Gamers Nexus alleges LMG has insufficient ethics and integrity

[Loopers]

5 minutes ago, escape093 said:

No shit. You would think that LMG, a multi-million dollar company, who are able to cover those kinds of costs, would be held to a higher standard than Gamers Nexus.

I expect a high standard from both and don't pretend GN is small. Didn't they just spend upwards of half a million of late? GN is no underdog and the reason Linus was so out of touch with reality was his weird messaging and comments thinking if you throw 10 million dollar lab in the mix it would make them the best. It won't and GN and HU are good examples of that.

[escape093]

7 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

The difference in size of company is already accounted for in Cav's commentary.  You are literally accomplishing nothing stressing it further, nor are you addressing the criticism of GN contained within the commentary. 

GN's entire thing with the LTT backpack is that LTT had no formal warranty for the backpack (hence, "trust me bro.") Calling this a "pot calling the kettle black" situation, when the thing Cav is criticising of GN is not even the same thing as what GN criticised of LTT, is just moving the goalposts.

 

Cav is criticising GN for having a less-than-ideal repair solution, and that may cause someone to damage their equipment by relying on inaccurate pin-out information. While that is true, what GN criticised LTT for is not having a formal written warranty for the backpack. GN had a formal written warranty for the modmat.

 

Cav also said "there was no product-replacement option", but that's covered by the warranty:

Quote

For any warranted product authorized to be returned to GamersNexus in accordance with this warranty, GamersNexus will repair or replace the warranted product, or any part thereof, in its sole discretion.

 

[MercuryRain]

2 minutes ago, escape093 said:

GN's entire thing with the LTT backpack is that LTT had no formal warranty for the backpack (hence, "trust me bro.") Calling this a "pot calling the kettle black" situation, when the thing Cav is criticising of GN is not even the same thing as what GN criticised of LTT, is just moving the goalposts.

 

Cav is criticising GN for having a less-than-ideal repair solution, and that may cause someone to damage their equipment by relying on inaccurate pin-out information. While that is true, what GN criticised LTT for is not having a formal written warranty for the backpack. GN had a formal written warranty for the modmat.

 

Cav also said "there was no product-replacement option", but that's covered by the warranty:

 

 

Sure.  But the Backpack 'issue' has already been addressed.  Publicly.  And the LTT backpack now had a formal warranty.  The comparison was made to the LTT backpack, but that is not what prompted the original post from Cav.  I don't think it's fair to say that we're moving the goalposts when you set them in the middle of the field to begin with.

[escape093]

2 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

Sure.  But the Backpack 'issue' has already been addressed.  Publicly.  And the LTT backpack now had a formal warranty.  The comparison was made to the LTT backpack, but that is not what prompted the original post from Cav.  I don't think it's fair to say that we're moving the goalposts when you set them in the middle of the field to begin with.

I don't know what you're trying to say. 

[MercuryRain]

1 minute ago, escape093 said:

I don't know what you're trying to say. 

Cav's original comment had nothing to do with the GN warranty vs the LTT warranty.  He used that as an example, but the point being here was that Gamers' Nexus is throwing stones from a glass house with their criticism of LTT's sloppiness.

[escape093]

Just now, MercuryRain said:

Cav's original comment had nothing to do with the GN warranty vs the LTT warranty.  He used that as an example, but the point being here was that Gamers' Nexus is throwing stones from a glass house with their criticism of LTT's sloppiness.

So his original comment had nothing to do with the GN warranty vs LTT warranty, but also, the only example he gives of GN apparently "throwing stones from a glass house" is the GN warranty vs LTT warranty. He says:

Quote

GN isn’t wrong. But, I feel this is a scenario where the pot is calling the kettle black

THIS is a scenario. THIS. As in, the errors in videos thing.

 

So where is the example of "the pot calling kettle black" with regards to errors in videos? Also how on earth am I the one moving goalposts when Cav was the one inserting the warranty thing, and then you conveniently say "oh, well that was just an example, his original comment had nothing to do with the warranty stuff."

