Gamers Nexus alleges LMG has insufficient ethics and integrity

[Woodmember]

Asked Google Bard for it opinion on this whole situation, and it honestly has some wise words to share

 

https://g.co/bard/share/4df58c3fcfec

[coopa]

1 minute ago, Uttamattamakin said:

You know Youtube will run ads on a demonetized video ...they just won't pay the creator. 

Ads will appear on YouTube videos if the creator doesn't monetize them ONLY if someone else copyright claims the video. So if someone content IDs or claims your video for using their music, video, etc., ads will appear on your video.

In this case, LMG owns all the content in the video, there would not be a third party claim. Without a third party to claim it, ads would not appear.

 

I'm not a YouTube partner, so why am I seeing ads on my videos? 

And here's demonetization on a video saying it turns off ads:

Turn off ads for individual videos

If they demonetized the apology video, YT would not run ads on it.

[DeatheTech]

10 hours ago, Amaninacity said:

The cooling block is being tested for its ability to cool the card. You need that particular test on a card the manufacturer never had. You wouldn’t test a cpu cooling block on a cpu the manufacturer supplied.

but you would test a CPU on a motherboard the manufacturer supplied?....(cause you know that is what they do, right?)

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, IseeFractals said:

Lol i don't have the temperament nor the desire to put myself on camera.  
Not familiar with either of those Hardware/monitors unboxed goes fairly deep, GN is generally less dense but no less methodical, no they're not on the same level as LMG...which is kind of the point. 

People with a fraction of the resources and far less reach shouldn't be outpacing you in terms of accurate, unbiased and generally useful information. If you want to build out the "tech junkie" fun time entertainment network, absolutely nothing wrong with that. But don't make a big show about the depth of your investments into lab equipment and pretend that's more important than your methodology and ethics. 

If you suck at playing the guitar, spending $5000 on a Gibson isn't going to make you sound any better. Acting like you're being victimized for being told you still suck just as much on the $5000 Gibson as you did on the $75 Washburn isn't the right response. 

When 4090's started catching fire, GN was there doing the lab testing, calling out the shady tactics of manufactures, when X3D's were exploding they were there doing the lab testing, and calling out the shady tactics of Asus. That's a lot more useful then reporting "oh this is a problem, but _____ promises they're totes on top of it, so don't worry guys"

it was really more me trying to give some examples of "reviewers" (both dont really do strictly reviews) that actually try to be objective,  and will absolutely call out if they think something is bad/trash/not worth it (in techmoans case even sponsored reviews,  he has zero qualms to literally say not to buy it if he thinks something is not worth it)

 

you have to realize,  "reviewer" is more like a marketer,  they are by default not objective,  because thats not how they're business works. someone like techmoan , or vwestlife, etc, do this purely out of enthusiasm for the medium,  and its both,  more entertaining to watch and more informative too, because they will absolutely call out any faults they'll find!

 

(in techmoans case it's funny because hes a *huge* SONY fanboy, but still the only sponsored Sony review he ever did he straight up said not to buy these headphones,  and you could see how actually disappointed he was about the whole situation) 

 

as for mentour pilot,  i recommend watching,  one if not *the* youtuber with the highest production values and not at last most entertaining/ informative (even if you aren't into planes tbh)

[inthebrilliantblue]

7 minutes ago, coopa said:

Gamers Nexus has a goal of generating revenue as well. It's not as nearly as big as LMG, but it does exist to make money and gives their employees a paycheck. They generate money from monetizing youtube videos, as well as sponsorships and selling their own merch.

 

Leaving monetization on the LMG apology video is forcing anyone who doesn't have YT Premium or adblock to view ads that directly benefit LMG's corporate coffers before they can watch LMG give the apology. It sends a message that, like every other upload, this is viewed as a money making opportunity. When combined with the merch link in the description and the plug of the screwdriver, it erodes the authenticity and sincerity of the apology by making it seem like this video is business as usual. It shouldn't be, but that's the message these things said.

Similarly, the "sponsor - just kidding" jokes cheapen the nature of the apology because it makes it seem like the people making these jokes are treating the apology itself as a joke. It's jarring and it has no place in this video.

While I agree with the point that leaving monetization on the apology video was bad, look at whats going on. (HOPEFULLY) They are working internally to make their processes better. They are not looking at specifically youtube optics right now. This could be just them not thinking about demonetizing the video when uploading it, and we know they have issues with quality checking videos, much less optics of youtube ads.

