Brianna Wu / John Flynt - Original Thread

[Optimus Prime]

Something still doesn't add up. She and Frank talk about themselves as a married couple; if they couldn't legally marry because of gender reasons then you'd think she'd be milking the "omg oppressed" points out of that. Then again it's weird that she's not milking trans sympathy points in the first place when she's a prime candidate (sheltered, not actually in any danger from it, Twitter martyr, target of Trans Roulette this past week). Is Brianna's secret that she's really just an ugly cis girl?

No, there's MORE than enough info on the ED page that shows she was a man (the first picture comparing what looks like a yearbook photo and a more recent screencap from one of the TV interviews makes it look like all that time has done to the same individual is thin out their hair. Seriously, MALE Wu has healthier hair than Female Wu).

And just because they say they're married doesn't mean anything. Like, two guys pretending to be married was a movie plot for some film because a guy and his best friend were trying to abuse a loophole in some inheritance litigation IIRC.

 

[tehpope]

and that movie is the Adam Sandler classic "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" /sneed

I guess its not a shock that John never got his named change considering all the other incompetence he's displayed.

 

[blackie toy]

Alright, after a great deal of reflection and a few close looks at the document, I have concluded that there is substantial reason to doubt its authenticity, as discussed at the thread over at /gamergate/.

Most importantly, the statute referenced, 571-A, does not appear to be the location of a statute dealing with defamation in any state. Nor with wrongful termination for that matter. There was a statute codified at that specific location in New Hampshire until 1973, but that dealt with obscenity. I don't think that makes sense in context.

This leads me to believe the document itself is a forgery. I admit, the statute number could be a typo, but that doesn't handle all the other things leading to question the report's credibility. There's just a lot wrong here, and a lot of things just don't add up about the whole situation.

I say, at best, we're looking at a disgruntled ex-employee who thinks he's got a wrongful termination claim. But, consider simply the facts that would have to be present here. This would have to be a person who got fired, and whose reaction was... to go to the police. Fired, police. This is the kind of person we're talking about.

That's some Judge Judy-tier shit. And fuck Judge Judy.

 

[Xarpho]

Yeah she's totally 35. Her age was whittled down to a 32-35 range due to discussing when she went to college and being 19 when her folks gave her all that free money.

Yeah, I think I did some educated guesses some pages back on when she got money (clearly post Toy Story) and alleged HS pics (looked mid 1990s). Glad I was pretty close!

Something still doesn't add up. She and Frank talk about themselves as a married couple; if they couldn't legally marry because of gender reasons then you'd think she'd be milking the "omg oppressed" points out of that. Then again it's weird that she's not milking trans sympathy points in the first place when she's a prime candidate (sheltered, not actually in any danger from it, Twitter martyr, target of Trans Roulette this past week). Is Brianna's secret that she's really just an ugly cis girl?

There was a picture of Wu back a few pages. Her body proportions looked...off.

 

[Lord RainbowDash]

Alright, after a great deal of reflection and a few close looks at the document, I have concluded that there is substantial reason to doubt its authenticity, as discussed at the thread over at /gamergate/.

Most importantly, the statute referenced, 571-A, does not appear to be the location of a statute dealing with defamation in any state. Nor with wrongful termination for that matter. There was a statute codified at that specific location in New Hampshire until 1973, but that dealt with obscenity. I don't think that makes sense in context.

This leads me to believe the document itself is a forgery. I admit, the statute number could be a typo, but that doesn't handle all the other things leading to question the report's credibility. There's just a lot wrong here, and a lot of things just don't add up about the whole situation.

I say, at best, we're looking at a disgruntled ex-employee who thinks he's got a wrongful termination claim. But, consider simply the facts that would have to be present here. This would have to be a person who got fired, and whose reaction was... to go to the police. Fired, police. This is the kind of person we're talking about.

That's some Judge Judy-tier shit. And fuck Judge Judy.

It honestly looked fake to me anyway.

 

[Cosmos]

From the Gamergate thread, might as well link it here:

Spoiler

Chloe-I-scammed-a-bunch-of-people-into-giving-me-money-to-mutilate-my-penis-by-lying-that-I-needed-life-saving-surgery-Sagal just leaked a chat log she had with Brianna where she attempted to get her to help take down Paypal for (rightfully, if this has to do with her scam, I don't trust her word for it here because she's a proven liar).

Hilarity ensued.

This will probably be the only time I EVER say this, but got-damn, you go, Brianna. I'm actually pretty impressed with her sticking to her guns like that and refusing to be guilt-tripped and coerced by an obvious psycho. She didn't buy into Chloe's whole "B-BUT YOU HAEV TO HALP ME BECUZ WE'RE BOTH TRANZ" bullshittery and rightfully told her to shut the fuck up when she started throwing a pity party. I may not like Brianna at all, but I can admit when she's done good, however rare that may be. And however hypocritical she may sound doing it.

