People News Chris Avellone grows a pair and fights back against being cancelled

[Bibbimbop]

s I said one hundred times, this is seen as an admission of guilt in any western civil judicial or societal system, whether you like it or not.

[INT] And what is deleting +60,000 tweets in response to a lawsuit considered? Proof of innocence?

She's spooked.

 

[Eli_Havelock]

Golly, this is an anglophobic forum, innit?

It's an equal opportunity phobic forum.

We hate limeys, micks, hebes, fat dagos, niggers, honkies, chinks, you name it.

When hate is more equitable than the party trying to push equity via racism...

 

[Quillon]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

 

[rusty_shackleford]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

not going to waste time watching such a long video to hear someone's opinion
going to guess a californian attorney knows more about california law than a michigan attorney

 

[Tacgnol]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

I glanced through, he seems pretty neutral. His overall conclusion was that Chris is going to have a hard time with his lawsuit, but he didn't claim victory was impossible.

He made the point that losing this would potentially put him in a worse spot in terms of denying the accusations as it could end up giving weight to the accusations.

I honestly have no idea who to believe with this stuff, as every lawyer seems to have different opinion of his chances.

 

[Roguey]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

Listened to the conclusion, he's coming at it neutrally but has a very pessimistic assessment because of the burden of proof required of Avellone.

 

[Sweeper]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

There's no agenda. Libel lawsuits are a bitch to win.

 

[Dycedarg]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

I only watched the conclusion. Didn't seem like the guy was taking a shot at Avellone or anything of the kind. Just analysing how difficult it is to win a case like that.

 

[Eli_Havelock]

anyone know if this guy is objective or has an agenda? /haven't watched the video yet

Listened to the conclusion, he's coming at it neutrally but has a very pessimistic assessment because of the burden of proof required of Avellone.

That already sounds like it was certainly a bit better than his dips into examining the Star Control lawsuit. Can't find a couple of those for some reason...

 

[Dycedarg]

The thing is, those thots are probably broke as fuck. If there's any lawyer here, I'd like to know how expensive is it to defend against a libel case, assuming it isn't immediately dismissed.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I honestly have no idea who to believe with this stuff, as every lawyer seems to have different opinion of his chances.

Well, like most things of this nature: he has at least a reasonable case, but it's all a crap shoot that has to be tested in a court to sort through things one way or another. Going to court is always a risk, no matter how strong your case appears to be.

 

[Sentinel]

1.) There was very few evidence brought to the public, just supposed witnesses. The only evidence brought forth of Avellone's weird behavior was the message screencap. Despite there not being much evidence and the allegations being relatively empty, Avellone chose not to defend himself, and, as I said one hundred times, this is seen as an admission of guilt in any western civil judicial or societal system, whether you like it or not. I already posted an analogy to evidence this before, but 2 people chose to hilariously misinterpret it and pivot instead of engaging with it honestly.

Well this line of thinking seems to be awfully similar to the whole “if you were raped why haven’t you gone to the police right away” type argumentation that is seen as increasingly abhorrent in any western judicial system though.

I mean its 2021 so why not just respond by saying “I was in such a shock that I couldn’t really do anything until now.” It certainly does seem to work for all kinds of accusers pretty well.

That's because we're talking about two different things. More than half the people who have been replying to me are replying to a strawman their schizo minds created and their replies have nothing to do with my posts. Even after I specifically clarified what I was talking about, I still got people talking to me about the criminal justice system and how "the evidence against klarissa exonerated Avellone", as if that has anything at all to do with what I said.
I'm not saying Avellone is guity and I'm not saying he'd be found guilty in a criminal court. Note that in that post I refer to the civil judicial system, where the presumption of innocence doesn't apply.

You're in part misinterpreting my post and making it about the criminal justice system, and in part you're making a false equivalency between a rape accusation and a libel accusation. There's various reasons why someone won't go to the police immediately after a rape - the humiliation and destruction of their ego being the most prominent ones. There's not many reasons to not defend yourself on twitter when accused of sexual harassment and immediately submitting to them though.

I will clarify again: I never said anything about how guilty Avellone was, I never said anything about criminal court. My post was about how the case was perceived in the days immediately after the initial accusations - before any evidence exonerating him came forth -, why the people who vigorously defended him without knowing the man personally did it, and why there is no reason for them (or us) to feel especially proud of themselves (or ourselves).

PS: That line of thinking isn't seen as increasingly abhorrent in western judicial systems, don't let twitter fool you. The time distance between the accusation and the alleged rape is still a consideration in determining the probability of the violation happening and getting a conviction, which is one of the reasons why victims are massively encouraged to go to the police immediately.

 

[Bibbimbop]

There's various reasons why someone won't go to the police immediately after a rape - the humiliation and destruction of their ego being the most prominent ones. There's not many reasons to not defend yourself on twitter when accused of sexual harassment and immediately submitting to them though.

I can think of a few reasons not to defend yourself on twitter after being accused of sexual harrassment, a place renown for fairness and calm deliberation. For example, the humiliation and destruction of their ego being the most prominent ones.

False accusations are just a different rape.

 

[Zayne]

The thing is, those thots are probably broke as fuck. If there's any lawyer here, I'd like to know how expensive is it to defend against a libel case, assuming it isn't immediately dismissed.

That's USA we're speaking of. I bet there're dozens of charities which will gladly pay lawyer costs for poor victims of sexual predator.

 

[mondblut]

I would for once favor merging this thread with the other one to keep our commentary behind the paywall. As unlikely as it gets, it's unwise to grant oven dodgers any potential ammo to use in court.

Infinitron do your qaballah

 

[Crispy]

This thread is going to go for at least 500 pages, isn't it?

