The Steven Zwartjes Saga Continues - Possible Aztec Strat Vid Coming Soon?!?

[RWG]

Wow! Henrik EPICALLY OWNS SZ with a tidy COMPENDIUM of inalterable FACTS, TRUTH & KNOWLEDGE and COMPLETELY SHUTS DOWN all hope SZ's supporters had of REDEMPTION!  Yikes!

--

This is now proven to be equally as impossible as Dragster 5.51.  Steven Z is literally the Todd Rogers of N64.

[Jonesy]

All of this seems to confirm

This is now proven

I'm curious if Henrik shares your conclusion, though I suspect he might demur given his previous comments on Dragster and his apparent intellectual honestly.

[KVD]

Wow! Henrik EPICALLY OWNS SZ with a tidy COMPENDIUM of inalterable FACTS, TRUTH & KNOWLEDGE and COMPLETELY SHUTS DOWN all hope SZ's supporters had of REDEMPTION!  Yikes!

--

This is now proven to be equally as impossible as Dragster 5.51.  Steven Z is literally the Todd Rogers of N64.

[Whiteted]

This is now proven to be equally as impossible as Dragster 5.51.

What even.
I'm by no means putting down Henrik's neat (as ever) analysis, but this is just showing how it works for 2 guards. The 2 lines to the object which it's trying to avoid are a really nice find, but probably aren't too relevant to 1 guard. And I'd agree that the red target position probably needs to go into the glass to get the guard to open it (I didn't look into it too much but I think it at least flicked behind the door on s1 each time I got the door open), but this doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, categorically rule out 1-guard.

[Shadow]

You are the one guilty of sensationalism if you're trying to sound the alarm that I'm going to completely destroy SZ's life, get him fired from work, divorced, and have his wife take custody of his kids. 

The hyperbole in this thread is ridiculous. SZ is being BLACKMAILED and DEFAMED and WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

Yeah, many posts here are ridiculous. Let him defend himself instead, which he would if this was that important to him. I would if my wife, children and job were at stake, like quite a few here seem to think it is for him.

If your wife leaves you and takes the kids because of a video on youtube about you possibly faking some times on a video game your relationship probably wasnt working out to begin with...

Congratulations. You want hyperbole? You've managed to debunk and ridicule a position literally no one in this thread has stated besides yourselves. Seriously, who are you talking to?

[RWG]

Guys, my post was a Ben Shapiro meme for Pete's sake.....

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/ben-shapiro-destroys-liberals

Are we not allowed to meme around here anymore?

[AEB]

Only speaking for myself but my post was indeed hyperbole on purpose just to make a simple point, which is that some people in this thread make it sound more serious than it is (to me personally, and I consider some posts a bit hyperbole because of that, which is why my post also was hyperbole to show that I think it's a bit silly) and that I'm sure Steven doesn't need guardians and is able to defend himself if he wanted to. I don't have time to quote all the posts I'm referring to right now but there have been a few of them that are fair to ridicule in my opinion.

I only care about the Aztec strat/1:31 claim though so I guess I should stay out of this since it's evolved to a lot more than that and I lack the knowledge to judge most of it and what the outcome might be.

Btw, I definitely think his proven times should stay.

[Huzi]

If your wife leaves you and takes the kids because of a video on youtube about you possibly faking some times on a video game your relationship probably wasnt working out to begin with...

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard dude. What is wrong with you.

[RWG]

All of this seems to confirm

This is now proven

I'm curious if Henrik shares your conclusion, though I suspect he might demur given his previous comments on Dragster and his apparent intellectual honestly.

You do realize that Henrik is Swedish, right?  And English is not his first language.  He posted three videos which PROVE that SZ's one guard glass strat can never work.  He has empirically PROVEN this.  You are using an incredibly massive strawman by picking out that he used the word "seems" instead of "proves" in his post; when the videos he posted do indeed PROVE (or in this case, disprove) SZ's strategy entirely.

You are literally discounting everything shown in the videos, and choosing to base your entire perspective on a single word that Henrik, a non-native English speaker, wrote in his post, where he proved the strategy is impossible

[Jonesy]

I haven't looked at the Dragster case myself, but yeah, it should be possible to actually prove stuff through assembly code analysis if it's simple enough. In the case of Goldeneye you're correct, it's far too complex.

