Nope, can't say the same about hatemongers and bandwagoners. It's still bad to actively ruining someone's life even if they did something wrong. Plus, even if you have reasons to be mad it's still bad to go to extremesforno good reasons.
Nanoless made some bad choices
Well, to be fair Redacted made much bigger bad choices, but is everyone mad at him? You know, there's still no google doc drop from him or literally anything :)
Well, to be fair Redacted made much bigger bad choices, but is everyone mad at him?
FalseEyeD had noted that while reading over the responses to Sinder's response. He had expected more inclusion of Red as a target of the (deserved) anger, especially with the material out there showing his role in this.
It's still bad to actively ruining someone's life even if they did something wrong.
No it isn't. Sinder and Red are getting exactly what they deserve, and yes, everyone is mad at both of them. Sinder is the wolf queen, though. Red is just her creepy little cuck pawn boy.
People clearly weren't happy with the way I phrased it earlier. Nanoless got manipulated by a couple of sociopaths and that sucks for her. I've had that happen to me before and it's a sickening feeling realizing that a bad person manipulated me into doing something wrong. I'm not blaming Nano for their sociopathic manipulation. All I'm saying is that she made the final choice to cancel the projects, even under false pretenses, and that was devastating for her friends, especially Bao. Hopefully she'll take this as a lesson moving forward and be more mentally strong against people like Red and Sinder.
Well, I'll give you an example. There's a Russian YouTuber named Vanomas, he was kinda popular in his time. He once made a video about how he was ready to promote reviews of new games for the top hardware of that time (specifically GTX580). And there was also a person named Abdul who bought GTX580 for 600 dollars and contacted Vanomas about his own channel, but Vanomas said no. Long story short: Abdul created his own internet army, there was a war between fans on the Internet, hacking of pages, doxing, vandalism, and finally a beating by three people and forced apologies. Apologies to fans of Abdul who abandoned his fans 4 years before that because his internet-army gone completely mad/stupid by his own words. Though, Vanomas got quite lucky since Abdul's internet army had such ideas as "eternal punishment" and "kill all sinners". His fans were just students who watched his videos on YouTube and serfed social networks.
The question is, what if we really don't worry about harmful actions and just let things slide their way? Surely people can't be so fanatical as to take some words as a guide to action?
Gardares, I think I see what you're getting at, but I think you're either taking it to the wrong conclusion or not being specific enough. The "vtuber A said no to vtuber B" scenario is not detailed enough for this situation. Sinder is not equal to Bao. If you don't understand why Sinder and Red are so in the wrong, and why so many people are attacking them, then I can't help you. But for the sake of this discussion, I can only work based on the overwhelming evidence of how sociopathic Sinder and Red have been over the course of their career together.
Most people see themselves as, or with, Nanoless in this situation. That makes it easy to just dogpile Sinder without thinking, and it also makes it easy to see Nanoless as an innocent victim who bravely exposed the truth.
My point, and the reason I posted my ideas on this particular image of Nanoless, is that the biggest lesson anyone should take from this situation is not how evil Sinder and Red are (because we've all seen Disney villains - or maybe the zoomers here haven't! Maybe they grew up with DEI Hollywood and don't know what actual classic Disney-style evil is, but I digress!), but instead it's the way that Nanoless got caught up in their lies despite her best intentions.
Nanoless was not a passive, innocent victim in this situation. I read the documents in full, and there were multiple times that I thought she should have just said STOP. She even admitted feeling conflicted, knowing things weren't right, knowing her friends would be wronged, and even called herself mentally weak. She did not act on the clear signal from her heart and mind to tell them to STOP.
It was so obvious to me, but it might not have been obvious to her. The result was the same: Heartbreak. Sometimes we just have to learn that lesson for ourselves. The problem I see is that the vast majority of the coverage of this situation is just attacking a sociopath instead of focusing on how decent people can better protect themselves and their friends.
tl;dr don't take this as justice porn. Take this as a lesson in mental and professional fortitude
Self-defense can and should be part of the discussion, but it shouldn’t center around Nanoless. If the focus of the discussion is on her specific case and what she could’ve done better, then it’s essentially victim blaming.
Snider and Red should not be treated as one-shot villains that disappear into the night as the protagonist learns a valuable lesson. The majority of the focus should remain on their actions because they may end up doing the same thing to other artists if left unchecked.
Death threats, calls to violence, doxxing, etc. are obviously unacceptable and should be stamped out by the sane members of the VTuber community. The worst consequences Sinder and Red should be facing are clients refusing to work with them and damage to their reputations. Maybe getting sued by Nanoless if she can make a valid case. But they still need to be the main focus of the conversation so they can either work toward redemption or be shut out of the VTuber community.