 

I dont however agree with the fact that GN left all their merch on the table during their LMG Has Issues video. That video should have been shot with a clear table and blank background. If they wanted something on table or background to decorate the set, then it should have been products (if they had any) that LTT messed up on. Otherwise the merch just sends the same message you are saying that LTT is sending.

 

In short, these are human beings. Stop attributing malice to these mistakes. And LTT at its core has always been a self depreciating joke company. I found it a light hearted attempt to make what they were saying on camera easier to deal with. Yes it sounds bad to you, but thats just you. Others here are looking at the overall message and taking note to check if they actually do the right thing later.

[Uttamattamakin]

4 minutes ago, coopa said:

I'm not a YouTube partner, so why am I seeing ads on my videos? 

And here's demonetization on a video saying it turns off ads:

Turn off ads for individual videos

If they demonetized the apology video, YT would not run ads on it.

I am sorry.  Guess I was wrong.  I have had other creators get demonetized because youtube deemed their content "not advertiser friendly" then still have adsense ads on them.  (Typically history and/or news channels).  All I know is youtube monetization is a bit of a black box.  IF they see a lot of traffic to a video it would not surprise me if they would put ands on it for their benefit. 

IF they kept it monetized that is an error on top of an error. 

[SuperGnu]

1 hour ago, Shlouski said:

You want them to shot it in a closet?

[Sartre]

Where is the direct apology to Gamers Nexus and Hardware Unboxed? Linus made a comment in a recent WAN show about the importance of not surrounding yourself with sycophants?

 

If you want to truly show humility and a desire to change, apologize for gaslighting and criticizing Gamers Nexus for not reaching out prior to their upload. Apologize to Billet for also selling a prototype and then gaslighting them too. Publicly.

[ColonelSupremePizza]

13 hours ago, Saeumii said:

you are assuming everyone involved in the process knew what it was, its importance, and lmg's agreement with billet labs. again, incompetence isn't great either, but claiming malice when there's more reasonable explanations is disingenuous

I never said there was malice, you are inferring that. Of course this is absolute and complete incompetence, but Linus KNEW what it was, his obligations, and should have stepped in to say that they couldn't sell it. There's no way in hell that they just randomly auctioned stuff without approval from people that absolutely would know that it should have been sent back.

 

Until malice is proven, this whole situation shows that he has an unbelievably incompetent, lazy, and irresponsible team imaginable, particularly given their valuation. Screw anyone not giving them absurd money for sponsorships, they don't care as long as their bottom line is their top priority.

[AJS9437]

As a very, very long-time viewer of LTT, I am posting this. Mods, for all your hard work condensing these random sprouts of threads on this topic, I am sorry. I just hope for a second this can be seen.

Operating a business, I'm just an Area General Manager(AGM) for a pizza chain in charge of 227 people below me between 8 stores, I know that itch, and everyone else would be lying to themselves if you love the tech community built within Youtube;

That GN is right, that Steves is on point, and the BL stuff is just... OOF. [insert more drama here]

However, as someone who also has ADHD, not an excuse, watching this unfold in forums, threads, and even pop up in my news feed as a serious topic, I can't help but read through all this. 

After GN's initial video, I came back to the LTT forums after a year just to see, then after a few days of digesting YT content on the topic... 

to put it simply, people who have ADHD are IMPULSIVE, INATTINVE, and RECKLESS. 

Linus f**ked up and LMG f**ked up, I hope the company as a whole uses this criticism to build. 

However, the pitchforks and hate I've seen hurts me personally, directed at someone ive never met. 

Id be very rash and reactive if i had millions looking on me, and these days after his video i think hundreds of stabs lead to his rather... weak forum response. 

Feels weird to white knight this, but having ADHD/ADD makes one different from the general rational thought of the common person. 



 

[EchoBravo498]

39 minutes ago, dustypaws said:

I set this troll on ignore.... He annoyed the shit out of me...

Lol - he is just stating that the GN video is not configured in an unusual way.

[andreimj]

This needs to stop!

 

   What the community did for the past two days was attrocious and Steve should take accountability for the toxicity of the mob community that he engaged. Empty assumptions, threats, what ifs. What happened deformed the reality and people quickly forgot to be kind to each other. In recent times, the world of online content creation has significantly evolved, giving rise to numerous influencers who hold substantial power to shape public opinion. Steve from GamersNexus and LinusTechTips are two prominent figures in the tech and gaming community. While discussions, debates, and critiques are integral to a healthy online ecosystem, there are instances when the line between constructive criticism and toxicity becomes blurred. 