 

[agris]

Yalls some bitches

 

[Lambach]

He had three sane options:

1. Do nothing <- This is what we thought he did
2. Consult a lawyer and issue a statement. <- This would have suppressed the opportunity to gather evidence (people get scared when real lawyers are involved, they delete their tweets, etc.)
3. Consult a lawyer but do not issue a statement. Let your accuser gloat and posture on twitter while documenting everything.

3 is the correct choice.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." ― Napoleon Bonaparte

It was absolutely not the correct choice. Do remember that around the same time Chris' accusers "came forward", pretty much the same thing happened to Seven Pesos Pedro. Except he's the one who handled it correctly. He immediately went in full offense mode, used all of his public platforms to vehemently deny the accusations and defend himself, got lawyered up within a day or two and started threatening/throwing lawsuits at his accusers.

Fast forward a year, Enraged Enrique's reputation is still 99.9% intact*, his career didn't take so much as a scratch and almost no one even mentions that case anymore. Compare that to Chris who chose to beg and grovel (or strategically do nothing as you claim ), who has been dropped and abandoned by p. much all of his "friends" and is entirely unemployable in the vidya industry because of his reputation as a sex molester.

*he did get banned from RetardEra, but it's, you know, RetardEra (although that may have been because of his "transphobic" review of The Last of Us 2, I can't remember)

 

[Tacgnol]

He had three sane options:

1. Do nothing <- This is what we thought he did
2. Consult a lawyer and issue a statement. <- This would have suppressed the opportunity to gather evidence (people get scared when real lawyers are involved, they delete their tweets, etc.)
3. Consult a lawyer but do not issue a statement. Let your accuser gloat and posture on twitter while documenting everything.

3 is the correct choice.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." ― Napoleon Bonaparte

It was absolutely not the correct choice. Do remember that around the same time Chris' accusers "came forward", pretty much the same thing happened to Seven Pesos Pedro. Except he's the one who handled it correctly. He immediately went in full offense mode, used all of his public platforms to vehemently deny the accusations and defend himself, got lawyered up within a day or two and started threatening/throwing lawsuits at his accusers.

Fast forward a year, Enraged Enrique's reputation is still 99.9% intact*, his career didn't take so much as a scratch and almost no one even mentions that case anymore. Compare that to Chris who chose to beg and grovel (or strategically do nothing as you claim ), who has been dropped and abandoned by p. much all of his "friends" and is entirely unemployable in the vidya industry because of his reputation as a sex molester.

*he did get banned from RetardEra, but it's, you know, RetardEra (although that may have been because of his "transphobic" review of The Last of Us 2, I can't remember)

I definitely do agree he should have come out swinging at the start. Sadly he was still a full believer in the "BELIEVE ALL WAHMEN" philosophy at that point (and probably still is to some degree).

 

[Fenix]

I think that you are mixing Avellone's ex-girlfiend Jackie and Jacqui Collins.

Yeah, I for one though that Karissa and the that one women with this texting is the same person.

 

[cherry blossom]

So Chris was drunk and misconstrued her demeanor as "enthusiastic consent" so his recollection is that of a consensual thing.

I don't know about her but men are capable of doing really ugly fucking shit without even realizing doing it because it is the culturally enforced thing. I doubt Chris is all that innocent and I don't like how he is resorting to some of the textbook perpetrator defenses. I would love for him to be really faultless here but find it unlikely.

 

[Fenix]

A great deal of good modern games come from Eastern Europe, ex-USSR countries, Turkey. Sure many developers would be glad to work with MCA.

As I said, his best chance is China now.

 

[mondblut]

I think that you are mixing Avellone's ex-girlfiend Jackie and Jacqui Collins.

Yeah, I for one though that Karissa and the that one women with this texting is the same person.

So does most of the "reee, sexual predator!111" crowd, I bet.

Some must be genuinely surprised how is this famous movie producer Avellone litigating now after he killed himself in his prison cell?

 

[mondblut]

So Chris was drunk and misconstrued her demeanor as "enthusiastic consent" so his recollection is that of a consensual thing.

I don't know about her but men are capable of doing really ugly fucking shit without even realizing doing it because that it is the culturally enforced thing. I doubt Chris is all that innocent and I don't like how he is resorting to some of the textbook perpetrator defenses. I would love for him to be really faultless here but find it unlikely.

Drunk women also misconstrue their demeanor as "enthusiastic consent" until the morning after. If you are looking for simping for drunken thots, you are in the wrong thread.

 

[Marullus]

The thing is, those thots are probably broke as fuck. If there's any lawyer here, I'd like to know how expensive is it to defend against a libel case, assuming it isn't immediately dismissed.

That's USA we're speaking of. I bet there're dozens of charities which will gladly pay lawyer costs for poor victims of sexual predator.

In the wake of MeToo, TIME'S UP opened a legal defense fund on GoFundMe for this very purpose. They raised $24 million dollars. Given the publicity of this case, it is likely the defendants will receive some form of legal aid. There are lawyers who would jump at the chance to defend them. It's one of the rare instances in which they won't be seen as a blood sucking parasite, and there's a good chance the "bad man" will have to pay every penny of their inflated bills.

If you want a rough estimate of costs, Keemstar was sued in California by Nicko LaCoste, a Hollywood tattoo artist, for $3.5 million dollars after he came on his show to discuss the allegations of his sexually charged conversations with minors, which he admitted he had engaged in. Keemstar prevailed on a motion to dismiss and requested $150,000. The judge lowered that a bit to $140,000. That's what it costs to defend against a very poor case.

To anyone who thinks a lawyer wouldn't take a case like this if they didn't think they could win, I'll refer you back to my blood sucking parasite comment.