Blank_User said: If the focus of the discussion is on [Nanoless's] specific case and what she could’ve done better, then it’s essentially victim blaming.
I don't agree, but I'm struggling to articulate this point. 'Blame' is a strong word, and to me it's an active word. It implies an active origin. This is something Sinder didn't understand either, and why her apology fell flat. I think that the blame falls on Sinder because her deep-seated jealousy and paranoia influenced her actions, what she made her manager do (or what he did in concert with her), and how she interacted with her peers, which spiralled out into this mess. All of this negativity is a result of Sinder's dark feelings and actions.
So when you say that talking about what Nanoless could have done better is some kind of blame against her, I don't agree. I think it's more of a tragic and cautionary warning that we can all learn from.
Edit: For the record, I also agree with everything you said about how things should be handled in general among the vtuber community
I don't agree, but I'm struggling to articulate this point. 'Blame' is a strong word, and to me it's an active word. It implies an active origin. This is something Sinder didn't understand either, and why her apology fell flat. I think that the blame falls on Sinder because her deep-seated jealousy and paranoia influenced her actions, what she made her manager do (or what he did in concert with her), and how she interacted with her peers, which spiralled out into this mess. All of this negativity is a result of Sinder's dark feelings and actions.
So when you say that talking about what Nanoless could have done better is some kind of blame against her, I don't agree. I think it's more of a tragic and cautionary warning that we can all learn from.
Edit: For the record, I also agree with everything you said about how things should be handled in general among the vtuber community
Let me put it another way, then.
If you discuss general strategies for dealing with these kind of situations without discussing who specifically was involved, then you can help others defend themselves without putting the victims in the spotlight. You can be inspired by specific cases, but you should generalize them as much as possible and not give out names.
If, on the other hand, you refer to the specific victim and their actions, you’re basically turning them into Dudley Don’t. We don’t need to turn Nanoless into a cautionary tale. She doesn’t need a bunch of people on the Internet talking about what they think she did wrong or how she could’ve handled it (though we both know they will anyway). She can think of that stuff on her own. The attention should be on the signs and strategies, not on the victim.
so it feels like everyone here in the thread know about something that went down, what happened?
The short of it is that Sinder's real self got exposed revealing she is a conniving backstabber who used people to help raise her up while also sabotaging and undermining those around her who thought they were her friends.
If you discuss general strategies for dealing with these kind of situations without discussing who specifically was involved, then you can help others defend themselves without putting the victims in the spotlight. You can be inspired by specific cases, but you should generalize them as much as possible and not give out names.
If, on the other hand, you refer to the specific victim and their actions, you’re basically turning them into Dudley Don’t. We don’t need to turn Nanoless into a cautionary tale. She doesn’t need a bunch of people on the Internet talking about what they think she did wrong or how she could’ve handled it (though we both know they will anyway). She can think of that stuff on her own. The attention should be on the signs and strategies, not on the victim.
Preliminary devil's advocate: I will state that Sinder did not get the benefit of anonymization nor generalization, and that she is bearing the complete responsibility of her actions. Sinder is absolutely the "Dudley Don't" that you speak of. It's fair for things to be even-handed.
As for Nanoless, I don't think her actions are so shameful that she should be protected or anonymized. It's okay to be a cautionary tale to both yourself and to others. That's how you grow. There's no dignity lost in weathering the experiences of life. She'll be stronger for it if she chooses to be, and her fans will be there for her. I hope she can look back on this and laugh, and best of all say that she became a better person.
I'm an old millennial and I'm concerned at how much shame and ridicule are permeating internet culture. I'm lucky enough to be able to look on my past mistakes and laugh, but that's only because I could admit I was wrong and not get condemned to the 9th circle hell instantly. I hope Nano can admit how bad she got caught up in a bad game. And I hope that somehow Sinder will come to this point. She may or may not be an evil person, but what she did in her career was inexcusable. If she's a decent and mature person, maybe she'll someday be able to honestly reconcile with the people she hurt.
tl;dr I really don't think Nanoless should be ashamed. It's just something to learn from in life. Watch Hanamonogatari FFS.
Preliminary devil's advocate: I will state that Sinder did not get the benefit of anonymization nor generalization, and that she is bearing the complete responsibility of her actions.
As she should. She got caught doing bad shit, now she deserves to get punished. Giving her anonymity runs counter to that - if you don't know who did the crime then you can't punish them.
I think a good way to end is is to hope that everyone who did wrong will learn from their mistakes and become better people in the end.
Yes, even Sinder herself. Although she did a lot of bad things, we also shouldn't completely shun her if or when she makes honest efforts to make up for her mistakes. (Though she will have to stay off her job for a while till things cool down again.)
And for those that got harmed by it all, let's hope they can make a swift recovery and can move on without a big issue.