This statement informed my interpretation of his most recent response, which appears to corroborate his use of "seems". Like I said, I'm curious if he agrees with your take (or was it just a meme?) that this constitutes "proof".

FWIW, I have no stake in this and I'm not discounting Henrik's findings. Just consider me to be QA. If Henrik states that his findings are as rigorous as the Dragster findings, I think that would constitute a win. If not, then at the very least we are collectively becoming more knowledgeable about the game.

[falzy211]

It’s not about his wife and kids.

It’s closely linking him with Todd Rogers. Maybe not in your line of work. But employers do look
Up their potential employees. Todd Rogers has a bad reputation, soo much soonthat non speed run people know him. More and more these sorts of
Things are putting people in trouble

The glass start working or not isn’t really relevant. It probably doesn’t work and he probably lied. The question is what is a proportionate response

Goose appears to have a conflict of interest here. He wants a shocking click bait like title to make
Money, but you don’t really have anything like the evidence to claim them as similar. Because of this his view is being skewered. SZ is more like the guy he covered on his gta video than Todd

[stefankok]

Henrik's post is quite interesting and demonstrates the working of the second guard openings quite well, the red target position line must most certainly be inside the glass in order to have a glass opening occur. Should be useful for Goose to show in his video at least. But this honestly doesn't prove that it's impossible imo. I'd say that you'll need to find a way to prove that the red target position can never under any circumstance go inside the glass while doing the one guard lure. SZ mentioned some stuff that the angles(from Bond and the Guard approaching the glass) were important in order to make it work iirc. But i'm no expert, just floating thoughts. In the end the only one that should bother with this is Steven himself, since he was the one who claimed it worked.

For anybody that wants to find more about the Dragster case, feel free to read through the Dispute thread from Twin Galaxies(good luck, it's 5400+ posts long lol) https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/175364-Dispute-Dick-Moreland-Atari-2600-VCS-Dragster-NTSC-Game-1-Difficulty-B-Fastest-Time-Player-Todd-Rogers-Score-05-51/page2

[RWG]

It’s not about his wife and kids. It’s closely linking him with Todd Rogers. Maybe not in your line of work. But employers do look
Up their potential employees. Todd Rogers has a bad reputation, soo much soonthat non speed run people know him. More and more these sorts of
Things are putting people in trouble

Todd Rogers is not quite "literally Hitler" dude.  It's not like I'm making a video "THE MOST RACIST MAN SINCE HITLER SHOWS HIS FACE!"  I'm making a video "The Todd Rogers of N64."  A random employer in Netherlands doesn't know anything about Todd Rogers from the next Sven van der Beek down the street.

The glass start working or not isn’t really relevant. It probably doesn’t work and he probably lied.

So in the name of being a steward for speedrunning history, I'm not allowed to document this extremely high profile and significant lie in the community?

The glass strat not working IS relevant, because if it worked; or if never claimed it worked when it didn't, we wouldn't be here in the first place!

The question is what is a proportionate response

Goose appears to have a conflict of interest here. He wants a shocking click bait like title to make
Money, but you don’t really have anything like the evidence to claim them as similar.

No dude, I've already given you a massive list of evidence to claim them as similar in Reply #281.

Because of this his view is being skewered. SZ is more like the guy he covered on his gta video than Todd

And I titled that video "BIGGEST CHEATING SCANDAL IN GTA HISTORY!"  You are deeming that to be an appropriate response?  How is that any less "extreme" and "clickbait" than "THE TODD ROGERS OF N64?"

[Wuldntuliktono]

SZ claims that it took about 10 hours to get the 1 guard strat to work yet how many hours have people put in over the years since trying to repeat this? Ill add another 40 euros into the pot to anyone who can prove the strat works. I dont get why theres such a backlash against goose making this video about SZ possibly cheating but every other video was fine. It would be nice to get all the facts squeezed down into one video summary.

[falzy211]

Perhaps it’s since you are using his real name which is traceable to him
Personally rather than a forum name or pseudonym which is known by the speed running community

Click baiting before doesn’t make it acceptable now. You can justify it how you like. The mk forums didn’t think much of it either

[RWG]

Did you miss the numerous posts in this thread where I pointed out that I will not be using SZ's real name in the title, tags, or metadata of the video?