Fuck Chloe Sagal, she's a whiny little baby and a fraud and obviously not that smart if she expected people to side with her based on this conversation. I'm not too crazy about PayPal's policies (they STILL hold my money for like three weeks after I sell something despite how I've established myself, what the fuck???) but Chloe took all that money in the first place so I'm not taking that victim card of hers.

 

[Papaya23]

This will probably be the only time I EVER say this, but got-damn, you go, Brianna. I'm actually pretty impressed with her sticking to her guns like that and refusing to be guilt-tripped and coerced by an obvious psycho. She didn't buy into Chloe's whole "B-BUT YOU HAEV TO HALP ME BECUZ WE'RE BOTH TRANZ" bullshittery and rightfully told her to shut the fuck up when she started throwing a pity party. I may not like Brianna at all, but I can admit when she's done good, however rare that may be. And however hypocritical she may sound doing it.

Fuck Chloe Sagal, she's a whiny little baby and a fraud and obviously not that smart if she expected people to side with her based on this conversation. I'm not too crazy about PayPal's policies (they STILL hold my money for like three weeks after I sell something despite how I've established myself, what the fuck???) but Chloe took all that money in the first place so I'm not taking that victim card of hers.

That's the thing though, this whiny, pushy, "everyone is my platform" manipulation is what Brianna does to all her friends. I'm sure she says she'll have their back, then when it's someone else's turn she turns on them, like this. She didn't get a $13000 Patreon and TV appearances all on her own, she got the same signal boost from people like Chloe.

 

[Johnny Silverhand]

People like this are an enigma even to themselves. How one person can so singularly make so little sense is nearly short circuiting my brain...

 

[Lord RainbowDash]

 

[Cosmos]

They're turning on each other.

This is going to be good.

 

[Uzumaki]

This will probably be the only time I EVER say this, but got-damn, you go, Brianna. I'm actually pretty impressed with her sticking to her guns like that and refusing to be guilt-tripped and coerced by an obvious psycho. She didn't buy into Chloe's whole "B-BUT YOU HAEV TO HALP ME BECUZ WE'RE BOTH TRANZ" bullshittery and rightfully told her to shut the fuck up when she started throwing a pity party. I may not like Brianna at all, but I can admit when she's done good, however rare that may be. And however hypocritical she may sound doing it.

Fuck Chloe Sagal, she's a whiny little baby and a fraud and obviously not that smart if she expected people to side with her based on this conversation. I'm not too crazy about PayPal's policies (they STILL hold my money for like three weeks after I sell something despite how I've established myself, what the fuck???) but Chloe took all that money in the first place so I'm not taking that victim card of hers.

Yeah she can be downright reasonable when she's protecting herself from her own medicine. While it might be nice to see Chloe put in her place, this is hardly an example of Wu being anything but the self-serving piece of shit he/she/it has always been. This is hypocrisy. It's hypocrisy that couldn't have been aimed at a better target, but that's what it is. It is not an example of Wu being a good person.

 

[Cosmos]

Yeah she can be downright reasonable when she's protecting herself from her own medicine. While it might be nice to see Chloe put in her place, this is hardly an example of Wu being anything but the self-serving piece of shit he/she/it has always been. This is hypocrisy. It's hypocrisy that couldn't have been aimed at a better target, but that's what it is. It is not an example of Wu being a good person.

Yeah, you're right. I was just so happy to see Brianna not being the craziest person in the room for once. But hypocrisy is still hypocrisy no matter which way you spin it.

I still stand by the fact that I'm super pumped to see Chloe, Brianna, and their asspatters go at it, though. There won't be anyone to root for but it'll still be entertaining.

 

[Uzumaki]

Yeah, you're right. I was just so happy to see Brianna not being the craziest person in the room for once. But hypocrisy is still hypocrisy no matter which way you spin it.

I totally feel you, that was my initial reaction too, which is why I pointed out the conclusions I came to.

I still stand by the fact that I'm super pumped to see Chloe, Brianna, and their asspatters go at it, though. There won't be anyone to root for but it'll still be entertaining.

It's reverse Aliens vs. Predator: Whoever wins, we win.

 

[Smutley]

It's reverse Aliens vs. Predator: Whoever wins, we win.

The greatest thing in my opinion is that we're going to see more leeks. Devi Ever and Chloe Segal have proven themselves to be unstable drama queens who also happen to be incredibly stupid. Since getting repeatedly mocked for fucking up (GamerFruit, Hijacked Meme, Sending herself death threats on twitter, poorly doxing herself twice) Wu has backed off to just being a shrill voice on twitter, but the other two... they have no qualms about throwing themselves under the bus so long as it hurts whoever they are mad at.

All three are gonna get fucked up from this, and it's glorious.

 

[AnOminous]

$10K is an amount that should trigger financial disclosure requirements, and failure to comply with these laws is a serious crime. (Ask "Dr. Dino" Kent Hovind, a "young Earth" creationist serving a lengthy federal prison term.)

