hbomberguy / Harry "Harris" Brewis / Slazenger Rapemachine Whiteshaf - "Rational" SJW, former SA goon/LPer, sexual harassment apologist, raised $350K+ for child abuse cult

[Art School Admissions]

this bald faggot literally looks like a rapist.

He called somebody in the video a fuckable twink, so I wouldn’t be surprised.

 

[Would]

What I took from that video was "he's not even critiquing it wth" rather than "do not critique the thing I like," which resonated with me.

Doug never really critiques anything, he just mocks it. By the mid-10s he knew full well his talent was not in being an intellectual or auteur, but rather an internet funnyman who makes shrieking spasms and exaggerated faces. He's smart enough to know he's not enough of a politisperg to interpret Walters' political views, same way he never bothered to interpret Shyamalan's vision for his movies; he just poked fun at the surface-level cheese.
He has always operated this way. The Wall only became a thing because it hit close to home for Breadtube's biggest spergs, and just like how "Sonic's arms aren't blue damnit ", "The Wall is verboten" to these autists. Not one of them could name another instance of Doug accurately critiquing other pieces of political media, so why was this time supposed to be different?
The "This is pandering as all hell" line from Doug made Breadtube ree on twitter like nothing else that month.
It was all 100% political retorts from Doug's apolitical review.

Same way HBG has to inject politics into every attack he does. They can't help themselves; it's their nature.
That said, I'm not anybody to dissuade people from watching whatever they enjoy. If FI entertains you, more power to you.

Why did Todd think we needed two MORE hours? The coordination is amazing, especially now that James deleted everything.

These faggots always attack in groups. They're not trying to expose him, they're trying to end him to the point you think the twink stole from them too.

 

[Fluoxetine Man]

I just finished the IH portion of the video, my god was it excruciating! All of the shit Hbummergay talked about was stuff people knew months ago, yeah it's shit IH or one of his writers lifted an article wholesale, but it's clear Hbummergay was butt mad cause IH cleared this up behind the scenes with the journalist and didn't castigate himself to Twatter weirdos through some teary apology video, and joining the Reformed Troll Trannies.

I was never into IH's earlier content but I found the fancy wine video entertaining enough to hold my attention from start to finish.

Thanks to that Fancy Wine video, I will never buy wine over $20!

 

[Markorian]

So, when's the video from Pedo Dan the Puppet Man, I mean, "folding ideas" about this literal nobody expected to drop? I'm half expecting Quentin to announce to his few remaining sycophants that he's gonna make a video on him too, because he wants to be a good boy and get the breadtuber clique's approval, only to spend a year and a half on it and still get 90% of it wrong.

 

[Haramburger]

I love this shit. Hour long video essays where a guy systematically lays out whatever the fuck I don’t care about is prime asmr happy sleep time material for me. Last time I was blessed by such mana from heaven was when some guy accused a smash bros player of being the dark triad second coming of Hitler for multiple hours, I’ve fallen asleep to that video numerous times and that’s my best attempt at remembering whatever the fuck it was.

Actually the last time you got this kind of crap was Featured Content at the end of August 2023:

New George just dropped

55 minutes talking about Justin Whang...God be with the farmer who sits through it all.

in which Maddox cries about Justin Whang of youtube fame supposedly plagiarizing shit like other people's coverage of the Max Headroom Signal Hijacking Incident of '87, but when you watch the whole thing he veers off course and reveals that he spent 3+ years making a two-hour video, is still mad about Dick, and hilariously tries to take a swipe at the Farms but instead posts the greatest summary of his current characteristics & accidentally memes on himself:


Both this and hbombergoy's videos are ostensibly good videos on the subject of stealing content, but they're both done by lolcows who ramble too long and love the smell of their own farts. If you like this Feature, you'll like the old stuff too. Fun 50+ pages and it gets you up to speed for Maddox's NEW feature that dropped same day as this one. Link here for posterity.