You seemed to hugely misinterpret the post where I said "search Steven Zwartjes into Youtube and you do not see any of my videos." (Reply #279).  The meaning was that, I do not include the traceable names of people who do not wish to be included.  But you seemed to think this was "belligerent and irresponsible" or something.

I'm starting to think that perhaps it's not that we don't see eye to eye on this... it's that you made up YOUR mind already that I'm some kind of vicious, life ruining, clickbaiting, Content Copping YouTuber, who is literally going to do to Zwartjes what idubbbz did to Leafy, and it seems you are refusing to understand or realize that I, 100%, unequivocally, will NOT do this to SZ.

[Saltkillzsnails]

Check out his responses on the Andrew Kent thread back in February. Will tell you all you need to know about him making up his mind a long time ago

[Retrix]

I would think the video might prompt SZ to redouble his efforts if he indeed didn't lie. Would like to be proven wrong still. I've had my fair share of glitches where I could say, "it happened, no really," like on Egypt when I got the Baron to fade without a death animation. Alas the footage is gone and it goes down as a strange occurrence. The problem is SZ claimed a WR with no proof and refuses to let go. you need proof mate  this is modern speedrunning. That's just how it is now. Please, prove us wrong. We love game breaking stuff if it brings the time down. (Well I do.)

[Smit]

Guys, the video won't affect his real life at all. Just make the video, let the /r/speedrun trolls and Gooselings post their hate on youtube and let it die out within a week please.

Thank you.

[AEB]

My thought about Henrik's wording is that he's scientifically minded and humble because you can't say it's 100 % sure the strat doesn't work, "only" 99.9 % or close to it.

[Wyst3r]

This statement informed my interpretation of his most recent response, which appears to corroborate his use of "seems". Like I said, I'm curious if he agrees with your take (or was it just a meme?) that this constitutes "proof".

FWIW, I have no stake in this and I'm not discounting Henrik's findings. Just consider me to be QA. If Henrik states that his findings are as rigorous as the Dragster findings, I think that would constitute a win. If not, then at the very least we are collectively becoming more knowledgeable about the game.

This is now proven to be equally as impossible as Dragster 5.51.

What even.
I'm by no means putting down Henrik's neat (as ever) analysis, but this is just showing how it works for 2 guards. The 2 lines to the object which it's trying to avoid are a really nice find, but probably aren't too relevant to 1 guard. And I'd agree that the red target position probably needs to go into the glass to get the guard to open it (I didn't look into it too much but I think it at least flicked behind the door on s1 each time I got the door open), but this doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, categorically rule out 1-guard.

Henrik's post is quite interesting and demonstrates the working of the second guard openings quite well, the red target position line must most certainly be inside the glass in order to have a glass opening occur. Should be useful for Goose to show in his video at least. But this honestly doesn't prove that it's impossible imo. I'd say that you'll need to find a way to prove that the red target position can never under any circumstance go inside the glass while doing the one guard lure. SZ mentioned some stuff that the angles(from Bond and the Guard approaching the glass) were important in order to make it work iirc. But i'm no expert, just floating thoughts. In the end the only one that should bother with this is Steven himself, since he was the one who claimed it worked.

For anybody that wants to find more about the Dragster case, feel free to read through the Dispute thread from Twin Galaxies(good luck, it's 5400+ posts long lol) https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/175364-Dispute-Dick-Moreland-Atari-2600-VCS-Dragster-NTSC-Game-1-Difficulty-B-Fastest-Time-Player-Todd-Rogers-Score-05-51/page2

While technically all this is true, I do think there is a major flaw in this type of reasoning. Grav already mentioned the unfalsifiability problem, but to add to that, what you're asking for is essentially rigorous mathematical proof, which only really works for well... mathematics. In pretty much every other area of science, that level of proof is impossible, yet there are things within those fields that are considered "known" or even "facts". In fact, most things in life that are considered facts do not have this level of proof. It would be very unpractical to require this, since it would mean we would never know anything for certain. For example, murderers or criminals would always be found not guilty, and we would still wonder if the earth was flat.

From Wikipedia's page for "proof":

In most disciplines, evidence is required to prove something. Evidence is drawn from experience of the world around us, with science obtaining its evidence from nature,[11] law obtaining its evidence from witnesses and forensic investigation,[12] and so on. A notable exception is mathematics, whose proofs are drawn from a mathematical world begun with axioms and further developed and enriched by theorems proved earlier.

