0
()
submitted a long while ago by @ to c/@
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rognaut@lemmy.world 161 points 1 month ago

It's unbelievable how much hate for LTT there is on this platform. I like them. No one is perfect. This investigation from a third party is a good thing and the findings are good as well. The statement about defamation, I feel, is warranted because the ex-employee made a ton of very damning claims and really hurt their image. The Fediverse is a great example of this damage.

The hate from this community towards LTT is extreme and unfounded.

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 78 points 1 month ago

I'm glad this report showed their innocence but I unsubscribed after the GN/Billet Labs thing.

I might check them out again later but that situation made me kind of uncomfortable with supporting them

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 1 month ago

fwiw, they changed their process and output amount a lot after that

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago

I saw that which is why I'm willing to give them another chance. I really don't think Linus is a scummy guy or anything, they just grew too fast without thinking.

I haven't had a strong desire to get back into the channel but if a video pops up on my feed again, I might resub.

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 1 month ago

personally, I think they handled the situation the best way the could.

Gamers Nexus had genuine good criticism, and they took it, took a moment to pause and implemented fixes.

Mistakes happen. And they learned from them

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

I agree but it did shake my confidence enough to make me back off. I watched LTT mostly for entertainment (GN for news and reviews) and I've since "filled that spot" so it'll probably only make its way back into my watch list once a different thing falls off.

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

According to who?

Tbh I don't trust anyone that reacted the way Linus did in response to GN's investigation or that only changes things once they get called out on it publically.

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 10 points 1 month ago

Okay, let's go back in time, gamers Nexus just releases the video. You're Linus. How do you respond?

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

If I were Linus I'd stay as far the fuck away from any investigation as possible if for no other reason than having anything to do with it would sow doubt in any conclusion favorable to LTT.

No one should trust the conclusions of an investigation paid for by the accused any more than you should trust an inspector that was hired by the real estate agent selling you a house and for the exact same reasons.

[-] IronKrill@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

... the investigation has nothing to do with the GamersNexus video, so your reply is irrelevant to the parent comment. But since you posted, I'll take the dive: you really think it's better they don't investigate? If you were Linus, you're saying you would rather bury your head in the sand about potential employee abuse because your reputation is too important? Sounds like your morals are worse than LTT.

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 50 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The defamation statement was maybe a bit much, but also warranted. People need to know that just throwing accusations out there that are just plainly not true is actually legally problematic.

I also don't get why people feel this is "threatening people who want to speak up in the future".

If your "speaking up" has merit, it's not defarmation. Plain and simple.

Companies make mistakes (and aparently some were made in this case, and dealt with).

But I find it concerning that people also just blindly trust any and all claims that individuals make about these kind of situations. Believe that they are telling the truth, but also verify that this is actually true. The latter part is important. Blind trust is as damaging as not doing anything at all about a proble, There are people out there who get laid off for legitimate reasons, and try to retaliate for that. Even by claiming BS reasons.

[-] dustyData@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

I wish you never have to find yourself facing a corporation. The power imbalance is so massive that you feel like an ant, it's the most disempowering experience anyone could face in legal terms. LTT could destroy people's lives and it would be decades if ever, for them to ever have to face consequences.

This is why I always default to believing the individual over the corporation. The corporation has no soul, no heart, no conscience and no remorse. Imagine being a person who wants to speak up about something else you know for certain happened, but a million dollar law firm just put in writing that such kind of thing didn't happen. You have no recourse or power, it's your word against a literal army of lawyers. Regardless of whether the investigation was good or not. The result still has a silencing effect.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 month ago

I don't have LTT, I just find it worthless. Their content is frequently shallow, I dislike the presentation (clickbait-y titles and thumbnails, annoying segways, etc), and I find Linus himself annoying. Then again, I do watch their content from time to time, if they have something worth watching. That's not very often, but they do make some decent content occasionally. I rarely care about PC shenanigans, but sometimes I'll watch Jays2Cents if I want some of that (he's perhaps more annoying than Linus, but it is what it is, I guess).

I mostly watch Gamers Nexus for reviews, news, and benchmarks. I find the delivery much more in-line with what I'd like, though I find Steve a bit long-winded so I tend to skip a bunch in the videos. But the content is high quality.

To each their own though. My coworker really like LTT and went to LTX recently, so I'll watch a video here and there for water-cooler discussions.

