Nah you nikkas nasty
Streamers getting put on that summer jam screen
Nah you nikkas nasty
she was/is a clout chaser. they weren't even close to business partners, as your previous post indiciated...she didn't even know who he was beyond a "big youtuber"...she had all intentions to use whatever flirting/sexuality to get into his circle.
I've been to those type of mixers, and the people i've interacted with weren't doing shyt like she was...there's a stark difference from networking and whatever she tried to pull.
he's an awkward fukk who tried to shoot his shot, she a clout chaser who tried to use what she got to build a base...when that failed...she then gain symphony by exploiting MeToo.
My bad on the esport/youtuber distinction.This wasn’t Esports it was YouTube stuff but that doesn’t matter.
The difference is that a groupie would approach the person with plans to “hook up” or “go out on a date” or something of that nature.
This was a supposed business meeting that angry joe tried to turn into sex or a date/hook up.
This would be akin to a young female basketball player attending Lebrons basketball camp and he somehow ends up taking her to his hotel room asking her to join him in the shower.
Breh, (or brehhette?) I'm so out of it, its not even funny. Haven't followed a game reviewer since G4 got canceled. Just pretend I'm a baby-boomer or grandparent trying to understand rap music here.
Please be patient with me.
But on the topic, and still trying to understand. So the issue was the informal business connection in Joe's story? And would this be similar to the quid pro quo harassment where an employer denies you advancement/benefits for not encouraging his(or her) advances?
Thus, if Joe used the exact same scheme with a randomGirl at a bar it would be OK?
Sorry if I'm being too much. The legal side of this story fascinates me
Again it doesn’t really matter who works in what industry. They didn’t meet in a bar and their interactions were never under the guise of having a personal relationship.My bad on the esport/youtuber distinction.
Breh, (or brehhette?) I'm so out of it, its not even funny. Haven't followed a game reviewer since G4 got canceled. Just pretend I'm a baby-boomer or grandparent trying to understand rap music here.
Please be patient with me.
But on the topic, and still trying to understand. So the issue was the informal business connection in Joe's story? And would this be similar to the quid pro quo harassment where an employer denies you advancement/benefits for not encouraging his(or her) advances?
Thus, if Joe used the exact same scheme with a randomGirl at a bar it would be OK?
Sorry if I'm being too much. The legal side of this story fascinates me
He took her clear intentions on networking and building business relationships. Pretended his intentions were the same, then tried to turn that into a transactional sexual encounter. I.E. “I help you with getting your name out there You give me sex”
Obviously she was there to meet and mingle with big Youtubers. That’s why they all where there.
Everything else you made up, cause you want to build a narrative of victim blaming to defend nasty behavior.
shyt like what?
Again. You try to turn the normal behavior of networking into a negative in order to defend creep behavior.
no PAX is a con. Anyone can attend PAX.
The stuff later that night she talks about, that he ends up taking her to, yeah those are strictly YT shyt, that normal peeps can't attend.
make up? She admits herself she didn't know who Joe was or watch his content. And if I'm networking on some actual trying to network, I ain't DMing you at 2 in the morning on some cutesy shyt. I'll actually try to network you at your panel (in joe's case) or shyt ask questions during a Q&A. She went out of her way to message Joe.
I ain't victim blaming cause there ain't no victims in this shyt.
The stuff later that night she talks about, that he ends up taking her to, yeah those are strictly YT shyt, that normal peeps can't attend.
make up? She admits herself she didn't know who Joe was or watch his content. And if I'm networking on some actual trying to network, I ain't DMing you at 2 in the morning on some cutesy shyt. I'll actually try to network you at your panel (in joe's case) or shyt ask questions during a Q&A. She went out of her way to message Joe.
I ain't victim blaming cause there ain't no victims in this shyt.
Breh gotta give it up...she had no leg tos stand as evidenced by the fact soon as lawyers got involved she fell back 
I see.
Then are you saying Joe's mistake was simply not being straightforward? But now I'm a bit more confused.How could Joe have pretended to share her desire for networking if his 4:10am txt (before the lunch invite) called the woman a "cutie in 80s gear?" Thats not a phrase you'd use on a business partner or client. May that phrase have signaled a transition into a personal relationship?
Sure but their interactions were always business. She and he were clear on that.
There was no 2am DM (you made that up
)and when networking, it is formal and even expected to follow up communications. Especially in a situation like this at a convention event when further networking can happen. Again all normal behavior. She sent follow up communication to everyone she met that night. Joe was the one that offered a chance at further networking. Which he tried to turn into sex without ever being clear or honest about that. He expected that she would have sex with him in order to further her networking efforts.Nasty
Your playing dumb game is getting old.I see.
How could Joe have pretended to share her desire for networking if his 4:10am txt (before the lunch invite) called the woman a "cutie in 80s gear?" Thats not a phrase you'd use on a business partner or client. May that phrase have signaled a transition into a personal relationship?
You acting like Joe here, pretending you don’t know what’s going on
made it up? did you even read the story or see the DMS she posted?
look at the Time 2:16 AM
you call this shyt networking? that's some cutesy shyt.
look at the Time 2:16 AM
you call this shyt networking? that's some cutesy shyt.
She never accused him of a crime. There’s nothing to fall back on.Breh gotta give it up...she had no leg tos stand as evidenced by the fact soon as lawyers got involved she fell back
Lawyers intimidate and threaten.
This is why people are reluctant to speak out and creeps keep creeping.
Right after they met. Again that’s what you are supposed to do.made it up? did you even read the story or see the DMS she posted?
look at the Time 2:16 AM
“Hey remember me, thanks for meeting up, looking forward to more business/networking etc.
You made it like she randomly hit him in the middle of the night with a “hey big head” text
Right after they met. Again that’s what you are supposed to do.
“Hey remember me, thanks for meeting up, looking forward to more business/networking etc.
You made it like she randomly hit him in the middle of the night with a “hey big head” text
i ain't DMing you 2 in the fukking moring or DMing you what she did.
What you posted is far different from what she posted.
So whats the point? nothing he did was criminal, you can't go around claiming shyt and not standing on it when it affects peoples pockets. If he really did something wrong she would fight this tooth and nail like other victims of sexual abuse do.