I guess I should be angrier, but the only possibility more entertaining than Donal launching Brutas 2 while flatout ignoring Nasser's co-creator status is Donal and Nasser willingly agreeing to work with each other again after years of a-logging and IP theft, which seems to be what is actually happening.
Anyways, some stuff happened in Comicsgate recently:
14/02/2022 - THE GREY COUNCIL - LET'S TALK ABOUT FROSK AND THE QUARTERING W/ @COMICARTISTPRO SECRETS ETHAN VAN SCIVER
On account of the majority of the CG Kings unable to attend, by Frog's account, due to wrinkly gray haired viagra-fueled marital duty on Valentine's Day (thanks for that image btw Frog), the
ALL CAPS comic publisher instead entertained the arguments of a certain Darth Daddy Lunga over the Frosk G4 controversy and the ethics of Quartering for availing his platform for the woke scold TV hostess. Lunga and Frog are no strangers to one another, having clashed horns in the past
when the former went on the latter's show to argue in front of a panel of conservative comic creators with more than a century of professional experience between them that blacklisting and political discrimination against right-leaning creators did not exist as this clashed with Lunga's pre-formed sentiments regarding horseshoe theory, enlightened centrism and that "both sides practice cancel culture"; therefore none of their lived experiences actually happened (spoiler: Lunga did not win this).
After a five minute Yonofui-derived intro montage, the dialogue opens with some pre-debate small talk that Frog peppers with a series of mild negs, either to express a more encompassing contempt of Lunga beyond the scope of this discussion or simply to undermine his opponent's self-image before the debate begins in earnest, going so far as to pan the intro as "headsplitting" and advising Lunga to stop picking at his face acne. This has the desired effect as Lunga shifts around a bit, clearly rattled, but Frog overplays his hand by then asking what Lunga has gotten up to for Valentine's Day, regarding Lunga's answer (made his wife dinner and chocolate covered strawberries) with visible disgust and how a real man like himself is going to be busy making his wife orgasm. The tension immediately drops from Lunga's shoulders as, suddenly in his comfort zone, he accepts the invitation for candid sexual discussion on how he will be making his wife cum
post-debate and now it's Frog's turn to squirm with a wide-eyed, tight lipped grimace as it dawns on the prudish Mormon-raised frog merchant that he has instigated a discussion about his sex life with Darth Daddy Lunga. I rate Lunga as the (unwitting) winner of this exchange.
Lunga begins by providing context for the disagreement that led us to this livestream -
a twitter thread between the two replete with calls for each other to 'shut up', gifs and 'say that to my face on a livestream pussy'. The basis of the conflict was simple enough: Frog asserted that his disapproval of Quartering's interview with Frosk was just his personal opinion on a matter and nothing more than that while the more cynical Lunga contested this, arguing that Frog going around repeatedly blasting his supposedly detached personal opinion repeatedly to anyone who will listen for weeks amounts to flagrant concern trolling. Unprompted, Frog begins to elaborate his position on this issue as nothing specific about Jeremy Hambley and what he does on his channel per se, but serves as a stepping stone to discuss his thoughts on how he and likeminded youtubers should go about the waging of culture war and what constitutes wise policy in regards the "enemy" having access to one's audience. As an example, Frog cites the time when Jeremy from Geeks and Gamers allowed Zack Snyder to metaphorically piss and shit all over him and his audience and, most importantly, his brand to the accolades of Snyder's peers as an example of some of the disastrous and humiliating consequences of allowing people that hate you free access to one's platform. Lunga defends the principles of open discourse, arguing that things like the Snyder incident are the risks one runs when producing meaningful discussions and content. Frog questions the fairness of SJWs being expected to have free access to their opponent's platforms and audience while gatekeeping those self-same people from mainstream platforms. In response to this, Lunga rejects the idea that rejecting any sort of dialog between opponents is of real benefit of and there are instances where dialog across opposing lines could be productive. Frog agrees, but instead of following this very interesting path through towards a possible consensus (fundamentally, both sides agree on access to one's platform should be guided by self-interest), a clip from the Yellowflash show is pulled up and the conversation resets.
Lunga plays some videos while Frog delivers a by now well-rehearsed boilerplate articulation of his position regarding how Frosk and G4's producers hijacked an innocent gaming show to fill it with narratives about how she's the victim of the show's non-woke audience and that this amounts to the unethical hijacking of pop culture, and that being allowed to go on to Quartering's channel and take her act there amounts to giving them (the enemy) more of the same. As opposing sides in an ongoing ideological conflict Frog reasons, it behooves people like himself and presumably Quartering, to
not give these people what they want. Lunga questions the power Frog is assigning a facially pieced suicide girl like Frosk to subvert people like his platforms, intuitively sussing out the weaker of Frog's bifurcated argument:
- Appeal to People's Ideals: That if Frosk and Quartering are two opposing sides contesting in a conflict over access to audiences in the public space, then there shouldn't be a one-sided providing of access from one side to another in the name of a nebulous principle like "open dialog".