This leads me to believe the document itself is a forgery. I admit, the statute number could be a typo, but that doesn't handle all the other things leading to question the report's credibility. There's just a lot wrong here, and a lot of things just don't add up about the whole situation.

I'm not sure whether it's a forgery, but if it isn't, it is evidence of idiocy to make a police complaint about things like "slander" that would be, at most, cause for a civil lawsuit. At best, whoever would call the cops to complain someone said mean things about them is an idiot.

Anyway, it looks like there's some entertainment in our future, involving two cretins who deserve each other.

 

[José Mourinho]

lol she took two months just to ask her supporters to report the tweet she's that desperate, and plus the Crash Wu account seems to be pretty questionable.......

Spoiler

BUT DON'T WORRY I'LL DEFINITELY TWEET MORE ABOUT GG VERY SOON!

Spoiler

Hmmm.. another threat to Wu again.... that Wu was doxxed... again. Mmmm... yeah.

Spoiler

Now time for her activity at r/GamerGhazi!
http://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2rpsat/about_the_future_of_gamer_ghazi/cnivj71
Wu on the future of r/GamerGhazi. The Antis are WINNING!!!!!!!!!!11!!!ONE (over one company promoting diversity even though Hatred was also back on Greenlight too, which evens out, and besides, didn't r/GamerGhazi said they're not a movement in the first place lol?)

Spoiler

http://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2rtuon/please_warn_wu_her_family_could_be_in_danger/
The aforementioned thread where Wu's family could be in danger. Stay tuned for more.

Spoiler

 

[A Random]

What if said slander is something like accusing him of being a terrorist, though? Not saying it's the case, just wondering if that kind of thing would possibly work. We're having a bad week as it is.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Alright, after a great deal of reflection and a few close looks at the document, I have concluded that there is substantial reason to doubt its authenticity, as discussed at the thread over at /gamergate/.

Most importantly, the statute referenced, 571-A, does not appear to be the location of a statute dealing with defamation in any state. Nor with wrongful termination for that matter. There was a statute codified at that specific location in New Hampshire until 1973, but that dealt with obscenity. I don't think that makes sense in context.

This leads me to believe the document itself is a forgery. I admit, the statute number could be a typo, but that doesn't handle all the other things leading to question the report's credibility. There's just a lot wrong here, and a lot of things just don't add up about the whole situation.

I say, at best, we're looking at a disgruntled ex-employee who thinks he's got a wrongful termination claim. But, consider simply the facts that would have to be present here. This would have to be a person who got fired, and whose reaction was... to go to the police. Fired, police. This is the kind of person we're talking about.

That's some Judge Judy-tier shit. And fuck Judge Judy.

Since when has bullshit concepts like common sense and actually fact-checking before accepting the legitimacy of actually even applied to the SJWs?

As you point out, the document is probably fake. But you did it by actually looking up the fine print, which is more than the anti-GG group does on a daily basis.

And even then, you have to remember that these people will go off at even the slightest provocation or implication that they're being attacked, when not staging things to look like they're being attacked in the first place.

Or, in this current situation, when their rigid behavior patterns necessitate lashing out at anybody who does not follow their will doesn't have exceptions for when "anybody" happens to be another public SJW icon.

 

[AnOminous]

What if said slander is something like accusing him of being a terrorist, though? Not saying it's the case, just wondering if that kind of thing would possibly work. We're having a bad week as it is.

Assuming that police report is legitimate (kind of a leap), the cops basically told him to get a lawyer. This is cop-talk for "what the fuck do you want ME to do about this?"

Some states actually do still have criminal defamation laws on the books but successful prosecutions are basically unheard-of.

This could be an utterly fabricated document, but it is pretty much how a cop would generally respond to getting a call from some lolcow about slander.

 

[Cosmos]

You know what really gets me about people like Brianna? Idiots are always going to hand them money for no reason. I've seen it happen over and over. It doesn't matter how much you discredit them and prove that they're full of shit, people will still donate to them because they're "oppressed." Brianna Wu is getting over 10 grand a month to sit around and do nothing but bitch on Twitter (because I think we all know that she's not gonna work on her games until she's forced to do so). And the donors see nothing wrong with that.

Honestly, it all ties back to armchair activism. Why actively try to make a difference in the world when you can just donate money to someone who says that they're oppressed? Surely that makes a difference! And donating to charity is a really good thing, but the thing is that they don't actually donate to real charities, they donate to charity cases. Now, I have no idea how these people really are, so it's entirely possible that some of them do actually give money to established charities. But there's a huge difference between donating to, say, an organization that provides shelter and safety for trans people and donating to a woman who claims that she's being harassed by gamers on Twitter.

People can spend or give their money however they want, it's not any of my business. But I'm sick of professional victims like Brianna Wu getting tons of money for doing nothing but bitching and moaning when that money could go to much greater causes.