 

[Toolbox]

Stumbled onto this video of his from years ago in another thread, coincidentally enough. It's another video about plagarism, and it's insane how much more concise it is compared to this shit. Covers three cases but only takes 17 minutes to summarize what's what, it gets to the god damn point. Six years and he's gone from this to making video at least 400% longer than they need to be because that became the 'in' thing. Also, from what I've seen of this there's not much political tism from him here despite it coming out after 2016.

---

Josh, what do you think these post edits actually accomplish? At least you're showing you've edited them, but this is something like Reddit's CEO Spez did.

Yes, I'm referring to what's been done to the featured post.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

The video lifted the structure and passages from the article. Copy pasted. That's not 'huuur people think the same things sometimes'.
Internet-Daddy-can-do-no-wrong types are just as cringe as HBomb's tranny bootlickers.

I despise HBomberGuy but yes, what he pointed out is true. Let's not get off track by trying to redefine what plagiarism is to stick it to HBomberGuy, his shitty Nazi smear job is good enough cause to shit on him.

 

[Bing Chilling]

You're allowed to like someone and still think they fucked up, Jesus fucking Christ. If you're coping and seething because you don't like the guy who said it, then you're as bad as the turbo leftist girldick suckers who immediately left retarded comments on IH's newest video just because Harry implied he was an evil chud

based haver of the same opinion as me chad

 

[babadook]

He actually unlaunched his patreon entirely, everyone that was subscribed to him gets automatically removed - in short, he can subscribe to other people but nobody can subscribe to him anymore. Bye bye 120k+ per year job. Fully expecting his youtube to get nuked in the next hour.

I posted more details on it here but I got caught in a spam filter or something.

Good, faggot should find a real job like dying in a mine

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

He's written many, many videos with no plagiarism as far as we know, therefore him copying an article is a departure from his past behavior. That's why I said I don't understand why he chose to do it this time.

I'm guessing it's a subordinate that did it for him like James Rolfe. At least I hope that's what it is.

 

[SlipNHonkMach2]

He's not. He's a liberal.
That's irrelevant to leftoids though; "Liberals also get the rope".


Total endorsement and commitment to our cause, or else.
Laughing at the expense of tumblr and SJWs means he's not on their side, so that leaves only one side for him to be on (in their minds).

He's as liberal as Maher or Joe Rogan ie an alt-right neo-nazi that crossed a few lines in the humor department thus deserves to be cannibalized.

 

[Scarlett Johansson]

Todd in the Shadows has to put his own two cents in about this Somerton dude oops

The Joey Stefano thing is a reach if anything.

 

[Glowie]

Same here, what is your take on Internet Historian. Video is still fun to watch, but still need to credit the source. Which he did on some source, but didn't on other.

Internet historian surprised me as well, once you hit that gold button status, you're beyond reproach and afford to stay lazy. That's human nature I suppose, at least he isn't in the faggot/troon category.

Internet historian has been slow as fuck after his varus videos, to the point his videos aren't shown in the front page, only the usual vapid color saturated videos on the front page. Newpipe, which is less diseased YouTube client show "popular" videos when you open it.

Human creativity is finite ladies and gents.

 

[The Wokest]

As much as I want to keep dunking on IH and the rats in this thread guntguarding him ( yes gunt, IH is fat 100% more than Ralph and PPP combined).

I have to point out another choice hfag made on the video that does IH dirty, and not only him but also AVGN and that Illuminaughty fat bitch too, as much as I despise her.

The first and the last individuals he covered meaning the game reviewer at the start and the leaf faggot at the end make for a sandwich, a serial plagiarist sandwich. IDK if you'll agree with me but those 2 are the most damming parts of the video, then you sandwich 3 people who only had either one or a handful of incidents where the blame can even be offloaded to writers/editors.

I thing that's deliberate, make a serial plagiarist sandwich and any other juicer you put inside is gonna look worse, in this case AVGN, IH and fatlluminaughty.

 

[no-exit]

Stumbled onto this video of his from years ago in another thread, coincidentally enough. It's another video about plagarism, and it's insane how much more concise it is compared to this shit. Covers three cases but only takes 17 minutes to summarize what's what, it gets to the god damn point. Six years and he's gone from this to making video at least 400% longer than they need to be because that became the 'in' thing. Also, from what I've seen of this there's not much political tism from him here despite it coming out after 2016.