[MercuryRain]

1 minute ago, escape093 said:

So his original comment had nothing to do with the GN warranty vs LTT warranty, but also, the only example he gives of GN apparently "throwing stones from a glass house" is the GN warranty vs LTT warranty. He says:

THIS is a scenario. THIS. As in, the errors in videos thing.

 

So where is the example of "the pot calling kettle black" with regards to errors in videos? Also how on earth am I the one moving goalposts when Cav was the one inserting the warranty thing, and then you conveniently say "oh, well that was just an example, his original comment had nothing to do with the warranty stuff."

Because he said it was for example, and that's how the english language works?

[escape093]

1 minute ago, MercuryRain said:

Because he said it was for example, and that's how the english language works?

If we're talking about the English language works, "pot calling the kettle black" doesn't even make sense in Cav's example.

 

It means someone is accusing someone else of doing something they themselves are guilty of. GN's modmats had a formal warranty. LTT's did not.

 

Where is the hypocrisy?

[escape093]

13 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

Because he said it was for example, and that's how the english language works?

Also, you didn't answer my question. Where is this "pot calling the kettle black" in his videos? Where are the several asterisked or non corrected errors in GN's videos?

[MercuryRain]

1 minute ago, escape093 said:

If we're talking about the English language works, "pot calling the kettle black" doesn't even make sense in Cav's example.

 

It means someone is accusing someone else of doing something they themselves are guilty of. GN's modmats had a formal warranty. LTT's did not.

 

Where is the hypocrisy?

He was using an example of GN committing a fuckup.  Sure, they had a formal warranty, but the method they chose to invoke that warranty is not exactly good.  They rightly called LTT out on not having a formal warranty.  LTT now has a formal warranty and I would argue that even before they did their resolution to all issues I have seen is far above and beyond what GN has done for the modmats.

 

Again, that was an example.  His core statement was that Gamers Nexus is accusing LTT of being sloppy with their practices.  They are.  He is saying the Gamers Nexus is also guilty of that.

 

They are.

 

Simply put.  Even if you think that Steve reaching out to Linus for comment would have accomplished absolutely nothing, the fact that he did not is exactly the same in the journalistic context as Linus refusing to spend an extra $500 in labor cost to properly test the Billet Labs block and then claiming that it wouldn't matter if he had done that because it wouldn't change the conclusion.  It is ethically bankrupt.

[escape093]

41 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

Even if you think that Steve reaching out to Linus for comment would have accomplished absolutely nothing, the fact that he did not is exactly the same in the journalistic context as Linus refusing to spend an extra $500 in labor cost to properly test the Billet Labs block and then claiming that it wouldn't matter if he had done that because it wouldn't change the conclusion.  It is ethically bankrupt.

LMG not further testing a small company's product because they don't want to spend an extra $500 on labor, and then knowingly publishing inaccurate data based on faulty testing, and then going on to publicly misrepresent the product and tarnishing what little reputation a small company like Billet Labs has - again, based on knowing inaccurate data

 

is not the same as

 

Steve not reaching out to Linus (of huge media company with giant reach, LMG) because it may give him the opportunity to run out ahead of the narrative (which he then tried to do anyway with his initial response), and publishing data he believes, to the best of his ability and knowledge, to be accurate and objective information 

[MercuryRain]

8 minutes ago, escape093 said:

LMG not further testing a small company's product because they don't want to spend an extra $500 on labor, and then knowingly publishing inaccurate data based on faulty testing, and then going on to publicly misrepresent the product and tarnishing the reputation of Billet Labs - again, based on knowing inaccurate data

 

is not the same as

 

Steve not reaching out to Linus because it may give him the opportunity to run out ahead of the narrative (which he then tried to do anyway with his initial response), and publishing data he believes, to the best of his ability and knowledge, to be accurate and objective information 

The end result is:

Linus did not do things properly when it came to testing that product.  That is a violation of testing ethics, because he stated at the time and he still maintains that even the best result in the world would not have changed his opinion on the monoblock as a product.