- Appeal to People's Self-Interest: That if Frosk is allowed on people like Quartering or Comicsgate's channels, she'll inevitable subvert, dominate or humiliate the host anti-SJW platform for leftist asspats like what happened to Jeremy from Geeks and Gamers.
While the former argument, if you accept the underlying postulates that 1: one is in a culture war and 2: the name of the game is platform access, is difficult to confirm or deny as a matter of effective tactics, the latter argument makes the tacit admission that every anti-SJW youtuber is as weak and noodlespined a grifter with no conviction as Jeremy Griggs is and would fare no better than he, helpless as Froskirren or Zack Snyder or whatever d-list celebrity helped themselves to their platforms to use them and their audience as a public human toilet. Admitting that you're no different from Jeremy Griggs is a bad footing for anyone and Frog bristles enough at Lunga's questioning of 'are you that weak?' to throw out some innuendo about how he's heard stories about "what Lunga is into". This backfires again though as Lunga is completely comfortable with discussing his sexuality with Frog, Frog it turns out being much less eager to discuss what the purple-haired Sicilian does with his penis. While an intensely awkward tactic, this does buy Frog enough time to weld the two arguments together: shifting to how SJWs were allowed to have access to the comics industry as a collective, forced everyone else out and proceeded to devalue culture. Lunga is an independent comic creator himself - surely he supports outsider voices like himself creating and participating in public culture. Lunga does not accept everything Comicsgate says, but accedes that he does support independent creators and laissez-faire capitalism and people being able to express themselves. At 28:30, Lunga, who was doing decently so far, steers himself into a ditch when he stated his appreciation for Frog as a rational actor (unlike many of the Comicsgate zealots) who is motivated by the clear headed pursuit of profit and self-interest, which are the highest values to an individualist like Lunga. Frog deftly spins this around as "Well it's profitable and financially advantageous for me to gatekeep SJWs from my platform".
It's at this point where the debate as such ends and slides into freeform bickering over stream-of-consciousness points of contention, as many of these unmoderated youtube debates do when neither party wants to be the one to call for an end to the discussion and incur accusations of "running away". What exactly is an SJW anyway? Who gets to lay claim to the position of 'centrist'? Lunga explains to Frog and the audience to his own political philosophy as a secular humanist who dislikes political extremes of any stripe but does enjoy collecting Star Wars funko pops and merch. This done, Lunga closes by repeating the original question that started this whole debate in the first place: "Is it such a big deal if Quartering has Frosk on her show?" "No but I still think it's a bad idea"; this fails to erase the previous half hour. Next is an evaluation of Yellowflash's conduct; Frog likes it when Yellowflash gets drunk and yells, Lunga thinks its cringe. Lunga tries to establish some common ground by asking if Frog would agree that there are crazies on both sides, Frog answers that this is the most banal attempt at a point he's ever heard in a debate. The Comics Code Authority being created in 1952 is argued about in depth as a case of non-SJWs gatekeeping and purity testing comics; Frog doggedly defends the merit behind the CCA and McCarthyism in general, as he does. If comics were originally apolitical, how do you explain X-Men an allegory for the civil rights movement? .
This goes on for another 30 minutes, neither person willing to leave, where JDA (streamsniping the events on the channel) starts demanding to be let on the debate, presumably for attention purposes. Lunga plays a prepared video rebutting Jon's accusations of Lunga being a "Preston Poulter minion" by presenting the considerable evidence of the
Robotoad author's storied association with Poulter himself, going on for 15 additional minutes about what a piece of shit JDA is to an audience not quite willing to leave. Frog gives a silent, pained expression as if begging to be dismissed from the program at this point. Lunga is not willing to do so, so Frog starts claiming victory by asserting that, due to rejecting JDA's desire to go on his show, Lunga is just as guilty of gatekeeping his own platform as Frog is, to which Lunga responds with taunts about how Frog shouldn't be afraid of SJWs like Frosk existential and the "peril" she and people like her represents to so-called alpha male bloodsports guys like Frog.
At 1 hour 25 minutes, presaged by this superchat of Yellowflash (the accused perpetrator of cringe), Lunga
finally asks Frog for a cloing statement, which consisted of "Fuck SJWs I dont want them on our platforms".
Did anyone learn anything from this meeting of the minds?
Was Frog's opinion concern trolling?
I suppose I learned that unmoderated debates very often turn games of youtube chicken without agreed upon rules before the debate.
Next: the big slumtown CG heist involving IndieVolt taking tens of thousands of dollars of creators' money for a non-existant distribution deal, involving , furries, covid and a bunch of other shit. The closest thing to
a compilation would be on Vikki and DA Talks' shared channel, with some very vague clickbaiting Michael Bancroft's channel.