Exactly what evidence is sufficient to prove something is also strongly area-dependent, usually with no absolute threshold of sufficiency at which evidence becomes proof.[13][14][15] In law, the same evidence that may convince one jury may not persuade another. Formal proof provides the main exception, where the criteria for proofhood are ironclad and it is impermissible to defend any step in the reasoning as "obvious" (except for the necessary ability of the one proving and the one being proven to, to correctly identify any symbol used in the proof.);[16] for a well-formed formula to qualify as part of a formal proof, it must be the result of applying a rule of the deductive apparatus of some formal system to the previous well-formed formulae in the proof sequence.[17]

And "fact":

A fact is a statement that is consistent with objective reality or can be proven with evidence. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability — that is, whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable careful observation or measurement (by experiments or other means).

The problem with the statement "maybe there's a magical way to get the red line to point to behind the glass with 1 guard" is that there's no evidence or logical reason for why that would ever happen. You might as well say that "maybe there's a way to warp directly to the end of every level and have all objectives magically complete". But as Stefan said, the burden of proof is on SZ, not on the-elite. Personally, I think the most reasonable thing to do is to consider the 1-guard strat to be fake until proven real, rather than the other way around.

[KVD]

Nice conclusion by Wyst3r, sounding like the Richard Dawkins of the Elite.
I agree with this reasoning, the burden of proof is with SZ. Therefore backroll (or even removal) is ok.

But by the same token it should protect SZ from being called a PROVEN liar.

If someone told me (1) God is real, I'd say the burden of proof is with you. If someone told me the (2) theory of evolution is wrong I could be outraged enough to go into a rant (or make a video  ), precisely because that the latter is a falsifiable statement (different degrees of uncertainty between statement 1 and 2).

But whatever, what Eise said, bring on the video.

[SimThreat]

The strat being proven impossible if proof that Steven is a liar.

The burden of proof is on the person claiming that Steven is a liar. The proof of this claim is that the strategy he claims to have done is not possible.

This isn't complicated.

[Ray Ruane]

One thing that I'm surprised nobody is mentioning is, let's say Steven is telling the truth. Would he really get a 30-odd second untied once on a level - using a strategy that it allegedly took him "1 hour" to do - and never played the level again?!

Surely if he discovered this he would have had to have grinded it down to 1:50, 1:45, 1:40 and so on, but NO, 1 fucking 31 straight away.

Of course this isn't proof per se, but it just makes it even more un-believable.

[stefankok]

One thing that I'm surprised nobody is mentioning is, let's say Steven is telling the truth. Would he really get a 30-odd second untied once on a level - using a strategy that it allegedly took him "1 hour" to do - and never played the level again?!

Surely if he discovered this he would have had to have grinded it down to 1:50, 1:45, 1:40 and so on, but NO, 1 fucking 31 straight away.

Of course this isn't proof per se, but it just makes it even more un-believable.

The one hour session was with the backup(allegedly increases the odds) for a claimed time of 2:03 00A. Furthermore he claimed 1:33 on A first, then a 1:31 later(without backup). Without backup, it should be somewhere between 2 to 5 seconds faster than the currently used 2 guard strat and i believe 12 to 15 seconds faster than the old Boss method(i have done a video comparison in Sony Vegas). I could be wrong with my calculations, but if i were correct it would mean Steven's 1:31 time would be equivalent to a 1:43 at best with the Boss method or 1:46 at worst. Correct me if i'm wrong about something.

[OHMSS]

The people demanding rigoros proof are annoying (to say the least). Let's not act like euphoric college juniors here please. The guy lied, end of story.

A video is certainly appropriate if there's no full name in the title and no facepic as thumbnail (as already declared by Goose).

[Whiteted]

Certainly rigorous proof is only in mathematics, but I would say GE science sits squarely inside mathematics.
I think what we have atm is not proof but some degree of confidence (which mathematics still kinda values, i.e. P not equal to NP), and if you are confident that there is no 1-guard strat then you are welcome to put money in the bounty
I still think there's probably a 1-guard strat.

[OHMSS]

I think what we have atm is not proof but some degree of confidence

Did you even read the arguments brought forward? The matter has been evaluated for like 16 years in probably close to a million attempts and not a single time was the glass opened by a single guard. In addition, there are Henrik's analyses that give a huge degree of confidence that a single guard cannot open the glass without the presence of an obstacle. Then there are Karl's arguments about the strat being way too slow for 1:31 with old school gameplay. You must accept that the people who accuse Steven know their shit very well.

