Phil's idea of "crimes" is quite loose too.
Activities that warrant site bans that might also be illegal according to DSP: restreaming him in any way, making names on a game or platform that relate to memes about his life in anyway (true or not), reiterating anything he says in a way that may or may not "hurt" his business*, posting public documents that he talks about ad nauseum, using Phil's own slanderous words against him**, "pocket watching" somebody who makes more about their finances public than any streamer I've ever seen, and lastly, telling him he's wrong in a slightly not groveling way.
* I would actually pay money to be in the court when Phil would have to prove his business's "brand" was hurt by the actions of others. The shit show that would be would be hilarious, since we all know Phil's biggest detractor is Phil Burnell, and a defense attorney would have a field day. And we all know, the things he would like to sue somebody over are all things, if revealed, would actually hurt his business.
** Phil loves to say detractors take him out of context or make up lies about him, and he gets maddest at the people who clip him, but the funny thing is he's right because Phil lies so much that a Phil lie on Monday probably contradicts a Phil lie on Friday. So in a way, slanderous videos are being made to make Phil look bad... by using different day (and honestly sometimes different hour) Phil's words to disprove something.
With all that, if Phil could sue himself for slander & defamation, he might have a case!
Maybe I'm just an idiot who can't speak English. I'm not saying that anyone on this board committed any crimes—I know that's a lie. What I'm saying is that Phil, DarksydePhil himself, asked for this board to be closed because, and I quote, 'people used it as a haven for malicious activity and crime.' I thought that not challenging him on this lie is just complying with it and opened yourself to the lies of Cloudflare and ISP companies to denied service to the site because of this.
Just quoting you since you mentioned something I said... Phil would have to prove one of his many ridiculous tails to be true for anybody to care. He's retconned the bank leaks 3 times (1st it wasn't his account but his identity was stolen around the same time, 2nd it wasn't his account but also somebody stole money from his account, now its still not his account, but the same exact leak happened to his account and they "drained" money from it, but didn't actually make any transactions, which makes zero sense).