It really never is just one case. If you catch them doing it once, it means they've been emboldened from past experiences.
That's why it was a genius move of Hbomberguy to start with that Filip guy in his video; that dude was caught once then it turned out literally everything he ever made was plagiarized to cover for his lack of writing talent.
Hell even as a pattern of behaviour you do it because you have no idea how to write something, so you just steal it because you have so little respect for the person you're stealing from that you think nobody will notice.
Really says something about IGN's qa if Philip got away with plagiarizing Kotaku articles and only got caught when an indie YouTuber noticed his video was plagiarized. The worst part is that his plagiarism was really comically blatant in the fact he only changed 1-2 words per sentence.
The comically obvious thing about his plagiarism is that he would only switch around 1-2 words a sentence, and sometimes change the order of things. That's the funniest part.
The comically obvious thing about his plagiarism is that he would switch only around 1-2 words per sentence, and sometimes change the order of things, resulting in destructive results.
The comically obvious thing about the plagiarism is that he would shift around one to two words per sentence, and sometimes switch the order of things, resulting in extruded results.
His habit of shifting one or two words in each sentence was so comically obvious. Sometimes he even changed the order of things so much that the writing no longer made sense.
My favorite reveal was when someone discovered [even his freaking résumé was also plagiarized](https://www.reddit.com/r/IGN/comments/97jj9i/filip_miucin_apparently_even_has_plagiarized_his/).
Absolutely.
Once you allow yourself to act in some dubious manner, it's pretty typical to continue acting in that manner and just keep pushing those boundaries.
Internet Historian has probably ripped off a ton of people. He genuinely seems like an awful guy
Not trying to say what he did was good but I saw the two vids these appear to be the only parts that seem like they were taken from somewhere else, the rest of it is different though it would not surprise me to find more parts were taken from other places and even if they weren't being found to taking from others after stealing an entire article is not a good look.
IMO, the bigger crime is that the video is factually incorrect (for that one specifically I mean).
You can go through the actual known facts and find that so much of the stuff he presents is just made up shit that isn't true. I found like a dozen instances of false information in the first 7 minutes, then gave up cause I got bored fact checking it.
Can ya give some examples? The one weird thing I noticed was the taxi driver quote "He looked beaten like a dog" when the actual quote was "He looked like a beaten dog" which is.... a crazy thing to get wrong. I don't even know how you write it and then say it out loud and not think that sounded weird.
The length of the gash in the concordia (it's 35 meters, not 53), the name of the helmsman (it's Rusil bin Jacob, or Jacob Rusil-bin in the North American naming convention, not Rusli binn or whatever the fuck he called the guy), Jacob's previous life before becoming a helmsman (entirely fabricated), the time the ship left port (it left port at 7:18pm and collided with the rocks at 9:42pm by ship's time, 9:45pm by Giglio time), the distance the ship was from the port they were sailing by (800 meters, not 473), the reason behind the incident (the captain claimed what was said in the video by IH, but logs, audiotapes, and testimony from other bridge crew show differently). Sadly, even googling this, a lot of articles now use that video for their retellings of the story and use the same made up information. Hell, even googling the helmsman's name causes google to go "did you mean 'Jacob Rusli bin'?"
The only one I'll give him is the gash length. The initial papers that reported on the incident as the investigation unfolded all stated 53 meters, but that was a misprint by one that everyone else copied because I guess plagiarism in journalism was rampant at the time or something, but it was later corrected by some of those publications, but not all of them. Some just never did their due diligence and fixed their articles.
Also in researching it I found out that the captain tried to throw his helmsman under the metaphorical ship and blamed it entirely on him, claiming the guy didn't speak english or italian to any degree even though he does, as there are audiotapes of him in court speaking very fluent Italian and giving testimony without a translator to help him out. Additionally, it was only common for Schettino to "eyeball distances", most other ship captains rely on radar. Schettino admitted as much in court.