   Content creators hold a considerable influence over their audiences. They have the ability to shape perceptions, introduce new ideas, and drive conversations within their communities. The dynamics of this influence are complex, as creators are responsible for maintaining an ethical balance between sharing their opinions and encouraging healthy discussions. However, this influence can sometimes result in unintended consequences, such as the toxic behavior within our communities.

   LinusTechTips has faced backlash on several occasions due to controversies related to their content, product reviews, or business practices. These instances have sparked heated discussions within the community, with opinions ranging from constructive criticism to outright rage. While healthy debates are essential for any community's growth, the concern arises when discussions devolve into personal attacks, harassment, or bullying.

   Steve Burke, the host of GamersNexus, is known for his in-depth analysis and critical evaluation of tech products. His content often investigates technical aspects and presents a thorough evaluation of tech, naturally growing a dedicated following fan base. However, there have been instances where Steve's criticisms have been interpreted and overly harsh or abrasive towards some members of the community.

   While Steve's critiques may be rooted in his passion for accurate analysis, they should not support toxic behavior among his followers. If his criticisms lead to his audience engaging in harassment or bullying towards LinusTechTips and its supporters, then he should be held accountable for contributing to the toxicity within the community.

    Content creators have a significant ethical responsibility towards their audience and the communities they lead. While creators have the right to express their opinions, they must be mindful of the potential consequences of their words. Encouraging respectful discourse and discouraging toxic behavior should be a priority for any content creator, regardless of their personal opinions.

   The controversy surrounding the LinusTechTips fracas and Steve's involvement highlights the potential impact of influential figures on the community's behavior. While Steve's critiques may have been intended as constructive criticism, the line between critical analysis and engaging toxicity is a fine one, as the past two days showed. As such, Steve should recognize his ethical responsibility in promoting a healthy online environment and be prepared to be held accountable for any unintended negative consequences that their actions might bring out within their communities.

   What started as a criticism of content quickly escalated into personal attacks against individuals. The tech community more often than not showed amazing resilience and cerebral takes on various topics, but this incident showcased how disagreements can quickly digress into attacks on character rather than focusing on the issues at hand. While criticism can be constructive, the response to Steve's callout often disregarded nuanced discussions. Instead, it fueled a wave of toxicity, overshadowing the potential for meaningful debates on the controversy. The tech community is not immune to herd mentality, where individuals adopt opinions en masse without critical evaluation. Steve's callout, rather than encouraging thoughtful reflection, led to a rapid alignment of opinions without a thorough understanding of the situation. Steve's callout on LinusTechTips' controversy acted as a catalyst, sparking an effervescent wave of opinions that quickly escalated into a display of tribalism. The tech community sadly showcased a troubling tendency to polarize when confronted with different perspectives. The callout exacerbated this trend forgeting its main focus, with followers rallying behind Steve and vehemently opposing facts or lack thereof context. The resulting tribalism stifled rational debate and replaced it with an 'us versus them' mentality, undermining the very essence of a thriving community.

   In conclusion, both Linus and Steve, like any content creators, made mistakes in their response to this backlash. By prioritizing open communication, respectful engagement, and a willingness to learn from criticism, they can help create a healthier and more constructive online environment for their followers.

 

Be kind to yourself and others!

 

[coopa]

12 minutes ago, inthebrilliantblue said:

I dont however agree with the fact that GN left all their merch on the table during their LMG Has Issues video. That video should have been shot with a clear table and blank background. If they wanted something on table or background to decorate the set, then it should have been products (if they had any) that LTT messed up on. Otherwise the merch just sends the same message you are saying that LTT is sending.

I take two issues with this:

1. If I never watched GN before, I would have no basis to understand that anything on camera in his video critiquing LTT/LMG was a product he sold. The bag at the bottom right of the screen maybe (I only see the part "GAMER"). I know he sells the screwdriver and the work mat, but only because I've watched other videos from GN before where that was mentioned. He doesn't mention that it's GN merch in the audiovisual content, nor does the description or comments.
2. If we're going to apply the same standard, Linus should not have been wearing an LTX 23 hoodie in the apology video. Obviously that's one item versus the multiple on camera in the GN video.

Quote

In short, these are human beings. Stop attributing malice to these mistakes. And LTT at its core has always been a self depreciating joke company. I found it a light hearted attempt to make what they were saying on camera easier to deal with. Yes it sounds bad to you, but thats just you. Others here are looking at the overall message and taking note to check if they actually do the right thing later.