[Whiteted]

To be clear I'm only talking about a 1-guard strat existing, not whether SZ found it, or whether it's fast.
I can't remember if I've said this before, but I think any 1-guard strat will be different enough to the 2-guard ones that you won't have hit it randomly attempting a 2-guard strat, which negates as many million attempts as you like.

[OHMSS]

Well, then stop going off topic mate This is about SZ, who boasted with a huge UWR and gave very fishy details, all of which is debunked now.

Btw, yes a single guard can open the door: if you get the keycard from Jaws and camp behind the glass, a guard will come and open the glass. Cool, huh?

[SimThreat]

*Removing this post as it was mostly incorrect.*

[stefankok]

^ The different strategy i'm referring to is pretty much the one he posted on the MK boards, where he shows himself to the guard, closes the mainframe manually and the guard then opens the glass right away at arrival(not noting anything resembling that he bothered planning for the backup). To me it seems that he claimed that that was the strat he used for Agent(since he was being questioned on his 1:31 strat there) and for his 2:03 00A he used the backup(which he claimed earlier than his Agent times), which makes sense to me due to 1:31 and 1:33 being ludicrously fast for 2002 if you're including the backup. But take it for what it is, no reason to discuss this further. Like i said earlier, Steven is the only one who should bother with this.

[SimThreat]

^ The different strategy i'm referring to is pretty much the one he posted on the MK boards, where he shows himself to the guard, closes the mainframe manually and the guard then opens the glass right away at arrival(not noting anything resembling that he bothered planning for the backup). To me it seems that he claimed that that was the strat he used for Agent(since he was being questioned on his 1:31 strat there) and for his 2:03 00A he used the backup(which he claimed earlier than his Agent times), which makes sense to me due to 1:31 and 1:33 being ludicrously fast for 2002 if you're including the backup. But take it for what it is, no reason to discuss this further. Like i said earlier, Steven is the only one who should put effort into proving/disproving the strat.

Ok yeah my last post was mostly mistaken. I was definitely confused about how he described the strat. Apologies.

[stefankok]

http://www.mariokart64.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1117846347

[SimThreat]

I edited my previous post above, thanks.

[stefankok]

No worries.

[Blue Khakis]

I'm fairly sure the Netherlands has a pretty rigorous justice system and has no shortage of lawyers familiar with international laws regarding defamation. If SZ actually loses his job because of Goose's video, he will be perfectly entitled to take legal action against Goose in a court of law, where he will no doubt be legally required to show his strategy in action.

Ultimately, if you think that Goose is jumping the gun without all the evidence, it is Goose you should be concerned about. It is entirely up to him whether he believes he has enough evidence to go to press because he is the one taking the risk by publishing the video.

[falzy211]

Sorry just to clarify
Did SZ put up the claimed time on the rankings? So did he “officially” have a near 30 second untied? Did that not flag something back then?

[stefankok]

^ It was put on the rankings, but it's not certain whether he did so himself(doesn't really matter either way). If it was never on the rankings i don't think it would have been as controversial.

[Wuldntuliktono]

Also to note while very rare huge 20+ second untieds werent unheard of in the very early days. I think mike martin had like a 25+ second untied on surface 2 sa when the grenade strat was discovered, and a few other levels had huge untieds.

[RWG]

Sorry just to clarify
Did SZ put up the claimed time on the rankings? So did he “officially” have a near 30 second untied? Did that not flag something back then?

Why have you not acknowledged my statement that I will not be including Zwartjes name or picture in the title, thumbnail, tags or metadata of the video?  Why are you continuing with this narrative that I'm out to destroy SZ's life when the reality is the complete opposite?

[Saltkillzsnails]

I'm fairly sure the Netherlands has a pretty rigorous justice system and has no shortage of lawyers familiar with international laws regarding defamation. If SZ actually loses his job because of Goose's video, he will be perfectly entitled to take legal action against Goose in a court of law, where he will no doubt be legally required to show his strategy in action.

Ultimately, if you think that Goose is jumping the gun without all the evidence, it is Goose you should be concerned about. It is entirely up to him whether he believes he has enough evidence to go to press because he is the one taking the risk by publishing the video.