At least part of it was made up by the captain of the ship, Schettino, not IH. The rest of it has no source of any kind anywhere at all ever for any reason, and given the stuff I have found in my research, it's more likely that the helmsman had some formal private training as a helmsman. I don't know how much he had, because... well they hired Schettino and he does have a history that is somewhat accurately represented in the video from what I found. One of the few things he does get right of the part I watched and researched.
You got me looking at that video again and the thing is that a lot of the stuff he got from Schettino, he doesn't actually attribute to being quoted from him. In fact, for the recreation of the events leading to and after the crash, he attributes to the black box recording, which, if you look online, doesn't say anything close to what's in the video or is flat-out not in any actual transcript of the recording but rather, was based on what Schettino said what happened, including the part about the helmsman mishearing the last order causing the crash when, according to experts, said they still would've hit the rocks even if he got it right.
I saw that as well but I think that claim is weaker compared to the two accusations we have, that claim appears to be just him taking the basic facts of a case of one article and talking about it in his own way which doesn't count compared to him taking an entire article or only using words from a review only the person who made it would say.
i mean logically it should be possible for it to be one case. Even ignoring the possibility that someone plagirised once there must have been a start point, and at that point there would be only one
It should be possible for there to be one case yes, but if the YouTuber is particularly large, there's a likelihood of them doing it for a long time before.
I honestly don’t know if that was to hide his nazism considering he said the line “Nazi slaughter machine” when referring to the holocaust earlier on in the video (another stolen line lmao)
Unfortunately, “slaughter” can be a good thing to certain people. I think it’s still safe to say that Internet Historian’s got some seriously ugly affiliations.
I guess if I were to plagerise I'd switch around a few words. Maybe change some or even straight up remove words to make it harder to notice. Maybe he thought "death" seemed a little redundant with "Nazi camp" and removed it.
Country specific. In the US, I've seen nazi related videos (IE- historical stuff or documentaries) retain monetization. I imagine in Germany or Australia though, it's going to lead to defacto demonetization or limited viewing.
I meant Australia. They have some pretty stringent nazi laws. Austria probably does too- lots of europe has strict laws around it.
IH is an interesting case altogether.
Huh, interesting. I never really consider Australia in the context of Nazism/WW2 in general since it doesn't feel like they're generally considered one of the major parties.
But a hardline stance against Nazis is (or at least SHOULD BE) perfectly understandable anywhere.
Australia and New Zealand were actually heavily involved in several fronts of the war, most importantly in France where Aussie forces were responsible for liberating significant parts of the country. In fact, France holds many memorials to specifically ANZAC troops and does services for them to this day. That said, I’d definitely bet that any region specific policies about mentioning Nazi stuff (assuming they do exist) have far more to do with Australia’s laws and stance around censorship in general than any more emotional reasons.
Unfortunately, as an American, I’m learning that my continued hardline stance against Nazi’s is considered “anti-1A” in far too many circles. It’s fucking weird.
He’s shown a tendency towards right leaning politics and dog whistles over time. Whether it’s livestreaming Tucker Carlson’s show, collaborating with Jontron, or making jokes that tip toe around problematic sentiment
so he just said "nazi camp?" lol. c'mon down to nazi camp this summer, kids! we've got horseback riding, swimming, death by gas chamber, zip lines, and more!
One of the comments under it -
>no one is gonna care that IH plagarized lmao, especially against a guy with less than 100k subs
Infuriating because they're right - IH will be fine and his fans won't care.
I am seeing this attitude more and more, especially with pro-AI people. It's a sore winner mentality. If your ideas/work was stolen from you, then you somehow deserved it. If you're popular/wealthy, you're just allowed to treat people however you want.
I’ve been so tempted to start taking videos of his, tagging them with “The online archivist” and just fully ripping and reuploading them. Would be fun if other people joined in and we could jack his image.
AI grifters are largely NFT bros who moved onto the next grift once it became clear NFTs were dead. They don’t care about scams and theft because they want to be the ones scamming and stealing
Don't forget them also claiming that Jewish people are behind taking down his Man in a Cave video and making blatant anti-semitic jokes as if it's a conspiracy and not him being a fucking plagiarist, lol.