 

Steve did not do things properly by asking for a comment.  Again, he did not have to wait to receive that comment, he did not have to include any comment he did receive, he did not have to spin that comment in a positive light.  But he didn't even try.

Why does Steve get a pass? Because he's trying to defend a company that might as well be scamming people out of $800 per 'sale'?

They're both fucking wrong, dude.

[Rex Hite]

And if journalism can be whatever a practitioner claims it is, then there is no standard. And if there is no standard, then the practitioners cannot be held to one. 

 

[Cooldoe]

21 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

The end result is:

Linus did not do things properly when it came to testing that product.  That is a violation of testing ethics, because he stated at the time and he still maintains that even the best result in the world would not have changed his opinion on the monoblock as a product.

 

Steve did not do things properly by asking for a comment.  Again, he did not have to wait to receive that comment, he did not have to include any comment he did receive, he did not have to spin that comment in a positive light.  But he didn't even try.

Why does Steve get a pass? Because he's trying to defend a company that might as well be scamming people out of $800 per sale?

They're both fucking wrong, dude.

I agree. The main issue we need to criticized both side on this.

 

If Steve just point out the issue of LTT video without bringing ethic and integrity in the play no one would question Steve ethic and integrity. This is calling the kettle black as in the same video he also acted unethically 

[Cooldoe]

7 minutes ago, Rex Hite said:

And if journalism can be whatever a practitioner claims it is, then there is no standard. And if there is no standard, then the practitioners cannot be held to one. 

 

So ethic be dammed when you are accusing someone being unethical?

What a funny notion it is

 

And not calling is just one unethical thing Steve did in the video.

There are many inaccurate statement and unethical practices that he made in the video

[escape093]

35 minutes ago, MercuryRain said:

The end result is:

Linus did not do things properly when it came to testing that product.  That is a violation of testing ethics, because he stated at the time and he still maintains that even the best result in the world would not have changed his opinion on the monoblock as a product.

 

Steve did not do things properly by asking for a comment.  Again, he did not have to wait to receive that comment, he did not have to include any comment he did receive, he did not have to spin that comment in a positive light.  But he didn't even try.

Why does Steve get a pass? Because he's trying to defend a company that might as well be scamming people out of $800 per 'sale'?

They're both fucking wrong, dude.

Not testing a product properly is an objective matter. It's not "ethics." He literally tested the thing with a GPU it wasn't designed for, and decided to not bother retesting it with the right card. There was an objective way to test the block - with the card it was made for - and he did not do that. Oh and they later auctioned the thing off, without telling Billet Labs, and misrepresented what happened to it, which is borderline illegal.

 

Steve chose to not reach out to Linus, despite having all the time in the world to work on the expose video. No schedule, no rush. Some will say that wasn't the "proper" thing to do. Maybe, maybe not. But that's a subjective matter. He knew the consequences could have been, as he says in his expose, Linus trying to run out ahead of the narrative (which, again, he basically tried to do anyway, as Steve predicted: "we didn't sell it, we auctioned it.") Also, Steve is specifically defending Billet Labs based on their treatment by LMG. He says in his expose he has "no connection to Billet Labs." He took no stance on the value or pricing of the product, other than the cost to manufacture that Billet were now out after LMG auctioned it.

 

Pot calling the kettle black, my ass.

 

 

[Cooldoe]

5 minutes ago, escape093 said:

Not testing a product properly is an objective matter. It's not "ethics." He literally tested the thing with a GPU it wasn't designed for, and decided to not bother retesting it with the right card. There was an objective way to test the block - with the card it was made for - and he did not do that. Oh and they later auctioned the thing off, without telling Billet Labs, and misrepresented what happened to it, which is borderline illegal.

