anime convention around here no matter how much he paid for admission.

that wasn't the exact quote but broadly the gist, and the stream was from his home, which incidentally the anti lobby have stuck details and pics of on the intertubes seems only fair bans all round for anyone involved in that, doesn't really change the discussion just clearing that up, he looks like a sizable chap but suspect we'd be discussing 'contentious MTG Youtuber vanishes after Cosplay spat' if it was F2F

Well to be entirely fair it was on a Youtube video that was taken down by mass flagging, he did not attack her directly (though I would say it is fair to say she was implied) essentially what he said is that cosplayers who use their body to fund their patreon are not to his liking and that young males should not spend their money on them, his comment was that this cosplay is (akin to) lingerie, admittedly there are many photos of said cosplayer out there with quite a lot of flesh showing, but the video was never against that cosplayer or any cosplayer who does that, it was his opinion that people should not pay patreon for such cosplayers.

Personally I find more objectionable that he advised people to not pay patreon than his argument of why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Why change the lore to include primaris marines? Why change the lore to bring primarchs back? Why change the lore with all that awful fall of Cadia nonsense? It's ridiculous that people accept lore change after lore change after lore change from GW, but suddenly when it's a hypothetical lore change that goes against their anti-SJW opinions the lore is sacred and can't be changed.

Because some lore is not lore change but lore advancement, witch is fine primarchs coming back was always hinted, I remember saying that quiliman would be the first to come back when I was 12-13, the events of the fall of cadia are really not that great story telling, but again it is a lore progression not a lore change, Primaris? I have yet to see anybody that cares with the lore be ok with them, I don't like them Arch does not like them nobody really likes them, but changing the lore just for changing it, lets face it female marines push only excuse is for "better representation" I am sorry, Primaris are really bad and their excuse was "we want to sell bigger marines without been lynched by the owners of all the marine armies we invalidated their models"

 Peregrine wrote:

Again, if you saw yourself as a target by the writing in question then you have only yourself to blame, and you should take a long hard look at yourself and your moral principles. I am a gamer and I didn't see myself as a target at all, because I am not guilty of the behavior that was being criticized. I mean, FFS, this is the community that came up with the concept of "TFG" and uses is constantly, are you really going to suggest that there is no poor behavior to criticize? Or that it's impossible to say that TFG needs to be removed from the community without everyone else feeling persecuted?

Actually it says only what you think about me and anybody who does not share your world view about the subject, it says nothing about me, thank you for your concern though, my moral principles are fine and in line with my subjective view, some maybe not aligned with your subjective view?

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Shaming cosplayers is a huge red flag, though. His training wheels porn comment would have gotten him kicked out of any sci fi, comics or anime convention around here no matter how much he paid for admission.

that wasn't the exact quote but broadly the gist, and the stream was from his home, which incidentally the anti lobby have stuck details and pics of on the intertubes seems only fair bans all round for anyone involved in that, doesn't really change the discussion just clearing that up, he looks like a sizable chap but suspect we'd be discussing 'contentious MTG Youtuber vanishes after Cosplay spat' if it was F2F

I don't understand like half of what you said, but I agree that anyone who does should be banned and shunned from the community. If Jeremy posted a video to be seen by the community, I feel it doesn't matter where he posted it from. He has indicated that he is going to cause problems in the community and his actions affect customers.

I do not see why he should be banned or shunned for it, he expressed a valid opinion in a non insulting way not targeted at any cosplayer in particular.

He believes that coslayers who post half nude pictures of themselves in costume to their patreon use their good looks to raise money and that young adults should not throw money at them.

A valid opinion and criticism, definitely not a harassment, I guess he has issues with people using their good looks to raise money, fine I do not see any issue with that, I am assuming he also feels coslayers should not ask for money for their work at patreon? I do not see why not? free market, supply and demand and all that, but as an opinion it is perfectly valid, again I cannot see it as harassment.

What I would object on principle is a patreon creator saying some activities on patreon are not valid for patreon support, but again it is an opinion, not a harassment,

Not knowing exactly what he said--the other comment was a paraphrase?--it still sounds to me like the cosplay flavor of slut shaming.

Why should people not use an advantage to raise money? Should smart people not use their brains? Should we shackle all the Harrison Bergerons?

If he is using Patreon himself, what does he bring to the table that we can shame him for?


Granted, if all he did was express one stupid opinion the reaction seems way overboard. Was this a single incident or a running theme in his work?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Not knowing exactly what he said--the other comment was a paraphrase?--it still sounds to me like the cosplay flavor of slut shaming.

Why should people not use an advantage to raise money? Should smart people not use their brains? Should we shackle all the Harrison Bergerons?

If he is using Patreon himself, what does he bring to the table that we can shame him for?


Granted, if all he did was express one stupid opinion the reaction seems way overboard. Was this a single incident or a running theme in his work?

Yep was a paraphase, I'm getting on and my memory isn't what it was once well as best I recall anyway

His comment was crass and ill-advised and yes he does go out of his way to stir things up, and whilst I do disagree with many of his viewpoints he is a much needed voice of dissent in the MTG world as many of the other MTG pundits are pro-WoTC all the time about everything to company does.

Of course the extreme tin-foil hat think is that he, Ms Sprankle and other YT folks are all in cahoots for the moneys, as other than the card printing problems there isn't much going on in MTG at the mo.

So, is this controversy still blowing up? It seems like it's deflating here and the attempts to pull in Warhammer-related personalities haven't paid off.

It's still grinding a long, fairly low quality YT content from all sides and the bandwagon jumpers, like I said next to nothing else happening in the MTG world at the moment so it's keeping the views and clicks coming if nothing else.