this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025
403 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45454 readers
4614 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Warning, this story is really horrific and will be heartbreaking for any fans of his, but Neil Gaiman is a sadistic [not in the BDSM sense] sexual predator with a predilection for very young women.

Paywall bypass: https://archive.is/dfXCj

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

You people cry shitheel with so little substantiating evidence.

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

15 accusations, voicemails of him setting up hush money payments, NDAs, none of this points to lacking merit. 1 woman, yeah it could be false or misleading. 15? Either this is very very likely to be true, or someone with tons of money has convinced a huge swath of real people in his life and not total strangers to publicly destroy him in a conspiracy that would be on the scale of a military operation. How much money would it take for you to knowingly lie about an innocent person you babysat for, who, if this isn't true, is lovely to know by all professional accounts. What kind of dollar figure would that take? Would you be willing to do this without possessing the money already? Would you demand that in advance? Who would contact you to get you into this conspiracy? Certainly not the benefactor. How would they know you wouldn't flip on them in a heartbeat? Or simply out them to begin because you're not a horrible person. 15 times. Successfully. That's what this requires. People who are known to have worked for him. That's you're pool. That's a very shallow pool. 15 successful payoffs with no deserters or whistleblowers? Accusing someone of a crime isn't fruitful. You don't get fame or money out of this, particularly if you have 15 victims on your side sharing the supposed limelight and potential pay day. And why if that's all they wanted, why would they go further than blackmail? They were already getting paid off. More women came out after the first 5? More? 10 people were like oh, they are getting 1/5th of the spotlight. I want that. I'll get 1/15th of a spotlight! All I have to do is ruin the life of the rich guy paying me off right now. It makes NO sense.

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I actually never met Neil Gaiman, or the people making the accusations, or the person who wrote the article. How about you?

[–] Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is your bar that you have to meet the victim to believe them?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Actually yes. Before I condemn somebody I insist upon meeting the fellow, interviewing the witnesses and seeing the evidence.

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

With what expertise and training? Do we all have to wait until big_fat_fluffy has concluded his investigations before we can trust that any criminal activity has occurred?

[–] Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Yea, the legal systems has slowed to a crawl with this new policy

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Do you have to meet the meteorologist and check his data and model to believe their weather forecast? Do you have to meet every single politician, scientist, news reporter, just everyone, to believe any news at all?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago

If I'm going to revile somebody, yes.

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

You're THIS ridiculous? OK. Utterly pointless. Next time lead with ''I'm insane and don't believe anything or anyone unless I've personally met them myself'' save everyone some time.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is this you? What is your evidence that everyone does what you claim they do?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You are arguing that you can't know things other people tell you. So how do you know that everyone fakes it? Did everyone tell you? Every single person? Are they all telling the truth?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's just weak evidence. Hearsay.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's literally what you're arguing against believing in this thread.

I guess it's different when you do it.

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Your leap of logic is rather tenuous. Can you rephrase?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No it isn't. You just don't like the criticism. You're fine believing what you call hearsay when it suits you.

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm really not understanding your argument

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Just state it plainly. Succinctly. Clearly. Then there will be no room for uncertainty.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Read next time:

You’re fine believing what you call hearsay when it suits you.

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And what hearsay am I accused of believing?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Once again, read:

Or are you going to actually claim that you talked to "everybody" wherever "down here" is and they all told you they faked their cover letters and none of them lied about it?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh good lord, is it the tiny text at the top? I'm just not seeing it.

How about you just tell me.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nah, how about you stop trolling before you get banned for it?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Just say it. It's easy. I mean I assume it's easy. Asking me to pick through your "meme" is ridiculous. Just state your dumb accusation already.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

And with that added bit of incivility, you have made your choice.

[–] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

ETA: man I'm glad i responded as i did, the poster I was replying to is clearly a troll.