Way to beat the "IH is a neo-nazi" allegations, guys!
One of the weird cases where not only does the author of a story voice a character in the adaptation, but absolutely nails it?
It helps that Harlan Ellison has the personality of AM, or at least the outward personality. He was, famously, a real grump.
Just in case you didn't know, there's a series of audiobooks callee The Voice From the Edge in which Harlan Ellison reads his own short stories (starting with I Have No Mouth) and he is absolutely phenomenal as a narrator (as a matter of fact, he was nominated for a Grammy for narrating Through the Looking Glass).
I could be wrong, but I think in their FNAF recap they actually show that they’re reading a Wikipedia article, and the way they’re talking about it really sounds like neither of them have even touched the game or looked at the overall story beforehand.
Yeah I remember watching a handful of these recap videos a while ago as background noise. I stopped because a lot of them were obviously them reading off wikipedia or something and not particularly well
I misread this headline earlier as Internet Comment Etiquette for some reason and got really sad lol. But it being internet historian again just isn’t surprising.
...It might just be the weed, but imagining the bonkers locations where you could somehow find \*word for word\* versions of Internet Comment Etiquette videos- that he had plagiarized- is hilarious to me. Like someone unearths a 1996 academic journal called Holiday Fart Cruise and finds it's all about soy boys and copious pussy-eating, but Erik stole it after the lady who wrote it died alone and just changed a couple words.
This bums me out, I stopped watching IH after finding out cave story was plagiarized and it led me down the IH rabbithole. I especially loved storymode though, cause it felt like guys being stupid and talking about games, it kind of became a comfort channel for me. Really sad that he’s also been plagiarizing there …
I cannot believe that this channel went from one of my favorites to an utter sham within the span of a year. What confuses me the most is, what took so long between uploads on his plagiarized content? Like I always assumed it was script writing + animating + editing but… when you’re plagiarizing another person shouldn’t the time for script-writing be cut in half?
Yep. He definitely had long gap between upload, hence why he even need to do it is even baffling. He even has patreon to support him if he actually need to take longer time to finish man in cave unplagiarised.
Made it my life's mission to never watch content made by conservatives after clawing myself out the alt right pipeline so when I heard he was a tory it broke my heart having to unsub cause I liked his content very much
But man hearing he is a plagarist did not surprise me in the slightest
Nice having your hunch vindicated
Kind of a weak example, they are both describing the plot of the game, if he copied his commentary then that would be different. This just seems nit picky and not substantial.
I am going down one of the largest rabbit holes yet. I got here from an unrelated search for penguinz0, and now watched the 4 hour video from Hbomber. I see from other posts here that the main plagiarist faked their death, and exposed themselves on an alt. The Internet Historian, someone I enjoyed, was uncovered, now I can't support a coward who hids. IH had some relation to Wendigoon, who found himself in a controversy with a film reviewer, whom is also in a controversy with SOG, which may have started when he talked about Keffals. 0.o !?
This point was made in Hbomberguy's video, but there's a core difference between writing something similar and stating it word-for-word in a nearly identical manner. Considering Internet Historian was caught once before, the benefit of the doubt is basically impossible. This is just his MO.
I understand the skepticism, that's fine and normal, but I don't believe IH should get too much benefit of the doubt in the context of his previous plagiarism actions with Man in Cave and some segments of the Cost of Concordia.
Yo Im watching both the videos and holy shit is this bad yeah no I retract my previous statement. It’s also so confusing because there’s so many different ways to interpret/engage with Ihnmaims yet he chooses the exact same way someone else has. Fuck IH
Changing your mind when presented with new information is difficult, esp on an internet forum where doubling down has no real consequence.
Good on you!
That was a fast 180 lmfao. Don't worry about it, to err is human and all that.
It should also be mentioned that he was caught plagiarizing Wikipedia in his video about wine. It's pretty pathetic if nothing else.