---

Josh, what do you think these post edits actually accomplish? At least you're showing you've edited them, but this is something like Reddit's CEO Spez did.

Yes, I'm referring to what's been done to the featured post.

Ironic, in academia it'd be considered self plagiarism to reuse old work without disclosing it. Granted, youchoob isn't school

 

[Active User]

I know you have an anime avatar and are a dipshit in general, but do you really think that if the author of the article was OK with his use of his writing, that he would have required IH completely redo the entire fucking script to a clearly inferior version?

I'd have to imagine he's fine with the reuploaded version, given he didn't just take it down again. We all know that Youtube doesn't really hold copyright claims to a rigorous standard, you've personally complained about that. The fact that plagiarism can be hard to pin down in court (which isn't really uniformly true and depends a lot on the medium with musical standards of plagiarism in particular being insanely broad) doesn't mean that he can't just gum up the video forever, especially with the claim actually being legitimate. From the fact this has not happened and was not blown up into a thing by the original author nor anyone reached out to by that author, we can infer that he's fine with how it was handled.

As others have said, this isn't a one man show, and he'd have saved himself a lot of trouble to just add literally one line in the description at minimum. The ease in fixing this issue would lead me to believe it's more likely to be a mistake done by accident, forgetfulness, or laziness rather than an act of malice. He's an entertainer, not an academic, so his draw isn't in claiming to have the most emergent new data. He wouldn't stand to gain from burying the source the way someone who wants to present some breakthrough as their own would. Given his upload schedule, I don't think he's even really saving much time by not paraphrasing/sourcing/reaching out to the guy anyways. He'd save like a day or two at most, which is a drop in the bucket when it comes to his production time. From here, the sequence of events essentially becomes "Guy forgets to cite a source in his Youtube video, the original source uses the means available to them in order to suppress the video as a result, some agreement is reached which causes an edited version of the video to go back up and the original source does not further interfere," which isn't something a lot of people see as a major indictment especially when it's months old and already resolved.

Is it bad behavior to not properly cite for the video? Yes. Was it malicious? Probably not. Was it already resolved to the apparent satisfaction of the rights holder months ago? Yes. Given your rather extreme personal views on copyright, this fairly minor infringement becoming this sort of a big deal to you is what's throwing a bunch of people off.

(Here's an article explaining the linked lawsuit and appeal for anyone interested)

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

Given your rather extreme personal views on copyright, this fairly minor infringement becoming this sort of a big deal to you is what's throwing a bunch of people off.

What's getting Null's goat here is that IH apparently "recognized" that he did plagiarism, but then redid the video in a surreptitious manner, without financially compensating the original writer of the article he plagiarized from (at least as Null supposes). Your mileage on that might vary wildly, but I'm pretty sure that's what Null thinks about this.

 

[Getting Sentimental]

What's getting Null's goat here is that IH apparently "recognized" that he did plagiarism, but then redid the video in a surreptitious manner, without financially compensating the original writer of the article he plagiarized from (at least as Null supposes). Your mileage on that might vary wildly, but I'm pretty sure that's what Null thinks about this.

I think the problem is that Null is taking Hbombs word that the video is whole sale plagiarized when it simply isn't, as it also contains both skits and animations seperate from the article itself, its absolutely a transformative work without a doubt, and you'd be hard pressed to argue its not in a court of law.

My guess on why this was swept under the rug instead of being a big dramatic apology thing for IH is that Mentalfloss (which is a company not a person) probably sought to pursue legal action for the plagiarized sections, and rather than go through a lengthy court process they simply agreed to bury the hatchet and re-do the video without the plagiarized content with credit to the original source.

 

[Active User]

Assuming that the situation wasn't resolved to the original writer's satisfaction when he could have done a lot more about it if it wasn't without even needing to sue and incur a lot of personal costs just seems odd to me, especially with the original plagiarism probably not being actively malicious.

 

[Berrakh]

I like the part when he argues plagiarism comes from a place of contempt and entitlement. It is obvious but it’s good given his example of the unrepentant plagiarist.