TheAmbiguousLurker
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
It's such a biohazard to sleep in, but Lilly couldn't shell out any cash for a night at some cheap hotel while cleaning?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Looked into it. The Dewey apartment is in one of those dead zone areas.It's such a biohazard to sleep in, but Lilly couldn't shell out any cash for a night at some cheap hotel while cleaning?
TLDR: it’s all their parents fault.Funnily enough: I disagree. Emphatically.
First of all
I don't believe this event actually happened. I think Courtney heard the argument others were making of "Lily couldn't have done that maliciously, she was seven" and decided to appropriate it for herself. The logic being "Well I did this, clearly my accusations have merit!"
Second of all
If it had happened, that other person's 30 now. So either she's been in therapy, or she forgot it happened entirely. And if it's the former, a big part of therapy would be recognizing that a small child doesn't do these things without something else going on. If you believe a child does those things maliciously, you're a moron.
And I'm not speaking hypothetically here. I've said before, when I was 14 I was coerced into a sexual relationship with a peer. That peer was about my age, and it was a nightmarish year of my life as they sincerely believed I belonged to them. It fucked me up for a decade.
But as an adult I chose to forgive them on the basis that "We were kids. They didn't really know what they were doing and something else was probably going on."
That doesn't erase the harm that was done to me, it doesn't erase the decade of therapy and fucked up love map, but the idea of going after that person for something that, ultimately, wasn't their fault doesn't sit well with me. I'd likely try to talk things out with them in a way I wouldn't talk things out with the teacher who molested me. The real one responsible is whoever it was that hurt them.
I've held Courtney to this as well. She did a lot of fucked up things to me as a kid, but she only did it because our parents let her do it. Our parents are the ones who were ultimately responsible for everything. And I've criticized Courtney for directing her anger over things that actually did happen to the wrong person.
Thirdly
I've done the same thing. I've said many times "Even if Courtney's accusations were true, I was seven and I wouldn't be responsible for it. Go back to therapy you insufferable fuck." Like I said, I don't believe she actually did this. So I wash my hands of hypothetical responsibility, and I don't hear anything. But she does it and you notice? She's only doing it because I've done it and she thinks it'll give her claims legitimacy.
I appreciate that you believe me over Courtney, but it shouldn't rest on a double standard.
Because Courtney IS a victim of abuse. Not the abuse she claims (to my knowledge) but she is a victim of abuse. Our parents abused her. In a different way and to much less severity than they abused me, but severity is irrelevant.
And she's lashing out at the wrong person, and using pretty bog standard harassment rhetoric because there's a mob willing and ready to believe anything said against me. She's virulently angry at me, but the shit that actually happened in our childhood isn't enough to rile up a mob the way sexual predation accusations are.
Outside of the implicit threat of "There's a fire nation raiding party here" Zuko never directly threatens anyone the way he does in the Netflix show or the film. While he and Aang are fighting, Aang becomes fearful for the safety of bystanders and offers to surrender in exchange for them being left alone, which Zuko agrees and keeps his word. He's been training to fight the Avatar for years, and then accepts a peaceful alternative instantly.
This scene establishes not only Aang's selflessness, but Zuko's honour. During his fight with Sokka, he never once strikes to seriously injure him, only disarm him and knock him on his ass.
Conversely, in both the film and the Netflix series, Zuko threatens to burn the village if Aang doesn't surrender. Rendering the dual establishing character moments of both of them completely worthless as Aang isn't giving himself up out of selflessness, he's doing it under duress. And Zuko isn't being offered a peaceful solution and taking it without hesitation, he's making a threat.
This happened 14 years ago in the film, AND NOBODY CALLED THEM ON IT! Because the idea that Zuko was a "villain redemption" has permeated people's minds, so Zuko being evil at the start isn't questioned. But he's an abuse victim.
"Abuse victims can still do bad things"
BUT HE DOESN'T! Zuko never does anything close to the evil that Zhao, Azula or Ozai do. He's the Token Good Teammate. He shows his unwillingness to hurt the Water Tribe from the moment Sokka first charges him.
This is character assassination. Full stop.
I have no idea what I'm supposed to get from that image. Explain, please?View attachment 5794762
View attachment 5794767
I just really don't understand why she will just lie about easily disproven shit. It's insane. What random anon would even ask this completely out of the blue?
WoW allows even non players to view the stats, achievements, mounts, and armor of player characters through use of blizzards website and account system for WoW (Found here). Anevay is Lily's character and when looking for the mount that she claimed was oh-so easy to get it shows she never even got it to begin with.I have no idea what I'm supposed to get from that image. Explain, please?