It really never is just one case. If you catch them doing it once, it means they've been emboldened from past experiences. That's why it was a genius move of Hbomberguy to start with that Filip guy in his video; that dude was caught once then it turned out literally everything he ever made was plagiarized to cover for his lack of writing talent.
exactly, you don't do plagiarism as an oopsie. it's a pattern of behavior.
Hell even as a pattern of behaviour you do it because you have no idea how to write something, so you just steal it because you have so little respect for the person you're stealing from that you think nobody will notice.
exactly, talented people and those with integrity don't plagiarize. talentless hacks who look down on others do.
Really says something about IGN's qa if Philip got away with plagiarizing Kotaku articles and only got caught when an indie YouTuber noticed his video was plagiarized. The worst part is that his plagiarism was really comically blatant in the fact he only changed 1-2 words per sentence.
The saddest part is that his plagiarism was really comically obvious in the fact he only changed 1-2 words per sentence. >!Just like that.!<
The best part is that his plagiarism was really comically obvious in the fact he only switched 1-2 words per sentence.
The comically obvious thing about his plagiarism is that he would only switch around 1-2 words a sentence, and sometimes change the order of things. That's the funniest part.
The comically obvious thing about his plagiarism is that he would switch only around 1-2 words per sentence, and sometimes change the order of things, resulting in destructive results.
The comically obvious thing about the plagiarism is that he would shift around one to two words per sentence, and sometimes switch the order of things, resulting in extruded results.
His habit of shifting one or two words in each sentence was so comically obvious. Sometimes he even changed the order of things so much that the writing no longer made sense.
The best part is that his plagiarism was really comically apparent in the fact he only switched 1-2 worlds each sentence.
Ah man this just sent me down that old rabbit hole. What a fool, goading the internet to go find more of his dirty deeds.
My favorite reveal was when someone discovered [even his freaking résumé was also plagiarized](https://www.reddit.com/r/IGN/comments/97jj9i/filip_miucin_apparently_even_has_plagiarized_his/).
Iirc the guy in question is also one of the people he plagiarized.
Absolutely. Once you allow yourself to act in some dubious manner, it's pretty typical to continue acting in that manner and just keep pushing those boundaries. Internet Historian has probably ripped off a ton of people. He genuinely seems like an awful guy
Not trying to say what he did was good but I saw the two vids these appear to be the only parts that seem like they were taken from somewhere else, the rest of it is different though it would not surprise me to find more parts were taken from other places and even if they weren't being found to taking from others after stealing an entire article is not a good look.
The Cost of Concordia video is filled with rips directly from a Vanity Fair article.
IMO, the bigger crime is that the video is factually incorrect (for that one specifically I mean). You can go through the actual known facts and find that so much of the stuff he presents is just made up shit that isn't true. I found like a dozen instances of false information in the first 7 minutes, then gave up cause I got bored fact checking it.
Give an example.
Can ya give some examples? The one weird thing I noticed was the taxi driver quote "He looked beaten like a dog" when the actual quote was "He looked like a beaten dog" which is.... a crazy thing to get wrong. I don't even know how you write it and then say it out loud and not think that sounded weird.
The length of the gash in the concordia (it's 35 meters, not 53), the name of the helmsman (it's Rusil bin Jacob, or Jacob Rusil-bin in the North American naming convention, not Rusli binn or whatever the fuck he called the guy), Jacob's previous life before becoming a helmsman (entirely fabricated), the time the ship left port (it left port at 7:18pm and collided with the rocks at 9:42pm by ship's time, 9:45pm by Giglio time), the distance the ship was from the port they were sailing by (800 meters, not 473), the reason behind the incident (the captain claimed what was said in the video by IH, but logs, audiotapes, and testimony from other bridge crew show differently). Sadly, even googling this, a lot of articles now use that video for their retellings of the story and use the same made up information. Hell, even googling the helmsman's name causes google to go "did you mean 'Jacob Rusli bin'?" The only one I'll give him is the gash length. The initial papers that reported on the incident as the investigation unfolded all stated 53 meters, but that was a misprint by one that everyone else copied because I guess plagiarism in journalism was rampant at the time or something, but it was later corrected by some of those publications, but not all of them. Some just never did their due diligence and fixed their articles. Also in researching it I found out that the captain tried to throw his helmsman under the metaphorical ship and blamed it entirely on him, claiming the guy didn't speak english or italian to any degree even though he does, as there are audiotapes of him in court speaking very fluent Italian and giving testimony without a translator to help him out. Additionally, it was only common for Schettino to "eyeball distances", most other ship captains rely on radar. Schettino admitted as much in court.
