this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
296 points (93.8% liked)
PC Master Race
15226 readers
67 users here now
A community for PC Master Race.
Rules:
- No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No NSFW content.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘stupid’ questions. The world won’t be made better or worse by snarky comments schooling naive newcomers on Lemmy.
Notes:
- PCMR Community Name - Our Response and the Survey
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not sure these are the receipts GamersNexus believes them to be. They're all kinda stretching things into a gray area.
The plagiarism part is straight up incorrect. LMG did not say that their discussion was original reporting. The WAN show is explicitly a podcast reacting to news articles and events (WAN = Weekly Analysis and News). Plagerism needs a "passing off as your own" piece, while IANAL given react content typically ends up in the fair use category because of additional commentary and thoughts being added, the WAN show doesn't have to disclose sources. Usually on WAN show they mention where they heard of the story, and not mentioning GN is a dick move, but it's not plagiarism.
The history of not following up on issues was definitely better addressed in the original GN video. But at the same time, this just makes it seems like GN is trying to use the argument "Hey we warned you once that some of your methodologies aren't great and led to skewed results and you didn't really react, so now we're gonna release an hour long video on all of your previous fuck ups and not tell you, k thx bi*"
To Linus's original point on not getting a heads up, that's not industry standard behavior and also kind of a dick move.
The unprofessional communication part I can go either way with. Would I talk to my boss like that? No. Technical mentors and peers that I had a good relationship with? Absolutely and I have done it. By the book it's unprofessional it's hardly the damning statements Gamers Nexus is trying to sell them as.
Also for those of you who have not watched any LMG content since that original GN video, LMG has cleaned up their act quite a bit, so credit where credit is due. Linus also only asked for receipts since he was getting increasingly frustrated with several negative comments coming from GN whereas on the LMG side they've continued to praise and recommend GN content
I have not finished reading the article, but "Receipt 1" is just embarrassing to GN in my eyes. They claim LMG never addresses the plagierism and provides an email chain where Linus tell him what exactly LMG is going to do in response and GN responds indicating the solution is good. Where is the problem?
Specifically on publicly addressing it, Linus said they will pin a comment and Steve said that's OK. That's what happened. Is it truly unresolved? Just reading the emails provided makes it really look like an open and closed case.
I also dont get why they include the additional context in that part of their response. What does GN's recent criticism of LMG have to do with that interaction?
Sorry, on mobile and just had to type something out before I forgot, because this is a long read.