EEVblog #1099- BattBump - Dumbest Kickstarter Ever!

[Fungus]

If she removes all references to Cat Clark from the rest of the Internet then the only hits remaining will be on these forums. 

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Dislikes could also represent a dislike of the product being described in the video (in this case a dislike of BattBump) not a dislike to you or the video itself

Yeah, that happens to me often: I see a video I like about something nasty I dislike and my brain kind of short circuits: a thumbs up or a thumbs down?

[madires]

Awesome! A new daily debunk soap opera. Can't wait for the next episode

But seriously, an apology with an explanation would have ended this drama easily without causing too much damage to Miss BattBump's reputation (just a juvenile folly). Going for the Streisand effect makes everything much worse and will stick longer. What will be the next brilliant step after buying dislikes on Dave's youtube videos?

[erkko]

Awesome! A new daily debunk soap opera. Can't wait for the next episode

But seriously, an apology with an explanation would have ended this drama easily without causing too much damage to Miss BattBump's reputation (just a juvenile folly). Going for the Streisand effect makes everything much worse and will stick longer. What will be the next brilliant step after buying dislikes on Dave's youtube videos?

long waited "next" would be dave re-uploading original video without any redactions. if youtube shall remove it on its own accord - its better than anonymous bought dislikes.

[Rasz]

Is it possible to remove stuff from the Internet Archive?

If you go to her website there, it's empty:

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.catclark.co/

Nothing at all before the 27th of June (yeah, right...) and only a blank page after that.

Aaaaand, the exact same thing for battbump.com, there's nothing before the 27th of June. What are the chances of that? 

web.archive.org has a nasty habit of letting domain owners retroactively censor archive content with robots.txt
archive.is is an alternative ignoring censorship attempts, sadly it first crawled on 28, at the time website was already reset back to default wix template http://archive.is/http://www.catclark.co/
but was able to catch http://archive.is/http://www.battbump.com/

[EEVblog]

You can buy dislikes? LOL, something's very wrong with this world.

Yup, not the first time either:
(Yep, another Kickstarter)

[NiHaoMike]

How long before someone gathers every bit of public information about her and her "invention" and puts it in a torrent?

[julianhigginson]

Any presumption that she was just an innocent child who didn't know what she was doing ends right there.

Anybody who knows how to pay for dislikes goes straight in the same bin as the Batteroo Brothers.

Wow.. that's some real dark-web stuff right there..  buying youtube dislikes!!!  OMG. That's like super evil black-hat haxxor territory.  Absolute criminal mastermind confirmed, no doubt.

https://www.google.com/search?q=buy+youtube+dislikes

With hacker powers like that, she must have had something to do with that paedophile pizza hut that killary ran. Probably the webmaster. I mean, I have no *proof* that she was part of that, beyond this video about a deleted kickstarter campaign, and a photo from her website that I saved before it was taken down, that maybe I look at a bit too often.... but hey, why not? Really, at this point, any lack of evidence we can find is just more evidence at how much of an expert internet data-deleter she is.

And on top of all this plain and visible harm she has caused to the world, she continues to refuse to go out of her way to call me and talk to me, so really she deserves anything I decide to dish out. And any effect this has on her life is really her fault because she should have just called me and given me her time and attention, like I deserve.

It's now open season on Bumpgirl.

Yeah.... Or maybe, instead of engaging in cyber bullying someone you actually know nothing at all about, from behind the comfortable anonymity of a user name not connected to you personally, you could just not?

[Delta]

Jules, are you Cat Clark, or in any way related to her?

[EEVblog]

Jules, are you Cat Clark, or in any way related to her?

Just classic white-knighting.

[Fungus]

Wow.. that's some real dark-web stuff right there..  buying youtube dislikes!!!  OMG. That's like super evil black-hat haxxor territory.  Absolute criminal mastermind confirmed, no doubt.

https://www.google.com/search?q=buy+youtube+dislikes

With hacker powers like that, she must have..

I'm not saying it's difficult to do but you have to know it even exists.

Yeah.... Or maybe, instead of engaging in cyber bullying someone you actually know nothing at all about, from behind the comfortable anonymity of a user name not connected to you personally, you could just not?

Who says "Fungus" isn't my real, legally registered, name?

[mikerj]

Any presumption that she was just an innocent child who didn't know what she was doing ends right there.

Anybody who knows how to pay for dislikes goes straight in the same bin as the Batteroo Brothers.

Wow.. that's some real dark-web stuff right there..  buying youtube dislikes!!!  OMG. That's like super evil black-hat haxxor territory.  Absolute criminal mastermind confirmed, no doubt.

https://www.google.com/search?q=buy+youtube+dislikes

With hacker powers like that, she must have had something to do with that paedophile pizza hut that killary ran. Probably the webmaster. I mean, I have no *proof* that she was part of that, beyond this video about a deleted kickstarter campaign, and a photo from her website that I saved before it was taken down, that maybe I look at a bit too often.... but hey, why not? Really, at this point, any lack of evidence we can find is just more evidence at how much of an expert internet data-deleter she is.

