Twitch & Their Competitors / r/LivestreamFail / Live Streamer Community - Imitation of Hollywood

[Harm]

Or even if your innocent. Sometimes not talking really is the best move either way.

Precisely. That's why Ludwig has gone mostly unscathed so far whereas Asmongold has become the face of the controversy. Know your role and shut your mouth.

 

[Deteraliz]

I don't understand why people who were exposed for things like this simply don't admit to being at fault. If they just open up about the controversy and their part in it, more people, regardless if they're fans or not, would understand them and wouldn't have to make a bigger fool out of themselves than they already do by addressing it in the way that Asmongold did. Asmongold out of all people decides to handle it like this.

 

[Ed Special]

Excuse me while I archive a local dotcom techbro rag's writeup jerking Pfaltzgraf off before they take it down.

 

[Orkney]

I'm surprised to find Asmongold is 34 years old, because his reaction to the allegation and the lawsuit is typical of a deeply callous child.

This probably explains his popularity as an internet streamer.

 

['Ole Dente]

Most of these big name streamers are already rolling in cash and continue to "stick with the program" who knows why

For the same reason people keep gambling when they are winning. People don’t know when enough is enough, they always want more. It’s as fundamental to our nature as the need to procreate, we are greedy, disgusting little things.

I have autism, so naturally I am the superior being in this circumstance and not included.

 

[4090 Chad]

See: Rev says Desu - Soyjak Wiki
Asmongold of course loves him because he’s against the “evil antis and wokes ruining muh tranimes”

That wiki is amazing. The sharty boys certainly have a way with words.

 

[Sweet Musica]

You are missing my point, which is about how United Way and other such charities are a scam, because of the payroll that goes to people that literally do nothing. The CFO rode to work on his bicycle most days, as he lived in an expensive house that was near Martin Luther King Blvd. on the north side of Austin, about 7 miles from the University of Texas campus.

https://www.unitedwayaustin.org/dei/

Look I am just trying to say that CFOs normally make six figure salaries. That’s nothing new. It’s nothing suprising. I don’t know what this guy did but normally CFOs carry a lot of responsibilities in an organization so it just makes sense.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Am I the only one who thinks it's very much an exaggeration to call it a scam?

For a typical charity the guideline is that 65% of money raised should go to the actual charity. The rest being administration and fundraising costs. In this case it was 58%. So it's about 7% under the recommended guideline by such organisations as the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance.

Am I missing something here? Should I have read the article more carefully? Sure I can see that the streamers should have disclosed they got a cut, but it really isn't surprising for any of these streamers. You may as well be buying NFT's from Logan Paul. As scams go, 7% under recommended guideline is a very small margin between scam and succesful charity drive.

TL;DW: A female Twitch streamer's mod hangs out with her on stream, only for her to constantly belittle him for being incredibly unattractive and pathetic. She goes as far as to state on stream that she'd rather get back with her emotionally abusive ex than date her moderator to his face, along with running to the bathroom to wash her mouth out after she reaches enough donations to get him to kiss her.

Let's go for a second possibly unpopular take in one post.

She is 100% right in saying that she'd rather go back to a toxic ex, than someone who has such low self-esteem that he will doormat and mod (doormod?) for her. All these female streamers with their doormods, these mods deserve exactly what they're getting because they themselves believe they can't do better than live in a fantasy relationship that is purely in their head. I can see how some thirststreamer that suckers someone like that can't possibly imagine dating someone like that.

 

[marvlouslie]

I'm still confused as fuck as to why Asmongold is as popular as he is. He's a dirty motherfucker, and his politics are all over the fucking place because he flips on so many issues and is never consistent.

 

[PsychoJenny]

Am I missing something here? Should I have read the article more carefully?

I think the main thing from the article is this part

>In 2020 and 2021, Softgiving and those influencers raised a total of $6.2 million in donations, according to publicly available tax records. Yet $2.6 million of that—roughly 42 percent—went to Softgiving to cover its commission and expenses, including influencer fees, those public records show.
>influencer fees

basically the streamers are getting a cut of the money that people donated to go to the charity

 

[bile demon]

TL;DW: A female Twitch streamer's mod hangs out with her on stream, only for her to constantly belittle him for being incredibly unattractive and pathetic.