I never used the word malice, nor was I attributing it to malice. Monetizing the video, sponsorship jokes, a direct plug of the screwdriver may have been seen as a lighthearted way to break the tension, and indeed, judging by Linus posting this, that's what they thought of it:


But whether or not it was an innocent mistake or poor judgment or, god forbid, actual malice (which - again - I don't believe is the case), the effect of a poor appearance is the same.

I am cautiously optimistic on the video and look forward to LTT taking the time to take stock of their practices and procedures and coming back to the community with what the output of that was and what will be done to ensure future video quality. These things, if LMG executes on this as they have promised in this apology video, will be positive things.

 

At the same time, the hope for improvement of future video content does not leave the apology video immune from any criticism.

[mikaelus]

2 hours ago, James5382 said:

No they shouldn't, and yes it is. No one with integrity would take such a sponsorship in the first place.

That's how all of these people make a living. But you're always free to watch another channel of some bloke recording from his shed without any sponsorship. It's a free world, innit?

[Leksi T]

17 minutes ago, coopa said:

And that's fine - for a normal video. If they want to make money in multiple ways (sponsor mentions, store/merch mentions, monetization on YouTube) whether it's an in-depth hardware review, a first look at a product, a goofier video like setting up a giant fan or whatever, the WAN show, that is their right. And as a for profit business, LMG exists to make money and pay its employees.

 

An apology video should be the exception to the rule. Leaving it monetized sends the wrong messagel

This is especially baffling because in terms of revenue, they stand to lose far more by pausing all production for at least a week and by, for the foreseeable future, cutting their upload frequency to ensure quality. But that just makes monetizing this apology video even more baffling! You're forcing people to watch ads to watch an apology. It makes zero sense and sends the wrong message... 

I think I continue to disagree, but I can understand your point.  

 

My view is, that leaving the video monetized sends the message I was expecting to hear.  "We will use every opportunity to make money"  I think it's up to every member of the community how to interpret that. Whether that is the thing to make them leave, hold them even tighter to their promises, or otherwise.

[Amaninacity]

10 minutes ago, DeatheTech said:

but you would test a CPU on a motherboard the manufacturer supplied?....(cause you know that is what they do, right?)

The performance of the motherboard is not being tested. The CPU manufacturer is not claiming that their CPU will improve the performance on the motherboard. Also, there are good reasons you might be forced to use such a board when performing an embargoed review (such as the boards not being commercially available, or requiring unreleased bios updates).

[andreimj]

9 minutes ago, andreimj said:

This needs to stop!

 

   What the community did for the past two days was attrocious and Steve should take accountability for the toxicity of the mob community that he engaged. Empty assumptions, threats, what ifs. What happened deformed the reality and people quickly forgot to be kind to each other. In recent times, the world of online content creation has significantly evolved, giving rise to numerous influencers who hold substantial power to shape public opinion. Steve from GamersNexus and LinusTechTips are two prominent figures in the tech and gaming community. While discussions, debates, and critiques are integral to a healthy online ecosystem, there are instances when the line between constructive criticism and toxicity becomes blurred. 

   Content creators hold a considerable influence over their audiences. They have the ability to shape perceptions, introduce new ideas, and drive conversations within their communities. The dynamics of this influence are complex, as creators are responsible for maintaining an ethical balance between sharing their opinions and encouraging healthy discussions. However, this influence can sometimes result in unintended consequences, such as the toxic behavior within our communities.

   LinusTechTips has faced backlash on several occasions due to controversies related to their content, product reviews, or business practices. These instances have sparked heated discussions within the community, with opinions ranging from constructive criticism to outright rage. While healthy debates are essential for any community's growth, the concern arises when discussions devolve into personal attacks, harassment, or bullying.

   Steve Burke, the host of GamersNexus, is known for his in-depth analysis and critical evaluation of tech products. His content often investigates technical aspects and presents a thorough evaluation of tech, naturally growing a dedicated following fan base. However, there have been instances where Steve's criticisms have been interpreted and overly harsh or abrasive towards some members of the community.

   While Steve's critiques may be rooted in his passion for accurate analysis, they should not support toxic behavior among his followers. If his criticisms lead to his audience engaging in harassment or bullying towards LinusTechTips and its supporters, then he should be held accountable for contributing to the toxicity within the community.

    Content creators have a significant ethical responsibility towards their audience and the communities they lead. While creators have the right to express their opinions, they must be mindful of the potential consequences of their words. Encouraging respectful discourse and discouraging toxic behavior should be a priority for any content creator, regardless of their personal opinions.