And on top of all this plain and visible harm she has caused to the world, she continues to refuse to go out of her way to call me and talk to me, so really she deserves anything I decide to dish out. And any effect this has on her life is really her fault because she should have just called me and given me her time and attention, like I deserve.

It's now open season on Bumpgirl.

Yeah.... Or maybe, instead of engaging in cyber bullying someone you actually know nothing at all about, from behind the comfortable anonymity of a user name not connected to you personally, you could just not?

I do enjoy a bit of faux outrage from a shiny white knight 

[wilfred]

Who says "Fungus" isn't my real, legally registered, name?

If this thread says anything, it is that rigidly adhering to actual facts is optional.

[elgonzo]

[... knightly knight-stuff going on here ...]

I do enjoy a bit of faux outrage from a shiny white knight 

Yeah, there's nothing quite like watching a white knight polishing his armor. 

[Rasz]

Fun fact about YT internals, no idea if still accurate:

There is/was a per account limit on Likes/Dislikes (https://www.youtube.com/my_liked_videos), afaik its set to 5000, anything above that is still tracked for the account owner(blue up/down vote displayed), but does not show up on clip statistics (up/down vote counter reverses after page reload).
It used to work in a way spare likes/dislikes got unlocked after one of older liked/disliked videos got deleted. Checked it a moment ago and it appears to act as a rolling list now, with oldest liked videos simply dropping out. This means people participating in those like/dislike farms either have to make new accounts every couple of days/weeks, or their votes will simply vanish automagically with time.

My best guesses as to why this limit exists:
-YT/Google Machine Learning recommendation system input format
-database indexing/size optimization

[timelessbeing]

Cat clark doesn't exist. It's just a front for ex-soviet-block scammers milking money on the internet. There has been a recent spate of ransomware attacks from those same countries. They know there are hordes of gullible people on the net who are easily parted with their money.

[John B]

I'm not sure if it's been addressed yet, but the issue is that how do you prove that Cat Clark is the one lodging the privacy complaint, or paying for the dislikes? Now don't get me wrong - her behaviour thus far shows more than a little mens rea, but one only needs to look at the near barf-worthy displays of white knighting in this thread to entertain the possibility that someone would be foolish enough to do these things on her behalf. I mean, look at some of the critics here, then imagine how bad the fans are. 

At least it is something to consider before regarding these series of events as a foregone conclusion.

[EEVblog]

I'm not sure if it's been addressed yet, but the issue is that how do you prove that Cat Clark is the one lodging the privacy complaint

For the complaint to be legal, it must be the individual concerned. As the recipient of this complaint, I have to assume that it has been made legally and act upon that as such.

, or paying for the dislikes?

I never claimed it was her. I said I do not know who it is.

[EEVblog]

Most have probably seen it, but for those that haven't:

[wilfred]

I'm not sure if it's been addressed yet, but the issue is that how do you prove that Cat Clark is the one lodging the privacy complaint

For the complaint to be legal, it must be the individual concerned. As the recipient of this complaint, I have to assume that it has been made legally and act upon that as such.

, or paying for the dislikes?

I never claimed it was her. I said I do not know who it is.

Dave, after doing this blogging thing for so long surely you cannot be surprised by the subset of fans you have who would seek to display their tribal allegiances to you through a conveniently loose interpretation of what you say.

Or, if not that, then fans who lack the comprehension to distill the precise meaning of your words.

It is not that what you said was difficult to interpret but you could do more to reduce the misunderstanding.

The same thing is true for the white-knighting comment. I had to look it up myself. Regardless of whether it was accurate you clearly do have impressionable, easily led, fans who through a misplaced sense of loyalty readily take up the chant without fully thinking it through.

I think both you, and they, do a disservice to the other through a lack of caution.

[John B]

I'm not sure if it's been addressed yet, but the issue is that how do you prove that Cat Clark is the one lodging the privacy complaint

For the complaint to be legal, it must be the individual concerned. As the recipient of this complaint, I have to assume that it has been made legally and act upon that as such.

Fair enough. My question was going to be whether the privacy complaint must be made by the person involved, and what steps does youtube take to reasonably ascertain the identity of someone making a complaint.

[Bud]

Cat clark doesn't exist.

And obviously you are ready to prove it to us, dont you.

[julianhigginson]

I'm not saying it's difficult to do but you have to know it even exists.

what, like every single eevblog follower already knew it existed?
WOW! WE ARE ALL LIKE, SO DARKWEB, DOOOOOD!
WATCH OUT EVIL SCOOBY-DOO VILLANS!
WE WILL FIGHT YOU AND WE ARE RIGHTEOUS!!!
AND YOU WOULD HAVE GOT AWAY WITH IT IF IT WEREN'T FOR US MEDDLING SUPER INTERNET KIDS!