Based camwhore. Know your place, janny.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I think the main thing from the article is this part

>In 2020 and 2021, Softgiving and those influencers raised a total of $6.2 million in donations, according to publicly available tax records. Yet $2.6 million of that—roughly 42 percent—went to Softgiving to cover its commission and expenses, including influencer fees, those public records show.
>influencer fees

basically the streamers are getting a cut of the money that people donated to go to the charity

Yes, I believe it's fairly uncommon for charities to give a cut to the people that market them. They possibly even gave a % cut, as a kind of diabolical inverse of rich people that promise to double a charity's result.

Personally I always assume when a streamer recommends anything that it's a paid ad, because it usually is. And yes, they should be disclosing it. Again, a streamer talks about a charity, people give money to the charity and then the majority of the money goes to the actual charity, in a percent split that is only slightly worse than the recommended amount. That's it? Should they be disclosing it? Yes. Is it scummy not to do so? Yes. Deceptive? Yes, they're lies by omission. But scam?

A scam is when someone says you're getting a solar roadway, and you give them money and you don't get a solar roadway. Or when they say it's going to dying children in hospitals and then it goes to fuel strippers and coke parties. I can see why people call it a scam but with the info as given it just looks like an exaggeration to me.

 

[username1811]

Has anyone else from that circle acknowledged or mentioned the softgiving thing yet other than Asmon? (I’m mostly more curious about people like Ludwig who has a secondary channel where he reports on general twitch/youtube news and drama as well as giving his takes on recent scams much like asmon).

 

[6MillionCoofs]

Precisely. That's why Ludwig has gone mostly unscathed so far whereas Asmongold has become the face of the controversy. Know your role and shut your mouth.

And even Asmon has said when he can talk about it, he will have a lot of things to say. Citing the company sueing people for talking as to why he does not want to talk. Last thing they all want is to be roped into that clusterfuck after all.

 

[Glad I couldn't help]

I still think the Completionist situation is worse, as he was on the fucking board of directors of his own family's charity, and yet somehow he didn't know anything about the money. Of course, getting 'influencer fees' to promote charity scams is bad and everybody involved needs to be bullied relentlessly for it, it's not as bad.

I've watched Asmongold's stuff recently, he can be interesting at times, but his open cynicism can often be grating and I find hard to finish watching his videos.

 

[440088]

@Lemmingwiser for some reason it won’t let me quote you.

You’re getting caught up in the semantics of the word scam. I can see the point you’re arguing. That because a reasonable amount of money was donated (who defines reasonable??) then it wasn’t a scam.

I would argue that those kinds of semantics are frequently used to argue in favor of all scam charities regardless of amount donated. There are many charities that donate less than 5 percent of their earnings to their actual cause but because (some) money is donated then they say they aren’t scamming people because look we actually donated 5 percent - even though they represented themselves as donating much more.

And ultimately, that’s the issue. Transparency.

These streamers knowingly took a cut of the check while duping their audience.

Nobody would call this a scam if a simple disclaimer was put fourth about (x) amount of proceeds go towards the streamer.

If the streamer had any integrity they would say it’s essentially a sponsored stream.

Sponsored by a charity doesn’t mean the stream isn’t less charitable. Having charities sponsor stuff is completely ethically fine.

But to have some streamer fuck on a camera deceiving you is where the scam comes from.

If I got on a camera and said donate to save the pandas! Don’t you love pandas! Donate to this save a panda charity right now!

And later I came on the stream and said good job we raised 500 dollars! But didn’t tell you I pocketed 250 of it. Wouldn’t you consider that at least a little scamish?

Soliciting money under false pretenses is why people are saying the word scam.

 

[Burning Fanatic]

Let's go for a second possibly unpopular take in one post.

She is 100% right in saying that she'd rather go back to a toxic ex, than someone who has such low self-esteem that he will doormat and mod (doormod?) for her. All these female streamers with their doormods, these mods deserve exactly what they're getting because they themselves believe they can't do better than live in a fantasy relationship that is purely in their head. I can see how some thirststreamer that suckers someone like that can't possibly imagine dating someone like that.