 

Steve chose to not reach out to Linus, despite having all the time in the world to work on the expose video. No schedule, no rush. Some will say that wasn't the "proper" thing to do. Maybe, maybe not. But that's a subjective matter. He knew the consequences could have been, as he says in his expose, Linus trying to run out ahead of the narrative (which, again, he basically tried to do anyway, as Steve predicted: "we didn't sell it, we auctioned it.") Also, Steve is specifically defending Billet Labs based on their treatment by LMG. He says in his expose he has "no connection to Billet Labs." He took no stance on the value or pricing of the product, other than the cost to manufacture that Billet were now out after LMG auctioned it.

 

Pot calling the kettle black, my ass.

 

 

I think we can agree that linus is wrong in not testing the product with the correct gpu. Not one is disputing that.

I also not saying he should not publish the video

 

Pot calling the kettle black is because Steve talk about accuracy and ethic and choose to disregard both in the video.

 

1. Once he found out that there a mistake on the billet lab timeline of event he did not make any attempt to clarify or edit the content that is inaccurate. Something that Steve said LMG did with pwnage.

2. Linus does acknowledged there are error in the videos and looking for the solution in last week WAN show but Steve choose to not disclose that even when he disclose about pwnage issue in the same WAN show.

3. About editing with text in the video. Steve know it is normal in creator or even in news segment but he did not disclose that. If he take issue about that then he should disclose that and also criticize other big creator that definitely have done that.

4. Framework bias issue. Steve did not disclose what Linus already did to reduce the bias. Including reducing the amount of review on laptop. LMG also have properly disclose his relationship with framework, something that is required in the industry. Again here Steve does not disclose that LMG already follow the journalist ethic and integrity issue but he require higher ethical standard here.

5. In regards to bias, steve also did not show any proof of bias. Instead he just insinuating bias that is just bad journalism that is commonly done some like like fox news.

 

It is pot calling the kettle black as he did not even do what he require Linus do.

If he want to be the harbinger of ethic then act ethical

[MercuryRain]

6 minutes ago, Cooldoe said:

I think we can agree that linus is wrong in not testing the product with the correct gpu. Not one is disputing that.

I also not saying he should not publish the video

 

Pot calling the kettle black is because Steve talk about accuracy and ethic and choose to disregard both in the video.

 

1. Once he found out that there a mistake on the billet lab timeline of event he did not make any attempt to clarify or edit the content that is inaccurate. Something that Steve said LMG did with pwnage.

2. Linus does acknowledged there are error in the videos and looking for the solution in last week WAN show but Steve choose to not disclose that even when he disclose about pwnage issue in the same WAN show.

3. About editing with text in the video. Steve know it is normal in creator or even in news segment but he did not disclose that. If he take issue about that then he should disclose that and also criticize other big creator that definitely have done that.

4. Framework bias issue. Steve did not disclose what Linus already did to reduce the bias. Including reducing the amount of review on laptop. LMG also have properly disclose his relationship with framework, something that is required in the industry. Again here Steve does not disclose that LMG already follow the journalist ethic and integrity issue but he require higher ethical standard here.

5. In regards to bias, steve also did not show any proof of bias. Instead he just insinuating bias that is just bad journalism that is commonly done some like like fox news.

 

It is pot calling the kettle black as he did not even do what he require Linus do.

If he want to be the harbinger of ethic then act ethical

This.

 

You need to at least meet your own standards for ethics if you're going to call someone out on your standard for ethics.  Probably a good idea to...yknow...do the things you're saying they should be doing, too?

[escape093]

28 minutes ago, Cooldoe said:

I think we can agree that linus is wrong in not testing the product with the correct gpu. Not one is disputing that.

I also not saying he should not publish the video

 

Pot calling the kettle black is because Steve talk about accuracy and ethic and choose to disregard both in the video.

 

1. Once he found out that there a mistake on the billet lab timeline of event he did not make any attempt to clarify or edit the content that is inaccurate. Something that Steve said LMG did with pwnage.

2. Linus does acknowledged there are error in the videos and looking for the solution in last week WAN show but Steve choose to not disclose that even when he disclose about pwnage issue in the same WAN show.

