View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
|
Phraze
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 43
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:34 am
|
|
|
Seif wrote: | There's an alarming number of people claiming that either Rial or Samantha where the ones conducting the investigation. This misinformation is so prevalent and said with such authority that one of the youtube ambulance chasers must be primary sources of it's spread. |
"Involved" is an advanced term in the dictionary, so it's easy to misunderstand. A majority of the crowd aren't familiar with advanced terminology.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steve Minecraft
Joined: 13 Feb 2019
Posts: 120
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:39 pm
|
|
|
Seif wrote: | There's an alarming number of people claiming that either Rial or Samantha where the ones conducting the investigation. This misinformation is so prevalent and said with such authority that one of the youtube ambulance chasers must be primary sources of it's spread. |
I've been watching a lot of YouTubers takes on the drama and haven't heard any of them say those two were conducting the investigation. Like Phraze alluded to, I've seen them say those two were involved with the investigation, that is to say they were being questioned and their testimonies were taken down and being used as evidence, which is accurate. But I can't say I've seen anyone say they were conducting it.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ryasha
Joined: 26 Mar 2011
Posts: 101
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 1:37 pm
|
|
|
Steve Minecraft wrote: |
Seif wrote: | There's an alarming number of people claiming that either Rial or Samantha where the ones conducting the investigation. This misinformation is so prevalent and said with such authority that one of the youtube ambulance chasers must be primary sources of it's spread. |
I've been watching a lot of YouTubers takes on the drama and haven't heard any of them say those two were conducting the investigation. Like Phraze alluded to, I've seen them say those two were involved with the investigation, that is to say they were being questioned and their testimonies were taken down and being used as evidence, which is accurate. But I can't say I've seen anyone say they were conducting it. |
People have poor comprehension skills is what it all boils down to. They hear and read "involved" and automatically take it to mean that they were "conducting" the investigation.
Theres a disconnect with thinking that the only way to be involved with the investigation is to be the one sorting through all the evidence. That you can't be "involved" if all they did was ask you questions.
That's what Seif is getting at. That it's so widespread amongst the people who support Vic that it can't simply be a comprehension problem and someone, likely a person from YouTube, had to be the cause of it.
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecchigas
Joined: 29 Nov 2017
Posts: 39
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:13 pm
|
|
|
lol she posted old pictures to make the incident seem worse
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lynx Raven Raide
Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 412
Location: Central Coast, AU
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:27 pm
|
|
|
Ryasha wrote: |
Steve Minecraft wrote: |
Seif wrote: | There's an alarming number of people claiming that either Rial or Samantha where the ones conducting the investigation. This misinformation is so prevalent and said with such authority that one of the youtube ambulance chasers must be primary sources of it's spread. |
I've been watching a lot of YouTubers takes on the drama and haven't heard any of them say those two were conducting the investigation. Like Phraze alluded to, I've seen them say those two were involved with the investigation, that is to say they were being questioned and their testimonies were taken down and being used as evidence, which is accurate. But I can't say I've seen anyone say they were conducting it. |
People have poor comprehension skills is what it all boils down to. They hear and read "involved" and automatically take it to mean that they were "conducting" the investigation.
Theres a disconnect with thinking that the only way to be involved with the investigation is to be the one sorting through all the evidence. That you can't be "involved" if all they did was ask you questions.
That's what Seif is getting at. That it's so widespread amongst the people who support Vic that it can't simply be a comprehension problem and someone, likely a person from YouTube, had to be the cause of it. |
Exactly this. Any little thing that can support their narrative and be twisted to damaged the opposition they will jump on and clutch tight, even if they are clearly wrong. That's how they work.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Phraze
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 43
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:08 pm
|
|
|
ecchigas wrote: | lol she posted old pictures to make the incident seem worse |
Umm.. We don't have recent pictures to compare and decide that.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steve Minecraft
Joined: 13 Feb 2019
Posts: 120
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:30 pm
|
|
|
Lynx Raven Raide wrote: | Exactly this. Any little thing that can support their narrative and be twisted to damaged the opposition they will jump on and clutch tight, even if they are clearly wrong. That's how they work. |
Yesterday people were insisting the GoFundMe set up was a scam and in no way connected to Vic, despite that fact these people were "clearly wrong" since anyone who had been following this story would know it was real since Nick had been doing livestreams about the issue since he got in contact with Vic.
It seems like the issue is people are irrationally ignoring sources of information because it come from people they don't want to listen to, even if it's verified information.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lynx Raven Raide
Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 412
Location: Central Coast, AU
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:00 am
|
|
|
Steve Minecraft wrote: |
Ryasha wrote: | That's what Seif is getting at. That it's so widespread amongst the people who support Vic that it can't simply be a comprehension problem and someone, likely a person from YouTube, had to be the cause of it. |
It's only 'likely" a person from YouTube because you guys have an irrational fear of YouTubers for some reason. There's zero evidence to make that assumption.