The two choices for this hypothetical don't actually matter. What matters is that she's telling this guy to his face, along with everyone watching the stream, that she'd rather get back together with an abusive ex-boyfriend who traumatized her than to get with this guy because she finds him that pathetic. Even if this really is all an act being played up for views and attention (as he claimed in his interview), it's crazy to see the massive amount of copium he's huffing when he has people insisting that he grows a spine, and he instead continues to make so many excuses.

Meanwhile, if anyone can post and share a local archive of the original stream (or the main parts that have been highlighted) here, that would be much appreciated.

 

[Disastrously Dumb]

So, Jack Doherty got banned from Kick
because he is streaming with OF girls and he got one of Sneako's Ex-GF (Xena) to come to his content house and flash her tits

For those curious what it looks like
Sneako's Ex-GF flashed tits

Apparently theres like 6-7 clips of her flashing her tits that night in numerous places
including another streamer called Ac7ionman who was afk. She went in and sat on his stream to flash her tits to kids again

 

[GradeAGobbleDeeGook]

So, Jack Doherty got banned from Kick

IIRC it was Jack, Heelmike, Ac7ionman who Xena who got banned
but, they have all already been unbanned which is surprising

 

[A Flying Nun]

Am I the only one who thinks it's very much an exaggeration to call it a scam?

For a typical charity the guideline is that 65% of money raised should go to the actual charity. The rest being administration and fundraising costs. In this case it was 58%. So it's about 7% under the recommended guideline by such organisations as the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance.

Am I missing something here? Should I have read the article more carefully? Sure I can see that the streamers should have disclosed they got a cut, but it really isn't surprising for any of these streamers. You may as well be buying NFT's from Logan Paul. As scams go, 7% under recommended guideline is a very small margin between scam and succesful charity drive.

I agree for the most part, but would add:

1) Where they were undeniably scummy is simply the presentation that they're doing the charity out of the goodness of their hearts rather than disclosing they indeed get a cut of the donations. They lied for self-promotion.

2) From the sounds of things, they have the potential to negotiate their payment method with the organization. If there's any degree of altruism involved, I'd argue someone would take a flat fee, not a god damned percent. To be fair, I could be mistaken about them taking a percent, but instead it could be rather high flat fees, though I sincerely doubt the charity organization would agree to flat fees that composed 18% of donations upfront.

So overall, it doesn't seem like anything about the organization of the charity (at least this specific fundraiser here) is sketchy on face value, and it's really more about streamers self-promoting themselves with some very serious half-truths. I don't think anyone would have issue with the fact that yes the charity needs to re-invest a portion of the earnings back into itself, but hearing streamers claim "all money goes to charity" whilst pocketing a lot of it themselves is pretty shitty.

I'd also add that in general it's good advice to be skeptical of charities. Like I said I couldn't see any wrongdoing on Softgiving's behalf here, but that doesn't mean I immediately trust them.

I'm actually skeptical enough of charities that a couple months back I remember looking into Hasan's charity for Palestine, wondering if perhaps anything sketchy was going on there. Unless I'm missing something, this data from the website seems to suggest Hasan didn't keep his promise there either. Ctrl + F for "HASANABI" and he's 15k short of what he promised to donate, and I think even that donation was cut short compared to a previous pledge of his. (promised to match people's donations by X%, but backed out of that after they exceeded 1mil donations or so)

It's also interesting that if I'm truly interpreting that data correctly, despite the fact he didn't fulfill the pledge, the donations website will still list him as the highest donor, simply because he pledged the 50k. It's that kind of stuff where public image seems prioritized over actual causes that seems like a pattern with these people.

I think if there's anything to be upset about, it's that it absolutely seems like these streamers are doing more minor scummy practices that won't generate as much heat. Yknow, like if I were to call out Hasan for what appears to be a missing 15k, people would just say "how dare you shame him after he already donated thousands of dollars!" And if someone else calls OTK out for this scandal, it's "how dare you care about this?! They misspoke, that's all! They raised millions for charity!" It's like they take just a liiiiiittle bit off the top each time. Just enough to line their pockets, but not enough to anger an internet hate mob.