3. About editing with text in the video. Steve know it is normal in creator or even in news segment but he did not disclose that. If he take issue about that then he should disclose that and also criticize other big creator that definitely have done that.

4. Framework bias issue. Steve did not disclose what Linus already did to reduce the bias. Including reducing the amount of review on laptop. LMG also have properly disclose his relationship with framework, something that is required in the industry. Again here Steve does not disclose that LMG already follow the journalist ethic and integrity issue but he require higher ethical standard here.

5. In regards to bias, steve also did not show any proof of bias. Instead he just insinuating bias that is just bad journalism that is commonly done some like like fox news.

 

It is pot calling the kettle black as he did not even do what he require Linus do.

If he want to be the harbinger of ethic then act ethical

No. Again, that's not what "pot calling the kettle black" means. You can't just say "Steve is a hypocrite for calling out a pattern of errors in videos and in testing because he didn't reach out to Linus and that's sort of a question of ethics there, POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK" despite being innocent of everything else he is accusing LMG of. If that saying were appropriate here, Steve would be guilty of the majority he is accusing LMG of. Which, as we know, is pretty fucking far from the truth.

 

1. What was inaccurate about it? The only inaccuracies were from Linus misrepresenting when he reached out to Billet.

2. The entire point of the video is how their current content pipeline is resulting in multiple errors across their videos, with some errors that were corrected in one video, becoming uncorrected in another. Them saying they're looking at a solution with fixing the videos doesn't mean much if the cause of the errors is so deep-rooted, and they're still making big errors, like the Pwnage mouse review you literally mentioned.

3. Other creators doing it doesn't magically make it okay. The video is about Linus Tech Tips.

4. Seriously? Doing less reviews with which you have a conflict of interest with a risk of bias, unconcious or otherwise, does not solve the problem and does not "follow the journalistic ethic and integrity issue". It's the fact they are done at all which is the issue. Sure he discloses it - he is legally required to do so - but doing reviews of products you have an investment in is pretty damn far from journalistic integrity!

5. ??? Did you even watch the video? He is warning of the risk of bias, concious or unconcious, due to things like partnerships. He does not "insinuate bias", unless you count perhaps the ASUS 4070 Dual review where the reviewer literally makes a blanket statement about their product always being great. 

[MaleficWelter]

Am I to blame for all this?

 

By which I mean, is there a big enough amount of people that just like  all videos on YouTube, either to try to remember what it is I've watched or liking it because I did not hate it and feel like someone put effort into it?

I would love to feel like the unique snowflake, but we all seem to not be very unique, just looking at the attacks going back and forth on this page then randomly going to another page in this thread will probably show the same arguments by different people. So, just wondering if there are thousands of people doing the same that makes LTT think everything is right with the direction they've been heading?

 

I do keep wondering about...are they ShortCircuit videos? Sorry, I do not bleed LTT...the "not a review, reviews?" I feel like those are misleading and if you look at the comments,  a lot of people call them reviews, it seems obvious that a portion of the audience thinks they are reviews. I have liked all of them, even though I don't like what they are doing and I can't tell if that is a contribution to the problem?

[Cooldoe]

2 minutes ago, escape093 said:

No. Again, that's not what "pot calling the kettle black" means. You can't just say "Steve is a hypocrite for calling out a pattern of errors in videos and in testing because he didn't reach out to Linus and that's sort of a question of ethics there, POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK" despite being innocent of literally everything else he is accusing LMG of.

 

1. What was inaccurate about it?

2. The entire point of the video is how their current content pipeline is resulting in multiple errors across their videos, with some errors that were corrected in one video, becoming uncorrected in another. Them saying they're looking at a solution with fixing the videos doesn't mean much if the cause of the errors is so deep-rooted, and they're still making big errors, like the Pwnage mouse review you literally mentioned.