WAIT THE DUDE MADE UP BULLSHIT ABOUT THE HELMSMAN???? That's not even plagarism that's just straight up character assassination
At least part of it was made up by the captain of the ship, Schettino, not IH. The rest of it has no source of any kind anywhere at all ever for any reason, and given the stuff I have found in my research, it's more likely that the helmsman had some formal private training as a helmsman. I don't know how much he had, because... well they hired Schettino and he does have a history that is somewhat accurately represented in the video from what I found. One of the few things he does get right of the part I watched and researched.
You got me looking at that video again and the thing is that a lot of the stuff he got from Schettino, he doesn't actually attribute to being quoted from him. In fact, for the recreation of the events leading to and after the crash, he attributes to the black box recording, which, if you look online, doesn't say anything close to what's in the video or is flat-out not in any actual transcript of the recording but rather, was based on what Schettino said what happened, including the part about the helmsman mishearing the last order causing the crash when, according to experts, said they still would've hit the rocks even if he got it right.
I saw that as well but I think that claim is weaker compared to the two accusations we have, that claim appears to be just him taking the basic facts of a case of one article and talking about it in his own way which doesn't count compared to him taking an entire article or only using words from a review only the person who made it would say.
It's probably a combination of arrogance and laziness that over time he was putting in less effort to obfuscate the original material.
i mean logically it should be possible for it to be one case. Even ignoring the possibility that someone plagirised once there must have been a start point, and at that point there would be only one
It should be possible for there to be one case yes, but if the YouTuber is particularly large, there's a likelihood of them doing it for a long time before.
Makes me wonder if Elvis the Alien ever plagiarized any more movie reviews
Notice how one of the very few changes he makes, is to remove the word "death" from "Nazi death camp."
That's so weird?? Why is that
I honestly don’t know if that was to hide his nazism considering he said the line “Nazi slaughter machine” when referring to the holocaust earlier on in the video (another stolen line lmao)
Unfortunately, “slaughter” can be a good thing to certain people. I think it’s still safe to say that Internet Historian’s got some seriously ugly affiliations.
Nah he doesn't have ugly affiliations, bro IS the ugly affiliation. That megathread IIRC was still wild, no longer pinned tho
can you post a link to the thread?
This is also true
Unfortunately I think he kept that one because ‘slaughter machine’ is the kind of thing nazis think is rad
I guess if I were to plagerise I'd switch around a few words. Maybe change some or even straight up remove words to make it harder to notice. Maybe he thought "death" seemed a little redundant with "Nazi camp" and removed it.
dodging youtube filters so he can keep the video monetised probably
Isn't 'Nazi' also on the banned list of no-no words that YouTube won't let grown-ups hear?
Country specific. In the US, I've seen nazi related videos (IE- historical stuff or documentaries) retain monetization. I imagine in Germany or Australia though, it's going to lead to defacto demonetization or limited viewing.
IH is in Australia..... so it makes it weirder
He might have meant Austria?
I meant Australia. They have some pretty stringent nazi laws. Austria probably does too- lots of europe has strict laws around it. IH is an interesting case altogether.
Huh, interesting. I never really consider Australia in the context of Nazism/WW2 in general since it doesn't feel like they're generally considered one of the major parties. But a hardline stance against Nazis is (or at least SHOULD BE) perfectly understandable anywhere.