Lynx Raven Raide wrote: | Exactly this. Any little thing that can support their narrative and be twisted to damaged the opposition they will jump on and clutch tight, even if they are clearly wrong. That's how they work. |
Yesterday people were insisting the GoFundMe set up was a scam and in no way connected to Vic, despite that fact these people were "clearly wrong" since anyone who had been following this story would know it was real since Nick had been doing livestreams about the issue since he got in contact with Vic.
It seems like the issue is people are irrationally ignoring sources of information because it come from people they don't want to listen to, even if it's verified information. |
I don't think it's irrational to be honest. YouTube is a mixed bag, full of as many click baiters wanting their 15mb of fame or further their echo chamber as there are legitimate pages posting stuff. Same goes for GoFundMe too, as there has been many instances of scams such as the recent border wall one.
I for one view things with a healthy dose of scepticism because of the crap tonne of misinformation out there, and have no problems when I am proven wrong, and in this case I will give props to Vic for not accepting that money, directing it to a Salvos shelter instead (which I think a lot of people on the anti-Vic side missed).
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aura Ichadora
Joined: 25 Apr 2008
Posts: 2286
Location: In front of my computer
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:05 am
|
|
|
Steve Minecraft wrote: | It's only 'likely" a person from YouTube because you guys have an irrational fear of YouTubers for some reason. There's zero evidence to make that assumption.
...
It seems like the issue is people are irrationally ignoring sources of information because it come from people they don't want to listen to, even if it's verified information. |
Lynx Raven Raide wrote: | I don't think it's irrational to be honest. YouTube is a mixed bag, full of as many click baiters wanting their 15mb of fame or further their echo chamber as there are legitimate pages posting stuff. Same goes for GoFundMe too, as there has been many instances of scams such as the recent border wall one. |
I'm in agreement with Lynx.
For example, I trust the coverage given by Philip DeFranco and his daily news dives. Others don't, and that's fine, but I trust him for being a mostly-fair news reporter on YouTube. Meanwhile, some people go to people like Keemstar and try to take his things as news, while I think his channel is more of a gossip rag, but that's just my opinion.
YouTube is filled with things like that, and within the anime circle, that's not an exception. People can trust the things on there if they want to, but I don't think I personally can. And especially not with how extreme this has been; I can't help but feel that most people trying to cover this on YouTube would try to use their feelings more so than the facts. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right; I'm just going off of how I feel based on some level of experience. I rather trust people that are actually active and has proven to be mostly-fair with anime news, such as ANN. And so far, I think ANN is doing a good job with reporting this story, even with needing to correct a few things since it first came out.
|
Back to top |
|
|
DerekL1963
Subscriber
Joined: 14 Jan 2015
Posts: 1116
Location: Puget Sound
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:35 am
|
|
|
Quote: | [quote="Steve Minecraft"]
Ryasha wrote: | That's what Seif is getting at. That it's so widespread amongst the people who support Vic that it can't simply be a comprehension problem and someone, likely a person from YouTube, had to be the cause of it. |
It's only 'likely" a person from YouTube because you guys have an irrational fear of YouTubers for some reason. There's zero evidence to make that assumption. |
Trust me, my derision for YouTubers is not irrational - it's based on observing their behavior and content over a span of time.
Quote: | Yesterday people were insisting the GoFundMe set up was a scam and in no way connected to Vic, despite that fact these people were "clearly wrong" since anyone who had been following this story would know it was real since Nick had been doing livestreams about the issue since he got in contact with Vic.
It seems like the issue is people are irrationally ignoring sources of information because it come from people they don't want to listen to, even if it's verified information. |
To misquote quote Inigo Montoya - those words do not mean what you think they mean.
Verified information means established facts, not something "anyone would know" simply because someone has been "doing livestreams". The proper term in that instance is "assumption" or possibly "unsupported claim".
|
Back to top |
|
|
Phraze
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 43
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:26 am
|
|
|
Steve Minecraft wrote: | Yesterday people were insisting the GoFundMe set up was a scam and in no way connected to Vic, despite that fact these people were "clearly wrong" since anyone who had been following this story would know it was real since Nick had been doing livestreams about the issue since he got in contact with Vic.
It seems like the issue is people are irrationally ignoring sources of information because it come from people they don't want to listen to, even if it's verified information. |
Since there doesn't seem to be an article about it yet.. I'll write here.
Vic simply endorsed what someone else approached him about. His former statement clearly showed a willingness to step back, while this recent one is an endorsement and that he's retained lawyers (which would've happened regardless). It wasn't connected to him.
As for Youtube... It's the speculation of others over the same source material we all have access to. I would rather reach my own conclusion than echo others. If there's a channel that has access to backstage information, then yes, I'd agree it's irrational to ignore it.
------
I took the chance to reread this article. Looks like someone called Samantha to say she was swatted, presumably the same person who vandalized the property. Cops rushed to the scene and fixed the door amid apologies. Fast forward later, they discover it was a fake number(?) Police report could've been delayed for any reason. I guess the problem is that phone call, which has yet to be determined.
