RE: 1263 likes3 Aug 2025 16:15
Shychap, Congratulations, you remembered my name, Josh. But we both know the game you're attempting to play. You expose yourself.
Let me be clear from the outset: I’m not here to fling petty insults or join the mob you seem to fear. But I do want to cut through the posturing and address something you’ve claimed publicly — something that simply doesn’t add up.
You’ve stated — quite confidently — that you’ve never ducked a debate, never hidden behind a wall, and never shied away from engaging criticism in plain sight. You even went so far as to challenge others to come “out from behind the paywall” to confront you openly. But that’s the problem, isn’t it? Because when Elric did precisely that — when he directly engaged with your critique in a public, visible forum — you sidestepped, several times, if I recall.
You said you didn’t have access. You claimed your trial had lapsed. That you couldn’t respond in the comments. An excuse, if ever there was one. We know this was not true at the time. Elric confirmed this, and for insurance, made the article open source for a period. Again, from memory.
And yet, Elric — the very person you were critiquing — publicly thanked you for being a subscriber. He didn’t attack you; in fact, he went out of his way to defend your critique as informed, engaged, even principled. He said you weren’t part of some deranged anti-fandom, but rather someone pushing for greater rigour and fairness. He was fair to you.
He gave you every benefit of the doubt. He invited you to respond — civilly, reasonably — in the comments section, where the conversation actually lived. And you chose not to. Instead, you insisted the debate be held here, on your turf, in front of your trolling friends, where the odds were stacked for you because we all know, trolls are more likely to engage in the baiting and bullying, and few will have the courage or conviction to defend Elric.
That’s not bravery. That’s theatre.
I’m not the first to point this out to you, that you had access, were a member, and yet pretended you weren’t. That your strategy wasn’t to engage, but to provoke. Elric, to his credit, didn’t accuse you of deception. He simply asked a straightforward question — one you still haven’t answered:
“What have I ever said that is deliberately deceptive and manipulative?” This was one of your claims.
You accused him of precisely that. So why not respond — not here, not in some orchestrated pile-on — but there, where he invited you to do so?
I’ll be blunt: If you want to maintain even a shred of credibility, the very least you owe him — and yourself — is an honest answer.
Or shall we just call this what it looks like — a carefully choreographed dodge, dressed up as defiance?
P.S. Oh, and yes — absolutely, I’m thrilled to be part of the so-called “cult,” if that’s what we’re calling people who can read without frothing a
Sign In
Follow the stocks