Who says "Fungus" isn't my real, legally registered, name?

I don't care what your name is. But I know your user profile isn't attached to anything that's easily found, and I highly doubt employers or friends or family googling your name in future will find this thread and read what a glittering treasure you are.

I find the joy and eagerness you display in piling onto someone you don't even know, just following the lead of someone else, with no critical thought, to be very disturbing.  And I wonder what hurt you to make you like this, and I feel sad for you. And I wonder if rather than taking your issues out on strangers from behind the comfortable anonymity of a forum account that's not linked to you personally in any way at all, you might be better served by talking to a professional about your suffering, and work with them to make it better.

Anyway. Enough about you.

Lets back up and think logically for a few paragraphs here... all we have on this (probably) real stranger people here are happily trying to destroy, is these things.

1) they chose to be the public face of a kickstarter that was stupidly thought out. A kickstarter showing all the hallmarks of a lean startup approach to a solution that the people running it were *so* technically incompetent about, they didn't know where to even start to look for fundamental project killers before launch. (which is why the campaign was so hilarious and deserving of ridicule)

2) When questioned about tech details, the person answered, showing a complete lack of understanding of the issues involved. Just like you'd expect. But then the project started to change a bit. whatever final direction that change might have finally taken is now unknown, because pretty much immediately after this, they were attacked and the situation changed.

3) When attacked, and discovering  that the attack wasn't just on the startup idea, but also on their own junior professional reputation, they've done a couple of dumb things which are completely in line with their already obvious technical naivety. They have not launched sophisticated legal attacks or technical attacks (or even illegal attacks) on Dave or this website.  Like you'd expect from an actual real criminal with any resources behind them.

Anything else you can add to what we actually know?

Everything else here is plain speculation and hearsay (and maybe projection, I dunno)

This thread is ridiculous - with self righteous wannabe tech bros all gearing up for war against this complete nobody and their silly 2 bit attempt at being a lean startup product manager.

People are comparing them to actual fraudulent operations like that blood test company which burned how many billion $ of investor cash?, and relatively well funded stupidity like butt-a-roo that actually took and burned real people's money...

We even have someone further up in this muck heap justifying anything done to this person is fine, because apparently ICOs are out of control at the moment, and  therefore because "blockchain" was vomited into in the dirty laundry basket of stupid features the app idea had, this person is absolutely responsible for all the sucker "investors" currently pouring billions of dollars in borrowed money they can't afford into ICOs, which we all know will never be seen again.

All I'm asking, is that you take a step back and actually look at what you are doing.

1) Look at the actual damage caused in the world by this kickstarter project. (errr..... none? or negative damage, if paid dislikes can only help Daves engagement ranking)

2) Think about what this person's name is going to look like in the future when they need to look for a job one day.

3) Look at the absolute joy of a bunch of people are showing here - Enjoying being part of a big bad angry justified smackdown machine - totally getting off on how much pain they are causing to someone they don't know.  Who did nothing to them, and in fact did nothing of consequence to anybody.



PS, If you really feel the need to pile on with a bunch of people and destroy someone's life?
https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/comedian-charged-over-graffiti-at-eurydice-dixons-memorial/news-story/399fb93c29d8df77c3a0b7a3473fe5c8
Have a go at this guy. Seriously - knock yourself out. Do your absolute worst - He was just charged (and admitted guilt so no grey area here) yesterday with defacing the memorial for a woman who was raped and murdered on her way home the last month. Just days after her rape and murder. At the site where her body was found and probably where it all happened. He spray painted cock and balls around her memorial that people had come from miles around to build.

[julianhigginson]

Just classic white-knighting.

You know, the word choices people make to put down or discredit or attack people are very very illuminating.
They tell the world all sorts of things about the user of the words


Also, I think there's more than a hint of an echo in here.

[EEVblog]

This thread is ridiculous - with self righteous wannabe tech bros all gearing up for war against this complete nobody and their silly 2 bit attempt at being a lean startup product manager.

You do realise the irony that your continued elaborate posts in this thread help to keep the thread at the top of the new posts list and encourage others to continue to respond, right?
Instead of the thread naturally dying away into a obscurity as it inevitably will, as I'm sure you'd love, you keep it going, well done.

PS, If you really feel the need to pile on with a bunch of people and destroy someone's life?
https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/comedian-charged-over-graffiti-at-eurydice-dixons-memorial/news-story/399fb93c29d8df77c3a0b7a3473fe5c8
Have a go at this guy. Seriously - knock yourself out. Do your absolute worst - He was just charged (and admitted guilt so no grey area here) yesterday with defacing the memorial for a woman who was raped and murdered on her way home the last month. Just days after her rape and murder. At the site where her body was found and probably where it all happened. He spray painted cock and balls around her memorial that people had come from miles around to build.

You just got though preaching about how people here are conflating things, yet you come out with the biggest doozy of them all.
Give it up.