   The controversy surrounding the LinusTechTips fracas and Steve's involvement highlights the potential impact of influential figures on the community's behavior. While Steve's critiques may have been intended as constructive criticism, the line between critical analysis and engaging toxicity is a fine one, as the past two days showed. As such, Steve should recognize his ethical responsibility in promoting a healthy online environment and be prepared to be held accountable for any unintended negative consequences that their actions might bring out within their communities.

   What started as a criticism of content quickly escalated into personal attacks against individuals. The tech community more often than not showed amazing resilience and cerebral takes on various topics, but this incident showcased how disagreements can quickly digress into attacks on character rather than focusing on the issues at hand. While criticism can be constructive, the response to Steve's callout often disregarded nuanced discussions. Instead, it fueled a wave of toxicity, overshadowing the potential for meaningful debates on the controversy. The tech community is not immune to herd mentality, where individuals adopt opinions en masse without critical evaluation. Steve's callout, rather than encouraging thoughtful reflection, led to a rapid alignment of opinions without a thorough understanding of the situation. Steve's callout on LinusTechTips' controversy acted as a catalyst, sparking an effervescent wave of opinions that quickly escalated into a display of tribalism. The tech community sadly showcased a troubling tendency to polarize when confronted with different perspectives. The callout exacerbated this trend forgeting its main focus, with followers rallying behind Steve and vehemently opposing facts or lack thereof context. The resulting tribalism stifled rational debate and replaced it with an 'us versus them' mentality, undermining the very essence of a thriving community.

   In conclusion, both Linus and Steve, like any content creators, are made mistakes in their response to this backlash. By prioritizing open communication, respectful engagement, and a willingness to learn from criticism, they can help create a healthier and more constructive online environment for their followers.

 

Be kind to yourself and others!

 

*made mistakes in their response to this backlash

[Uttamattamakin]

7 minutes ago, andreimj said:

This needs to stop!

 

  In conclusion, both Linus and Steve, like any content creators, are made mistakes in their response to this backlash. By prioritizing open communication, respectful engagement, and a willingness to learn from criticism, they can help create a healthier and more constructive online environment for their followers.

 

Be kind to yourself and others!

 

Believe it or not I really did read every word you wrote.   You are right that none of this makes toxicity ok. 

However, lets all ask ourselves this question.  If Linus was someone we liked less how would we act?  If a channel with no clout, few followers, and no brand power did the exact same things what would be the outcome?  

If someone lent me a Nvidia A6000 ADA generation to run some Black hole simulations on and I either kept it or auctioned it off for charity I think the IL state troopers would be knocking on my door with a warrant.  For example.  It is a fact of life that known and popular people and entities get more trust than ordinary people. 

The flip side of that trust is that when it is broken there are HUGE consequences, that may take some time to play out.  He should consider his legal protection. 

[Biohazard777]

Just now, andreimj said:

*made mistakes in their response to this backlash

Use the edit button. 

 

[andreimj]

Just now, surrey_nerd said:

What does Linus boots taste like?
 

No one remember that LMG took a shot in an trollish way them and hardware unboxed first. 
 

blaming Steve for anything

you understood nothing from what I wrote. Is your reply helping anyone?

[EchoBravo498]

8 minutes ago, andreimj said:

This needs to stop!

 

   What the community did for the past two days was attrocious and Steve should take accountability for the toxicity of the mob community that he engaged. Empty assumptions, threats, what ifs. What happened deformed the reality and people quickly forgot to be kind to each other. In recent times, the world of online content creation has significantly evolved, giving rise to numerous influencers who hold substantial power to shape public opinion. Steve from GamersNexus and LinusTechTips are two prominent figures in the tech and gaming community. While discussions, debates, and critiques are integral to a healthy online ecosystem, there are instances when the line between constructive criticism and toxicity becomes blurred. 

   Content creators hold a considerable influence over their audiences. They have the ability to shape perceptions, introduce new ideas, and drive conversations within their communities. The dynamics of this influence are complex, as creators are responsible for maintaining an ethical balance between sharing their opinions and encouraging healthy discussions. However, this influence can sometimes result in unintended consequences, such as the toxic behavior within our communities.

   LinusTechTips has faced backlash on several occasions due to controversies related to their content, product reviews, or business practices. These instances have sparked heated discussions within the community, with opinions ranging from constructive criticism to outright rage. While healthy debates are essential for any community's growth, the concern arises when discussions devolve into personal attacks, harassment, or bullying.