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 month ago

It's unbelievable how much hate for LTT there is on this platform.

They have a huge reach and tremendous influence, but are not always conscientious, careful, and thorough as they should be given their sway. Still, that doesn't justify the vitriol.

[-] erwan@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 month ago

I just don't like Linus because he's annoying and abuses clickbait thumbnails and titles.

Some of their videos (from other people than himself) are good, but usually I'll avoid LTT content all together.

For that reason I'm not really sure what happened, and I don't really care.

[-] ericswpark@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 month ago

He said previously that he also dislikes the clickbait thumbnails, but they do it because it works. If they adhered to what the enthusiasts wanted their view counts would drop and they wouldn't be able to have so many employees on payroll.

[-] erwan@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

Maybe, whatever. It's just too annoying for me to click on that shit.

[-] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 6 points 1 month ago

Same. While Linus is part of the problem for using practices he claims to disagree with, I'd rather be part of the solution by not rewarding it with attention.

[-] ericswpark@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

He said previously that he also dislikes the clickbait thumbnails, but they do it because it works. If they adhered to what the enthusiasts wanted their view counts would drop and they wouldn't be able to have so many employees on payroll.

[-] DolphinMath@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

Have you ever looked at the DeArrow extension?

[-] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago

I watch almost all of the LTT videos as well as most of the videos across all the other LMG channels. While I think I'd probably get along really well with Linus as a friend or acquaintance, and I don't necessarily have any issue with him as a person, he has had some pretty irritating takes and used his bully pit to essentially swat away or mock legitimate criticism on his takes. Usually about things that are outside of his core competencies. The ones that come to mind are some of the things he has said about unions (he's not anti Union to be clear), the backpack, car dependency in North America, and worker cooperatives.

I personally think it would be pretty interesting if he had experts in those areas come on the WAN show to talk about those things. Instead he does the super ADHD thing (something he has admitted he has, and something I have definitely recognized him doing having had a partner with severe ADHD exhibit similar behaviors) where he spends seconds finding an article, skims it not noting much nuance, and then somehow simultaneously says something confidently while also saying he doesn't know what he's talking about. He often wants the best of both worlds. He wants to be taken seriously while also being given the latitude to joke around and just make hot takes.

Even with all that said, as stated above, I will still watch most of his videos and wish him well. Recognizing the flaws in something I enjoy doesn't mean I hate something, especially if I take the time to voice it. It usually means I care and I want to see something I like or that is good improve and get better.

The hate from this community towards LTT is extreme and unfounded.

Are you just going to ignore Linus and the companies abhorrent response to the situation? That alone should make anyone lose any respect they had for them.

[-] Aphelion@lemm.ee 22 points 1 month ago

Yeah, same for me. Linus' response was so stereotypicaly defensive, dismissive and shitty, I lost all trust. Couple that with GN's fact checking of LMGs sloppyness, and I was done ever watching their channel.

[-] fjordbasa@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

I agree, I don’t think it’s unfounded, their immediate response was really tone deaf and I’ve yet to see them own up to that.

I’m a bit uncertain as to how I feel about the overall response. I don’t exactly fault people for getting publicly upset, and I don’t hate anyone for still watching. I personally don’t feel the need to broadcast my thoughts. I canceled my floatplane subscription and stopped watching LMG videos on YouTube, but I haven’t tried to get anyone else to stop- or really even talked about them much at all, save for this post

[-] Rognaut@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

No, you're right. That was shitty, but this report sorta puts a different light on it. I would hope that Linus was caught off guard by the allegations and responded poorly. I'm clearly giving him the benefit of the doubt though and I hope I'm not wrong.

Time may tell. Idk.

[-] priapus@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

there are a lot of reasons to dislike LTT outside of this incident. I don't have anything against them, but I can understand why others would.

[-] Almrond@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

I have no issue with LTT as a whole, I just really don't like Linus. He portrays an almost weaponized incompetence in a lot of computing topics and doesn't accurately represent his own lack of understanding to the audience that couldn't tell on their own. By all accounts there is one hell of a team working there, they just chose a really bad face to represent the actual content.

Just my personal take for what it's worth.

