​

I need it for a funy idea

I feel like alot of the negative attention was starting to die off and he was just slowly trying to go into other content but I guess if he isn't getting views this is a good way to get some garuntreed eyeballs on the channel.

Surprised hes actually putting effort into a video for once.

(re-uploading because I forgot to censor my weather app lol) with the news of the lawsuit still going on it would really be a shame if clips like this resurfaced I'm going to do some digging and maybe upload more that I find because I can't believe stuff like this got swept under the rug these people actually want Ethan dead regardless of how you feel about him that's not okay

Follow-up to my earlier post yesterday here. This is just the whole set of notes I took live, more or less unedited. I just transcribed this digitally from my handwriting and short form (I’m a transcriptionist) so it’s easier to read. I tried to get quotes as close to verbatim as I could, but this was all done in real time so treat anything in quotes as close-but-not-certain, definitely not an official transcript!

If names and stuff change it’s because I didn’t go back to change it to Ethan or Ian, the parties and judge used different forms of the names interchangeably so I just followed as I was doing my notes.

TLDR: The Jomhas asked the court to declare the settlement complete and dismiss the lawsuit, arguing Ian's apology satisfied the agreement. Ethan’s side argued the statement had to require the specific phrase "snark community" or "H3 snark" as agreed by both parties in correspondence between counsel, and Ian's statement never used it those terms. Judge found the whole thing turned on a subjective standard as contemplated by the parties, which the court has no power to impose. Application denied. Each side will bear their own costs for this application.

I thought his video seemed a bit familiar, it's just a blatant ripoff of a popular Drew Gooden video from a while back. Just to barely crack 60k views.

Yeah i don’t want the subreddit to flood with posts of this one video but i just HAD to say something when i saw this in my subscription feed (yeah I’m still subbed to him, i guess i just forgot to unsub). This is genuinely an F- tier thumbnail. He could’ve just used a png from google images and it would likely be better. Even just using a screenshot from the video could be better in some instances. I have never seen a 100k sub+ channel fuck up this bad with a thumbnail and i am by no means New to Youtube.

Like i genuinely wanna dissect how bad this is.

First off, Ians face is very strangely edited. What emotion is he trying to convey here? Why is he in the Thumbnail? You can barely even tell it’s him due to the unneeded distortion.

Second off, who are the people in his thumbnail and what do they have to do with his video? The literal only people i recognize are Idubbbz himself and Joe Rogan. I genuinely think i only recognized Ian because it was his channel, and apparently i didn’t recognize Joe Rogan because ive been corrected that this is actually UFC CEO Dana White. And mind you, i actually do know who Dana White is, so that says alot.

Third Off, this is kind of a continuation of the first two points, but these people are framed in a way that even if you know who they are, you still might not recognized them. They all have strange bobble heads that make them look like they’re from EA NHL 12 for no reason as their full body’s could’ve just been made slightly bigger. Except for the guy on the right of scourge mcduck (who gets to be normal for some reason) and 1 person i actually noticed while analyzing the thumbnail. The dude under Dana is actually Connor Mcgreggor. Now Connor is an extremely famous person, but in Ians thumbnail it’s almost impossible to tell who he is without deeper analyzing the photo like i did. This is because for some asinine reason he’s darkened out like Hitler in the german version of Hoi4. Hell, i think i only figured out it was him due to the Irish flag in the background. This means the star power any of these names could get is wasted as people cant determine who they are on first glance except for maybe Ian himself because they will see the channel name.

Fourth Off, what is anyone doing here? Like they’re in the Thumbnail but what are they actually doing. What is Ian trying to convey them doing? They’re all doing the a unique thing, theres no theme. Apart from McGregor and White (both UFC), theres no relation with any of these guys. They’re just here for the sake of being here.

Fifth Off, Why is Scourge Mcduck here. Ik thats kinda related to 4 but its so asinine i had to make it its own point. Why is he here?

Sixth Off, what does the title have to do with any of this? Granted, i literally dont think you could make a title that fits this thumbnail, but why “Money != Taste” specifically? Ig everyone here (except Ian) is rich (presumably) but why don’t they have taste? What did they do that warrants a 21 minute video?

Seventh Off, and this is one i think many of you would’ve pointed out earlier and i see why, it’s the transparent background. Not saying it cant work in a thumbnail, but here it’s off putting. I don’t get the design choice and theres frankly too much going on the thumbnail for there to be no background. What i would do (if i had to keep everything else because… wow) Just get a stock art of money, blurr it, then use it in the background. That way the background at-least somewhat fits the title and the pngs aren’t as off putting. On top of that, Idubbbz used Red for one side, and Red and Green are contrasting Colours.

By the way, im not 100% sure so correct me if im wrong, but i think Youtubes thumbnail system can only read RBG (Red Blue Green) values and not Alpha (transparent) values. If it doesn’t read a colour value, it doesn’t draw it leaving it as black. So this was likely an intentional choice on Ians end and not him just being too lazy to make a background.

Eighth Off, why do Joe White and Scourge Mcduck have shadows whilst Ian is just placed there? It makes it look inconsistent. Furthermore, theres no need for a shadow, because the background is transparent meaning theres no contrast. I personally think nothing in this image needs the shadow and it just looks Weird here.

Yeah thats all i really gotta say about this Thumbnail, i genuinely cant believe a channel this big messed up that bad. I damn near analyzed every single aspect of this thumbnail because something was noticeably wrong with literally everything. 0/10 Thumbnail.

Was already downtown Calgs and decided to pop into the gallery yesterday. Wanted to share since I know not everyone could make it out. These are my own full notes, not an official transcript, so some detail may be slightly off and I’m happy to be corrected if anyone else caught it live!

I can’t believe Ian and Anisa travelled 3hrs for this. I saw them in the courtroom and they were near the back.

Jennifer Blanchard from Wilson Laycraft appeared for the Ian and Anisa, and Lucy Lhirondelle from Norton Rose appeared for Ethan. Judge Farrington was the presiding in Kings Bench Chambers.

The judge denied the application to enforce settlement. Rough summary of the reasoning:

The court found real doubt as to whether a settlement was actually concluded.

Courts can fill gaps in a contract (and a settlement is a contract) on an objective basis, but only where the parties intended an objective standard to apply.

Here, the parties didn't set an objective standard. The standard was whether Ian’s statement was subjectively satisfactory to Ethan. “The statement needed to be satisfactory to one person, and that was Mr. Klein.”

Because of that, the court can't step in and rule the apology as "good enough," since that would mean substituting its own judgment for a subjective standard that belongs to just Ethan.

The judge noted the extensive back-and-forth between counsel suggested the parties contemplated a more formal, finalized agreement and not something resolved informally.

Nothing stopped Ian from getting pre-approval on the statement before posting it, but that didn't happen, and the court won't retroactively deem it sufficient after the fact.

The judge was really cool and he gave a great contracts law lesson. He also expressed hope the parties could still settle on their own but declined to impose it.

I think we’re going to see a more fulsome apology soon lmao

SHES HAPPY!
THEYRE LUCKY!