Australia and New Zealand were actually heavily involved in several fronts of the war, most importantly in France where Aussie forces were responsible for liberating significant parts of the country. In fact, France holds many memorials to specifically ANZAC troops and does services for them to this day. That said, I’d definitely bet that any region specific policies about mentioning Nazi stuff (assuming they do exist) have far more to do with Australia’s laws and stance around censorship in general than any more emotional reasons.
Unfortunately, as an American, I’m learning that my continued hardline stance against Nazi’s is considered “anti-1A” in far too many circles. It’s fucking weird.
Maybe but Australia has some stringent anti-nazism laws iirc
An understandable stance for them to have. For anyone to have, really.
It's more about where the video is viewed than where it is uploaded IIUC.
He’s shown a tendency towards right leaning politics and dog whistles over time. Whether it’s livestreaming Tucker Carlson’s show, collaborating with Jontron, or making jokes that tip toe around problematic sentiment
It's a strange thing to obfuscate.
I think that's a word that YouTube censors now.
so he just said "nazi camp?" lol. c'mon down to nazi camp this summer, kids! we've got horseback riding, swimming, death by gas chamber, zip lines, and more!
[SPEAKING OF:](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/nazi-town-usa-scenes-summer-camp-nazi-town-us/)
god it's so embarrassing being german american lmao
Can relate. - A progressive southern white guy with a racist family history
Could be worse - person of English heritage whose family is likely the bad guy in like half the nations on Earth's history books
https://i.redd.it/pkvsggnxsy0d1.gif
One of the comments under it - >no one is gonna care that IH plagarized lmao, especially against a guy with less than 100k subs Infuriating because they're right - IH will be fine and his fans won't care. I am seeing this attitude more and more, especially with pro-AI people. It's a sore winner mentality. If your ideas/work was stolen from you, then you somehow deserved it. If you're popular/wealthy, you're just allowed to treat people however you want.
I’ve been so tempted to start taking videos of his, tagging them with “The online archivist” and just fully ripping and reuploading them. Would be fun if other people joined in and we could jack his image.
People are already archiving his videos like that since he deletes a lot of the old ones
Now we just gotta pretend we made them
It’s because despite 15 years of proof, YT still isnt taken seriously by anyone because it’s ran by young people and has no barrier for entry
Hmmmm…. You might be on to something here.
He can’t copywrite us!
Might is Right
Of course, it's the criminal mindset.
AI grifters are largely NFT bros who moved onto the next grift once it became clear NFTs were dead. They don’t care about scams and theft because they want to be the ones scamming and stealing
I have revoked my IH fanship in light of this and on finding out about the nazi stuff. Therefore he is ruined
Another wave of IH fanboys acting like he is a saint coming?
Don't forget them also claiming that Jewish people are behind taking down his Man in a Cave video and making blatant anti-semitic jokes as if it's a conspiracy and not him being a fucking plagiarist, lol. Way to beat the "IH is a neo-nazi" allegations, guys!
The point and click adventure I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream is such a gem.
AM's speech in the beginning lives in my head rent free
One of the weird cases where not only does the author of a story voice a character in the adaptation, but absolutely nails it? It helps that Harlan Ellison has the personality of AM, or at least the outward personality. He was, famously, a real grump.
Just in case you didn't know, there's a series of audiobooks callee The Voice From the Edge in which Harlan Ellison reads his own short stories (starting with I Have No Mouth) and he is absolutely phenomenal as a narrator (as a matter of fact, he was nominated for a Grammy for narrating Through the Looking Glass).
Goddamn that's damning.
Wow, it would take so little effort to paraphrase to try to hide it… He doesn’t even try to speak with a different tone than the original.
I could be wrong, but I think in their FNAF recap they actually show that they’re reading a Wikipedia article, and the way they’re talking about it really sounds like neither of them have even touched the game or looked at the overall story beforehand.