[-] poke@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago

It's one of those things you just have to accept about this kind of social media and, in a sense, Lemmy users specifically. I'm not too surprised that parts of this community are in the camp of disliking things because they are popular and don't fit their specific wants/needs. Many people are here because they dislike the more popular Reddit, after all.

In a more general sense, most people when they don't like something are neutral about it, and those people won't show up in the comment section, so all we see are these more "extreme" opinions.

I enjoy watching LTT videos, but you won't find me jumping into comment sections saying I'm a huge fan and there's no way they could have done something bad because I like their channel, for example. Getting the independent audit was a good idea, and I'm glad they went through it. I don't think the defamation comment was necessary, but that doesn't mean the rest of the message is worth ignoring.

[-] ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

An investigation from a neutral third party is a good thing, but in this case LTT hired the third party investigator so the investigators obviously have an incentive to find LTT innocent of all charges since LTT is paying them through Linus Media Group (LMG). It's better than nothing, but it's like when there's an internal affairs investigation into police misconduct... by the police... Nobody believes it and for good reason.

[-] PotatoPotato@lemmy.world 64 points 1 month ago

Of course LTT hired the investigator, who else would hire an investigator?

[-] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 52 points 1 month ago

The law firm would be putting themselves on the line for LTT if there was any further legal action, or if the subject of the investigation brought forth more evidence.

I doubt LTT is big enough to give them the incentive to do that.

Hiring a third party investigator is not the same as internal affairs. Internal affairs have only one client and little incentive to bite the hand that feeds them.

If LTT goes down after this and it comes out that the law firm missed something major or outright lied, it would call into question every investigation they've done (at least recently) and destroy their reputation.

[-] JRush@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 month ago

If the law firm bungled the investigation, it would affect their reputation and future business. Wouldn't that mean they have a monetary incentive not to favor LMG in their investigation?

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

Who would be paying for an investigation if not LMG? Firms don’t hire auditors/investigators to give them a rosy report. They want the truth so they can adjust their processes so they don’t spend more money on regulatory actions/fines.

If the report is bad they just don’t release it to the public. But a third party audit lying to a firm to make them look good does not provide value. The company isn’t biased just because they are being paid by LMG, that’s just not how it works. LMG could just say they investigated themselves and found no wrong doing if that was their objective.

Saying that you don’t believe the report because the company investigating it was paid for by PMG shows that you are biased more than they are.

[-] puppy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Firms don't hire auditors/investigators to give them a rosy report.

That's exactly why firms do it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwbq9OsHvp4

But a third party audit lying to a firm to make them look good does not provide value.

Why not? Making them look good IS providing value according to the client that pays tha audit firm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTxt96DwaFk

If the absolute auditing giant EY doesn't say anything bad on behalf of their clients, this firm doing it is certainly within realms of possibility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_0XEIFGK5o

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 1 month ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=qwbq9OsHvp4

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=CTxt96DwaFk

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=C_0XEIFGK5o

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 14 points 1 month ago

Withholding payment based on results with a negative outlook is illegal.

[-] essteeyou@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

If the results are negative you just pay them and don't release the results.

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 0 points 1 month ago

Yeah, but there's still the possibility of them releasing it. Anyway, my point is that there's no monetary incentive for them to skew the results.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Not within the span of one client, no, but businesses would have an incentive to hire firms that are more likely to find them innocent.

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

The law firm will gloss over as much as it can do safely, but if there was clear evidence of wrongdoing, they would have to report it or risk severe consequences. I am not familiar with Canadian regulations so I cannot comment on what those consequences would exactly be, but there would definitely be some.

[-] 0xD@infosec.pub 3 points 1 month ago

That's not how this works. Maybe if you get some business consultants, but this ain't it. Just because you hire them yourself, doesn't mean that they'll fall in line with your wishes.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

There's a big difference, it's not like Linus did the investigation himself like the police do

[-] Xanis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

It's important to remember that the people who are okay with this report probably won't speak up. Those who find reasons to not be okay will speak loudly. Personally, I take reports like this with a grain of salt and an assumption we are told only the good or neutral bits. I then decide if those bits are enough to constitute good will. In this I feel they are.

So good job: LTT.

[-] Rognaut@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah, I definitely see that now. The loud ones are apparently all I saw.

this post was submitted on 01 Jan 0001
0 points (NaN% liked)

0 readers
0 users here now

founded a long while ago