3. Other creators doing it doesn't magically make it okay. The video is about Linus Tech Tips.

4. Seriously? Doing less reviews with which you have a conflict of interest with a risk of bias, unconcious or otherwise, does not solve the problem and does not "follow the journalistic ethic and integrity issue". It's the fact they are done at all which is the issue. Sure he discloses it - he is legally required to do so - but doing reviews of products you have an investment in is pretty damn far from journalistic integrity!

5. ??? Did you even watch the video? He is warning of the risk of bias, concious or unconcious, due to things like partnerships. He does not "insinuate bias", unless you count perhaps the ASUS 4070 Dual review where the reviewer literally makes a blanket statement about their product always being great. 

I did not call Steve hypocrite 

I am only asking Steve to actually follow the standard that he set himself in this video.

 

1. Billet lab version of timeline is not correct and there a miscommunication between billet and LMG. Based on Steve own standard, he should include that as people will see his video and get wrong information.

2. I am not disputing LMG make mistake and just pointing out based on steve own standard he should mention that Linus already aware and try to address it. Failing to do so make the content inaccurate. Again not saying that he should not make the video but this should be disclosed and steve is clearly failing his own standard here.

3. It does when it is an industry standard and you are requiring higher standard compared to other in the industry. Failing to disclose that is a major fail

4. You are incorrect on this issue. Many news organization have similar issue like CNN covering news about their parent company time warner. The proper way is to disclose this information that LMG as you agree already done it properly. This is not something unethical or uncommon in journalism.

5. As I mention, if there is bias then he should show proof. He fail to do so and keep implying on the possible bias without proof. It is a tried and true method used by Fox news.

 

Again the biggest gripe is steve fail to give the other side of the story and pushing certain narrative without any proof is very unethical for someone who want to be the harbinger of ethic

[Cooldoe]

6 minutes ago, MaleficWelter said:

Am I to blame for all this?

 

By which I mean, is there a big enough amount of people that just like  all videos on YouTube, either to try to remember what it is I've watched or liking it because I did not hate it and feel like someone put effort into it?

I would love to feel like the unique snowflake, but we all seem to not be very unique, just looking at the attacks going back and forth on this page then randomly going to another page in this thread will probably show the same arguments by different people. So, just wondering if there are thousands of people doing the same that makes LTT think everything is right with the direction they've been heading?

 

I do keep wondering about...are they ShortCircuit videos? Sorry, I do not bleed LTT...the "not a review, reviews?" I feel like those are misleading and if you look at the comments,  a lot of people call them reviews, it seems obvious that a portion of the audience thinks they are reviews. I have liked all of them, even though I don't like what they are doing and I can't tell if that is a contribution to the problem?

I do agree with you sometimes our want to defend someone make us unable to see the mistake of our beloved creator.

I think this happen to both side of the fence.

 

I do agree that Steve need to make the video but I do hate the way he presented the information and the information that he choose to include and omit. I think he need to be called on that as well.

 

I also agree with you they need to make it clearer that short circuit video is only unboxing and not a review because I see a lot of the error is coming from short circuit and in someway they kind doing a bit of review as well like the pwnage mouse

[escape093]

1 minute ago, Cooldoe said:

I did not call Steve hypocrite 

I am only asking Steve to actually follow the standard that he set himself in this video.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black

 

See? I knew you didn't know what it meant. Also, look up the word "hypocrite" and come back.

[Alex T88]

6 hours ago, McCarthy said:

Simple. Do an image google search for "billet labs MonoBlock" and tell me how many of those proud owners posted a photo, anywhere. Feel free to search the text on forums as well. I didn't find ONE.

How can many people own something, that is the only thing in existence, a one of a kind prototype? And it's only advertised for sale on preorder, which means it has not been (mass) produced yet.

[Cooldoe]

2 minutes ago, escape093 said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black

 

See? I knew you didn't know what it meant. Also, look up the word "hypocrite" and come back.

Welk I guess I do call him that, but it does mean my criticism incorrect.

 

I am just requiring Steve to use the same standard in his video with the same ethic that he require from LMG