   Steve Burke, the host of GamersNexus, is known for his in-depth analysis and critical evaluation of tech products. His content often investigates technical aspects and presents a thorough evaluation of tech, naturally growing a dedicated following fan base. However, there have been instances where Steve's criticisms have been interpreted and overly harsh or abrasive towards some members of the community.

   While Steve's critiques may be rooted in his passion for accurate analysis, they should not support toxic behavior among his followers. If his criticisms lead to his audience engaging in harassment or bullying towards LinusTechTips and its supporters, then he should be held accountable for contributing to the toxicity within the community.

    Content creators have a significant ethical responsibility towards their audience and the communities they lead. While creators have the right to express their opinions, they must be mindful of the potential consequences of their words. Encouraging respectful discourse and discouraging toxic behavior should be a priority for any content creator, regardless of their personal opinions.

   The controversy surrounding the LinusTechTips fracas and Steve's involvement highlights the potential impact of influential figures on the community's behavior. While Steve's critiques may have been intended as constructive criticism, the line between critical analysis and engaging toxicity is a fine one, as the past two days showed. As such, Steve should recognize his ethical responsibility in promoting a healthy online environment and be prepared to be held accountable for any unintended negative consequences that their actions might bring out within their communities.

   What started as a criticism of content quickly escalated into personal attacks against individuals. The tech community more often than not showed amazing resilience and cerebral takes on various topics, but this incident showcased how disagreements can quickly digress into attacks on character rather than focusing on the issues at hand. While criticism can be constructive, the response to Steve's callout often disregarded nuanced discussions. Instead, it fueled a wave of toxicity, overshadowing the potential for meaningful debates on the controversy. The tech community is not immune to herd mentality, where individuals adopt opinions en masse without critical evaluation. Steve's callout, rather than encouraging thoughtful reflection, led to a rapid alignment of opinions without a thorough understanding of the situation. Steve's callout on LinusTechTips' controversy acted as a catalyst, sparking an effervescent wave of opinions that quickly escalated into a display of tribalism. The tech community sadly showcased a troubling tendency to polarize when confronted with different perspectives. The callout exacerbated this trend forgeting its main focus, with followers rallying behind Steve and vehemently opposing facts or lack thereof context. The resulting tribalism stifled rational debate and replaced it with an 'us versus them' mentality, undermining the very essence of a thriving community.

   In conclusion, both Linus and Steve, like any content creators, are made mistakes in their response to this backlash. By prioritizing open communication, respectful engagement, and a willingness to learn from criticism, they can help create a healthier and more constructive online environment for their followers.

 

Be kind to yourself and others!

 

Wow! First off wrong! Steve didn't create a toxic mob. Linus did when he went a little off the rails in his response - he was angry, we all do stuff we aren't proud of when angry.

 

The community has come to rely on LMG to be honest - this has shown that they have not behaved that way. I would say that Steve did his best to call out a channel that was getting too crazy. All in all - this is a good thing. Sure people are angry, but this is the wake up call LMG needed. Just look at the "Employee answers" video - they were all begging for a slow down in pace. Maybe this will bring that to them.
 

[Guest]

The LTT apology video is monetized and has jokes about merch, the store and a certain regular sponsor.

 

37534

[TylerD321]

The apology video mentions that there will be a forum post where you can list any ideas to improve transparency. Has this been done yet? I don't see one.

[m9x3mos]

11 minutes ago, andreimj said:

   While Steve's critiques may be rooted in his passion for accurate analysis, they should not support toxic behavior among his followers. If his criticisms lead to his audience engaging in harassment or bullying towards LinusTechTips and its supporters, then he should be held accountable for contributing to the toxicity within the community.

I understand what you are getting at but at no point has Steve (or Linus for that mater) supported or encouraged toxic behavior among their followers.

I also don't believe that either of them are liable or accountable for the actions of their followers.

It wasn't like he was inciting anyone to harass or bully anyone.

 

13 minutes ago, andreimj said:

Be kind to yourself and others!

Agreed

 

The amount of toxicity that came out of the community on this thread was disappointing. 

This is also nothing new and has been common among the PC space for it's entire existence. 

[surrey_nerd]

2 minutes ago, andreimj said:

you understood nothing from what I wrote. Is your reply helping anyone?

And you understand nothing from what is going on or how this startled. Your crocodile tears and gaslighting rant showed that.