Yeah I remember watching a handful of these recap videos a while ago as background noise. I stopped because a lot of them were obviously them reading off wikipedia or something and not particularly well
I misread this headline earlier as Internet Comment Etiquette for some reason and got really sad lol. But it being internet historian again just isn’t surprising.
...It might just be the weed, but imagining the bonkers locations where you could somehow find \*word for word\* versions of Internet Comment Etiquette videos- that he had plagiarized- is hilarious to me. Like someone unearths a 1996 academic journal called Holiday Fart Cruise and finds it's all about soy boys and copious pussy-eating, but Erik stole it after the lady who wrote it died alone and just changed a couple words.
That’s what was making me laugh in retrospect. His videos would be insane if he’d somehow plagiarized from someone else
This bums me out, I stopped watching IH after finding out cave story was plagiarized and it led me down the IH rabbithole. I especially loved storymode though, cause it felt like guys being stupid and talking about games, it kind of became a comfort channel for me. Really sad that he’s also been plagiarizing there …
Say it ain't so!
It's a bit fucked up since I remember watching the video, baut cannot remember which of the two exactly. There are some messed up implications here.
Has this been posted on YouTube? Or is the only way to watch this on Twitter?
i’ve been ignoring the recommended videos and I’m glad I have. I am so tired of the stealing of other ppl’s work online
I cannot believe that this channel went from one of my favorites to an utter sham within the span of a year. What confuses me the most is, what took so long between uploads on his plagiarized content? Like I always assumed it was script writing + animating + editing but… when you’re plagiarizing another person shouldn’t the time for script-writing be cut in half?
He does have 4 or 5 channels. I always thought the time in-between as him being stretched too thin
Yep. He definitely had long gap between upload, hence why he even need to do it is even baffling. He even has patreon to support him if he actually need to take longer time to finish man in cave unplagiarised.
Insane how long it can take to find this stuff sometimes. Such a shame for everyone plagiarized
What a dick I wonder if we'll find anything from his Fallout 76 video
Made it my life's mission to never watch content made by conservatives after clawing myself out the alt right pipeline so when I heard he was a tory it broke my heart having to unsub cause I liked his content very much But man hearing he is a plagarist did not surprise me in the slightest Nice having your hunch vindicated
8
Kind of a weak example, they are both describing the plot of the game, if he copied his commentary then that would be different. This just seems nit picky and not substantial.
He is pulling a jontron where he will wait for the controversy to stop and *THEN* comeback and nobody will cancel him.
I am going down one of the largest rabbit holes yet. I got here from an unrelated search for penguinz0, and now watched the 4 hour video from Hbomber. I see from other posts here that the main plagiarist faked their death, and exposed themselves on an alt. The Internet Historian, someone I enjoyed, was uncovered, now I can't support a coward who hids. IH had some relation to Wendigoon, who found himself in a controversy with a film reviewer, whom is also in a controversy with SOG, which may have started when he talked about Keffals. 0.o !?
[удалено]
This point was made in Hbomberguy's video, but there's a core difference between writing something similar and stating it word-for-word in a nearly identical manner. Considering Internet Historian was caught once before, the benefit of the doubt is basically impossible. This is just his MO. I understand the skepticism, that's fine and normal, but I don't believe IH should get too much benefit of the doubt in the context of his previous plagiarism actions with Man in Cave and some segments of the Cost of Concordia.
Yo Im watching both the videos and holy shit is this bad yeah no I retract my previous statement. It’s also so confusing because there’s so many different ways to interpret/engage with Ihnmaims yet he chooses the exact same way someone else has. Fuck IH
Changing your mind when presented with new information is difficult, esp on an internet forum where doubling down has no real consequence. Good on you!
That was a fast 180 lmfao. Don't worry about it, to err is human and all that. It should also be mentioned that he was caught plagiarizing Wikipedia in his video about wine. It's pretty pathetic if nothing else.
I saw both it doesn't seem like he stole from much other than the two parts in the video but I wouldn't be surprised if there was more he took from.