At its core, CG is an anarchic reaction movement and trying to impose a rule set to it will always lead to all sorts of schisms and scamps. Simple Zack can do what Simple Zack wants because he has a platform. People without a platform should comply to what Malin says or just grab an oar. Trying to impose laws, ethics and logic to the crowdfunding comics jungle is moot - and hilarious when you add spergs like WC or Liam
All movements
begin as reactionary. Or so Marxist revolutionary theory teaches. To use an example of an immediate problem, let's say you're at a party and a fire breaks out. The party starts to
react to the problem; the fire. Do they leave the party hall in an orderly fashion, or do they try to put out the fire? Unless of course you're Nerdrotic, in which case you start a youtube channel talking about first the original fire and then other fires all while the fire continues to burn unabated as the partygoers just stand there superchatting "i hate fire" "yes i too hate fire brother hail to the fire haters, the midnight riders thank you for the two dollars".
In the case of a fire at a party, either leaving the building or dousing the fire quickly resolves the problem and the "movement" has no reason to exist within a matter of minutes. Unless you want to address the greater problem of fires starting at parties as a whole, in which case one might want to pursue looking into petitioning the local government into instituting stronger fire safety codes, or starting a volunteer fire department, but at that point you can no longer consider yourself a
reactionary group as you have a set definition of philosophies and principles re: how to approach the matter of fire.
Now Comicsgate began as reaction to a problem that sounded similarly simple: woke Marvel initiatives like Secret Empire and All New All Different Marvel were
intolerably bad. The first attempt - registering bad reviews of the work through the appropriate channels like fan sites and social media - failed. The self-styled voices of the fans and the customer, news sites that covered comics like CBR or The Beat were too busy jockeying among each other for influence and access and sometimes work from the publishers, instead opting to attack the people they claimed to represent. The creators, backed and informed by the establishment comics news media on how evil these dissident critics were, vowed that they would never stop making gay dogshit comics no matter how badly they were received.
Without an immediate solution to the problem and in the face of entrenched opposition, the scope of Comicsgate went from "Marvel comics are bad" to "Marvel comics are bad because corrupt people have placed themselves in positions of institutional power" and as a result the group was forced to articulate actual principles and an argument and in doing so ceased to be a reactionary movement. Many did, ranging from Christian values to freedom of speech to respecting the customer to sound business principles (all mutually exclusive when taken to a far enough degree). However the philosophy that won the day was that of populism. There's growing evidence in the field of fan research and media analytics that fandom inherently lends itself to populism, but I can think of no better example than 2016-era Richard C Meyer and later Frog with their Trump-era populist message of the oppressed many (the fans) vs the elite few (the establishment) rising to the top. Apparently people wanted to hear that more than a bunch of comic artists running their own public access bible talk channel. Who knew?
The problem with populism though is its inherent instability - without any other overriding definitions, who is
Us and who is
Them is subjective and always in a state of change. Even petty personal slights are enough to get someone to consider another "not one of us". Populist movements by themselves historically do not last very long before either Us destroys Them (or vice versa), they collapse into various infighting splinter factions, or it stabilizes by one voice coming out on top and forcing it to adopt an overriding ideology.
These days Frog is gently steering Comicsgate away from populism towards a sort of
pluralism where constituents are free to support whatever "flavor" of Comicsgate they prefer in a free market system, whether it's Aaron Lopresti's John Bircher-CG or Billy Tucci's boomer-CG or the ever popular and still growing Simp-CG, which did put an end to the infighting but in turn comes with its own problems, not least of which is the notable decline of the vitally important populist energy that both fuels the movement and threatens to destroy it. Without the idea that it's done to spite some SJW somewhere, somehow in the most abstract sense, thoughts inevitably start to creep in that spending hours every week watching Patrick Thomas Parnell or Kelsey Shannon listlessly react to a twitter clip of a skateboarder landing balls-first on a railing may in fact just be a pointless and inane waste of time.
It's definitely starting to affect sales too, not just Simple Zack (who abandoned any sense of identification with the majority at the first opportunity) but even people like Charlie's London, who has yet to reach the funding total she reached on the first day of her debut crowdfund despite positive reviews, still being a universally liked figure in CG as well as a launch stream on Frog's show. Or Skits, which ground out over 20,000 back in 2020 just touring shows like Dan Fraga and Liam Gray's, but the prequel is now
struggling to get any repeat customers. Frog, a bit more astute than others, looks to be intuitively course correcting by stuffing his intros full of 2016-era Trump MAGA memes, championing figures like Irene Strychalski against cancel culture and inviting comrades in countercuture like Larry Correira. The change suits Frog, who I would describe as a populist by nature.
Another change is Frog's adoption of Romano's stance on ESG regulations regarding the investment of pension funds into demonstrably leftist corporations and how they're the source of leftist enforcement, which further expands the scope of Comicsgate from "Marvel comics are bad" to "Marvel comics are bad because corrupt people have placed themselves in positions of institutional power" to finally "Marvel comics are bad because a corrupt institution has placed idealogues in positions of control", and in so doing so contests global institutionalized cultural hegemon itself. Quite a lot just to get Marvel to stop drawing Carol Danvers with a flat ass, and definitely not a problem with any immediate solutions in sight.
Beyond a handful of guys like Commie Mark and I suspect Mike Baron, very few participants in CG give any of this much thought, the majority's thoughts start and end at either making a comic book of their own or starting a youtube chat show full of their friends just like how the big guys do it. Even Billy Tucci, the third largest figure in Cmicsgate regularly registers his befuddlement that mainstream comic news sites funds aren't running articles on
Shi: Sakura and complains that this is "unfair".
Finally I just want to say that these accusations that Frog "unpersoned" Adam Post sort of implies that Adam Post was a person in the first place, which I find offensive. If, in the absence of a constant flow of Frog oxygen Adam Post immediately deflates to an inert flat canvas husk lying there lifelessly on the grass, that's just Adam Post reverting to his natural state - not any sort of malevolence on Frog's part.