My suspicion so far is that.. As a rental property, there's no harm in showing the address. Looks like a panic decision, and literally nonsensical if it was an elaborate plot (that seems to be the narrative). Time will tell, I suppose.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Primus
Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 2774
Location: Toronto
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:48 am
|
|
|
Phraze wrote: | I took the chance to reread this article. Looks like someone called Samantha to say she was swatted, presumably the same person who vandalized the property. Cops rushed to the scene and fixed the door amid apologies. Fast forward later, they discover it was a fake number(?) Police report could've been delayed for any reason. I guess the problem is that phone call, which has yet to be determined.
My suspicion so far is that.. As a rental property, there's no harm in showing the address. Looks like a panic decision, and literally nonsensical if it was an elaborate plot (that seems to be the narrative). Time will tell, I suppose. |
If you believe the police fix doors without even verifying a swatting has occurred (it would take them longer to fix the door than check that), I think you might be interested in a bridge I have for sale. The police report was filed a day after the incident. That should've been enough time for those involved to realize what was up. Yet, there's no mention of a swatting or this mysterious phone call in that police report. If Samantha has changed her story to the police, why did she hand ANN an outdated report? She printed it two hours before Lynzee published this article.
Unless Samantha fesses up, time won't tell. The likelihood of the police pursuing this is nonexistent. As far as they're concerned, there's just a damaged door. It could've been some random junkie. If that phone call actually happened, there's no reason for it to not be in the police report. That escalates this story from minor property damage to a bonafide stalker physically threatening her. The police would actually investigate that, which likely leads to Samantha's phone records being looked into ...
There's a reason why people who immediately supported her swatting story have changed their tune.
|
Back to top |
|
|
AmpersandsUnited
Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 633
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:20 am
|
|
|
Primus wrote: | Unless Samantha fesses up, time won't tell. The likelihood of the police pursuing this is nonexistent. As far as they're concerned, there's just a damaged door. It could've been some random junkie. If that phone call actually happened, there's no reason for it to not be in the police report. That escalates this story from minor property damage to a bonafide stalker physically threatening her. The police would actually investigate that, which likely leads to Samantha's phone records being looked into ... |
Investigators have already contacted Williamson County Sheriff Department and they have stated they have no intention of pursuing this. It's a vandalism report. Those always go nowhere if there's no witnesses to who did it. It'll just get filed away and forgotten about like most vandalism reports. You can usually file a vandalism report online at your local PD's website without even having to go down to the station, that's how pointless they tend to be.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Phraze
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 43
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:57 am
|
|
|
Primus wrote: |
Phraze wrote: | I took the chance to reread this article. Looks like someone called Samantha to say she was swatted, presumably the same person who vandalized the property. Cops rushed to the scene and fixed the door amid apologies. Fast forward later, they discover it was a fake number(?) Police report could've been delayed for any reason. I guess the problem is that phone call, which has yet to be determined.
My suspicion so far is that.. As a rental property, there's no harm in showing the address. Looks like a panic decision, and literally nonsensical if it was an elaborate plot (that seems to be the narrative). Time will tell, I suppose. |
If you believe the police fix doors without even verifying a swatting has occurred (it would take them longer to fix the door than check that). The police report was filed a day after the incident. That should've been enough time for those involved to realize what was up. Yet, there's no mention of a swatting or this mysterious phone call in that police report. If Samantha has changed her story to the police, why did she hand ANN an outdated report? She printed it two hours before Lynzee published this article. |
I doubt they had the alertness to check, saying they would fix a door almost immediately after arriving is an indicator. You have a point to worry that it wasn't in the report though. Maybe they thought it was a harmless prank.
There are obvious gaps in the story, like a fake call and cops willing to fix the door, but they're written out here in black and white. If it was a lie (and an obvious one at that), the law knows what to do. It's that nonsensical.
|
Back to top |
|
|
ANN_Lynzee
ANN Executive Editor
Joined: 02 May 2011
Posts: 2948
Location: Email for assistance only
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:18 pm
|
|
|
Primus wrote: | If Samantha has changed her story to the police, why did she hand ANN an outdated report? She printed it two hours before Lynzee published this article. |
I didn't obtain the report from Samantha, I obtained it from the sheriff's office directly. It was faxed directly to me from the office.
Quote: | I took the chance to reread this article. Looks like someone called Samantha to say she was swatted, presumably the same person who vandalized the property. Cops rushed to the scene and fixed the door amid apologies. Fast forward later, they discover it was a fake number(?) Police report could've been delayed for any reason. I guess the problem is that phone call, which has yet to be determined. |
Cops actually didn't rush to the scene either. Samantha claims she called the cops after arriving to the property on Monday. Her information was taken. She contacted a friend who she says is a retired cop. He helped her replace the door. She says she called again Tuesday morning after not hearing from the police (perhaps due to it being a government holiday) and that's when a report was filed.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|