Either way the mount would still be unlocked account-wide if just one character had it. Unless she deleted it before they made mounts account-wide and for some reason decided not to recover the character that had it. Which inb4 she's gonna claim she did because that can't be proven, or some BS about having her original account banned and she totally just made a new one no big dealWoW allows even non players to view the stats, achievements, mounts, and armor of player characters through use of blizzards website and account system for WoW (Found here). Anevay is Lily's character and when looking for the mount that she claimed was oh-so easy to get it shows she never even got it to begin with.
To be fair to Lily though, I believe I remember her off-highhandedly mentioning she used to main a human male warrior back before making Anevay. As far as I'm aware Anevay is her current main but not her first one though I can't remember if she made that post on he tumblr or the now deleted Sylvanas server.
I thought she fucking quit WoW after being pressured to do so due to the Acti-Blizz assault scandal.Either way the mount would still be unlocked account-wide if just one character had it. Unless she deleted it before they made mounts account-wide and for some reason decided not to recover the character that had it. Which inb4 she's gonna claim she did because that can't be proven, or some BS about having her original account banned and she totally just made a new one no big deal
She lies like a teenager. Even small things that don't matter like jokes. It wouldn't matter so much but in her profession it is frowned upon to do things like this.I just really don't understand why she will just lie about easily disproven shit. It's insane.
Either way the mount would still be unlocked account-wide if just one character had it. Unless she deleted it before they made mounts account-wide and for some reason decided not to recover the character that had it. Which inb4 she's gonna claim she did because that can't be proven, or some BS about having her original account banned and she totally just made a new one no big deal
I'm not sure what version you're looking at, Invincible was added back in 2009. Mounts were made account-wide a few expansions later in 2012.According to WoWpedia, Invincible isn't account-wide.
Also according to WoWpedia the patch that introduced it was released in 2020, which was well after she start maining Anevay. Unless you have to have separate characters for both Classic and Modern WoW? I don't know how that works.
Seems a weird question to take either way. The mount was released four years ago. It's not current content, and it seems like a weird thing to remember from all that time ago.
This is how she treats fans. This is how she responds to somebody just giving their opinion and trying to save her some time.
Moving onto Oates’ legal claim that I was attempting to “extort money”, namely by “demanding 30% of her video, patreon and sponsorship income”, this, of course, ignores the fact that I can prove a sizeable portion of Skov’s video, 12 minutes out of 34, (this is excluding her intro and outro) were plagiarised directly from my series. Since that’s about a third of the video’s core content, I felt it only fair to expect a third of the video’s monetary value. This is something known as compensation, specifically for the work that was ripped off. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect to be paid for my work, but I guess Rachel Oates disagrees, hence her lies in defence of Vangelina Skov. It is for these reasons that I personally think it’s fair to say that Rachel Oates stands in full support of larger YouTubers plagiarising smaller marginalised creators.
Something else that’s probably worth addressing is her statement that I hadn’t “gone through any legitimate channels,” because I instead attempted to contact Skov to try and resolve the issue by appealing to her humanity. Which leads me to ask, what ‘proper’ channels should I have taken? Sadly, from my personal experience, YouTube is only really concerned about direct copying, also known as verbatim plagiarism, plagiarism that is word for word. But most plagiarism, including Skov’s own, isn’t verbatim. Plagiarists often deliberately change the words and shift around the sentences to try and hide what they’re doing. That means I probably would have to involve a court, and honestly, the revenue that video makes would probably be a fraction of the total legal cost, making doing so absurd. That leaves me one option, the court of public opinion, which, in the wake of hbomberguy’s video, seemed like a viable option. So that’s what I did. After giving Skov multiple opportunities to explain her actions and, if no reasonable explanation could be given, pay compensation — opportunities she responded to by threatening me with involving a law firm — I went ahead and published the evidence I had. This was done in the public interest, allowing everyone, including Skov’s Patrons who give her money to produce her own original content, the ability to judge for themselves based on the evidence provided. That is entirely fair. If she didn’t want to be called out for plagiarism, she shouldn’t have plagiarised. As the phrase goes, ‘fuck around and find out’.
I have no clue how long this has been the case (for all I know her about page could have always been like this), but I find it odd that Lily does not have her Twitter or Tumblr linked on her Youtube channel about page. She posts on those all the time, so I would have thought she would want her audience to follow her on those. Any clue why she doesn't have them linked?
Invincible is a 1% drop rate and as far as I know, he always has been. I know people who have been farming for him for literal years and do not have him because of that. I know this is small potatoes compared to everything else, but I thought anyone not familiar with the game/this mount's drop rates would appreciate the knowledge.View attachment 5794762
View attachment 5794767
I just really don't understand why she will just lie about easily disproven shit. It's insane. What random anon would even ask this completely out of the blue?