There would be no case for defamation (libel). It wod hinge on Goose in this example knowing that what he was saying was not true and making a video anyway. Every piece of evidence points to Steven being a liar so any video made is based on the overwhelming evidence that we know at the time. So while dramatic for some of SZ’s supporters to throw out some scare tactics there is no fear what so ever.

[KVD]

No one is gonna lose his job and no one is getting sued. SZ is not Billy Mitchell, his status in real life is not build on video games and he is not at Billy Mitchell levels of assholery.

[falzy211]

That’s not the discussion now goose. It helps of course
The discussion was if it’s fair to compare him to todd. I didn’t think your evidence was good enough for what is a fairly serious claim.

Im not trying to build any narrative. It’s just my point of view, maybe it will be considered a bit or not. The op just seemed too one sided

[RWG]

It was always the discussion.  You made a half-dozen posts her about how I was "belligerent and careless" for ruining SZ's life by muddying his name, *daring* to compare him to the truly evil and internationally infamous Todd Rogers.  You are lying right now, and tbh, you might be an even bigger liar than SZ himself.

"The OP"

Three fucking months ago.

Again, you do realize that, during and after investigations, people's opinions can change, right?

Had I not made the comparison originally, I don't think this would have received anywhere near the same levels of attention, and we wouldn't have become anywhere nearer the truth; like has happened since this took on a life of its own.

[falzy211]

Ok look this is clearly making you angry, like I was a couple of days ago. Before this ends up ugly im legitimately going to stop here. I’ve no more to add and i continued primarily due to a couple of people’s comments here.

Make the video,  I’m sure if the comparison is stretched the feedback on it will reflect that.

Not every young guy who made up a time is todd Rogers, who made his fame off it, that’s all.

[Saltkillzsnails]

Nice passive aggressive bait. A guy that lies as a young man then continues to lie into his 30s and 40s, a smidge shy of 2 decades, has more in common with Todd Rogers a guy thats lied for 30 years than a person who hasnt just saying.

You continue to ignore that this isnt just a one off from a young adult, its ongoing behavior to this day. He could have admitted he made it up and it would be forgiven and forgotten in less than a week. Its the continued lie and insulting peoples intelligence that caused this to blow up.

[GreasePig]

Since this dead thread has been bumped I'll tack my question on to it.

The wiki page listing GoldenEye point champions (which is linked directly to from the forums) still has Zwartjes listed:

http://speedrunwiki.com/Goldeneye_Champions

...
Sterling, 1998.7.4 - 2001.2.26 (968 days)
Martin, 1998.3.14 - 1998.7.4 (112 days)
Zwartjes, 1997.8.25 - 1998.3.14 (201 days)

A few options:
1. Zwartjes remains on the list for historical reasons
2. The rankings start on 1998.3.14 with Martin as champion
3. The rankings start on 1997.8.25 with Martin as champion (if he was active during that whole time and no. 2 during that period)
4. Some other person or people are listed for that period (if we have knowledge of the ranks from the time)

There has been no edits or discussion to the Wiki beyond adding Luke's recent reign.

I feel like the information to choose 3 or 4 is lost to time unless someone has an archive (way back machine doesn't go this far back, not even sure there was a web page or forum at the time).

Whatever is agreed upon for the wiki will be reflected in future point champion visualization videos.

[AZ]

Steven had no linked videos on his page or his PR history, so there was no proven times to backroll to. I don't think Steven is 'banned' and I don't think there would be a problem with any proven times being on the ranks. I will raise with the council to try to get this to happen.

Any update on this?

[TobiasSC]

Discussion’s already over but I’d like to add some quick thoughts.

First of all I just want to say that I really enjoy watching your videos Goose. I think you’ve got a great talent for speaking about stuff in a clear, fun and engaging way. Keep up the good work!

So here’s what I think about the idea of making this kind of a video in general, now that your channel has grown so much: Any time you make a video talking about an individual in an unsympathetic context (in this case a probable scam) you run a risk of painting him or her a target of harassment and ridicule in front of thousands of people. I can’t see how this could ever be a positive thing, even if the person happens to be guilty.

Nothing would probably happen IRL, especially since you seem to be careful about personal details. This is good. But you could do even better IMO and just decide not give this person any more spotlight than he’s already got. Little good can come from introducing him to 50k+ new people at this point.