Fredd-E wrote:Or maybe it’s you who did all this? The parody, the inverse profile picture,... don’t know why any respectable member would do this though.
Haha, no. Not sure there's any way I can prove it. But when I was catching up on the thread the other day and saw that Whitney pic again I ended up getting a lot more involved than I usually do and caught up on everything because I had a unique piece of relevant information to contribute for the first time. Either in connecting it to a past fake (my initial assumption) or a past legit account, TBD. So yeah, goes without saying I'm a bit extra interested in Sheol given the circumstances.
Sherbet Head wrote:And lets assume it's a fake page entirely: would the bros even possess the power to shut down something with 'Hell Interface' branding? The 'Boards of Canada' name is established and likely copyrighted to the high heavens, so there's no doubt they'll have some leverage when requesting page removal for that, but when it comes to the Hell Interface name, how much of an influence/legal standpoint do they have?
Maybe the name itself is dangerous to use in such legal actions especially when its primary purpose is making unauthorized remixes? As far as we know of course. Just a guess from an obvious standpoint. We know YT, bandcamp and something else is probably official but none of these are formally verified.
Fredd-E wrote:Or maybe it’s you who did all this? The parody, the inverse profile picture,... don’t know why any respectable member would do this though.
Haha, no. Not sure there's any way I can prove it. But when I was catching up on the thread the other day and saw that Whitney pic again I ended up getting a lot more involved than I usually do and caught up on everything because I had a unique piece of relevant information to contribute for the first time. Either in connecting it to a past fake (my initial assumption) or a past legit account, TBD. So yeah, goes without saying I'm a bit extra interested in Sheol given the circumstances.
I want to believe you, but otherwise the things you said in your previous post almost sound like a confession (of being a hoaxer) to me.
Fredd-E wrote:I want to believe you, but otherwise the things you said in your previous post almost sound like a confession (of being a hoaxer) to me.
Very skeptical now. Sorry.
That's fair, no worries. But are you thinking maybe I own Sheol Boundary and set that inverted pic after the HI fbook page to copy? Because there is concrete public evidence against that.
And I even mention the Whitney pic in that thread and perhaps as moderator you can see it wasn't edited (at least not in the past 8 years).
If you think I own Sheol and uploaded it before the HI fbook profile pic, then any remaining skepticism would basically be the same remaining skepticism that I have.
Last edited by egbdf on Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
friendly reminder that Marcus's twitter would need to be hacked too in order for this "hoax" to work. Anyway, facebook's leak did not include password.
Moz wrote:Maybe the name itself is dangerous to use in such legal actions especially when its primary purpose is making unauthorized remixes? As far as we know of course. Just a guess from an obvious standpoint. We know YT, bandcamp and something else is probably official but none of these are formally verified.
The bandcamp one is legit. Said it before.
Oh yeah, sorry. There was that takeover...
There were some issues indeed. We got notified. All good now. Unless they resurfaced...
I'm struggling to imagine what a hoaxer would have to gain from this.. all boc need do is say that it is a hoax and the whole thing would be defused.. it just doesn't seem worth the effort
But if it isn't a hoax it's indeed very strange that the fb page would go black and nothing else..
MIXL2 wrote:I'm struggling to imagine what a hoaxer would have to gain from this.. all boc need do is say that it is a hoax and the whole thing would be defused.. it just doesn't seem worth the effort
But if it isn't a hoax it's indeed very strange that the fb page would go black and nothing else..
Idk, if your enemies fight between themselves you let them fight
Fredd-E wrote:I want to believe you, but otherwise the things you said in your previous post almost sound like a confession (of being a hoaxer) to me.
Very skeptical now. Sorry.
That's fair, no worries. But are you thinking maybe I own Sheol Boundary and set that inverted pic after the HI fbook page to copy? Because there is concrete public evidence against that.
I was thinking in that direction indeed. But hey I'm not willing to burn witches here. I'm just getting more and more skeptical. Especially because it wouldn't surprise me some WATMM members could be having a very big laugh at our expense
Fredd-E wrote:I want to believe you, but otherwise the things you said in your previous post almost sound like a confession (of being a hoaxer) to me.
Very skeptical now. Sorry.
That's fair, no worries. But are you thinking maybe I own Sheol Boundary and set that inverted pic after the HI fbook page to copy? Because there is concrete public evidence against that.
I was thinking in that direction indeed. But hey I'm not willing to burn witches here. I'm just getting more and more skeptical. Especially because it wouldn't surprise me some WATMM members could be having a very big laugh at our expense
Alright alright settle down
This is the cached version from march 27. still has the pfp and banner
ColdEarth7 wrote:FYI Marcus Eoin Instagram page deleted all his followers and followings.. don't know what to make of that tbh
Ok, this is very strange behaviour indeed.
My take: he actually reads this forum and doesn't want any of us prying into his private life. And that includes us not even looking into his instagram followers and making assumptions...
Fredd-E wrote:I was thinking in that direction indeed. But hey I'm not willing to burn witches here. I'm just getting more and more skeptical.
Okay one more bit of exonerating evidence in addition to what I mentioned above would be this comment on the original video, which does not say "(edited)" next to it:
And also google's cached version of the channel (at least when I checked earlier) showing it was there Mar 27. (EDIT:, thanks for corroborating TheStatPow)
Fredd-E wrote:Especially because it wouldn't surprise me some WATMM members could be having a very big laugh at our expense
egbdf wrote:That's fair, no worries. But are you thinking maybe I own Sheol Boundary and set that inverted pic after the HI fbook page to copy? Because there is concrete public evidence against that.
I was thinking in that direction indeed. But hey I'm not willing to burn witches here. I'm just getting more and more skeptical. Especially because it wouldn't surprise me some WATMM members could be having a very big laugh at our expense
Alright alright settle down
This is the cached version from march 27. still has the pfp and banner
Doesn't really prove anything I think? The hoax could've been in the making days before to be unleashed upon us 5th of April.
In retrospect egbdf was quick to connect some seemingly important dots and "coincidentally" on his own YouTube channel. #fishy #skepticalfred
Fredd-E wrote:Doesn't really prove anything I think? The hoax could've been in the making days before to be unleashed upon us 5th of April.
In retrospect egbdf was quick to connect some seemingly important dots and "coincidentally" on his own YouTube channel. #fishy #skepticalfred
So if you see it was on the yt channel mar 27 (and before) and then later showed up on the fbook page apr 5, then it sounds like you're saying maybe I'm running the fbook page? If that's the case, again, I have no evidence against that and you basically have the same skepticism that I (and everyone) has. I only have evidence that whitney was on the yt channel back in 2013.
Fredd-E wrote:I was thinking in that direction indeed. But hey I'm not willing to burn witches here. I'm just getting more and more skeptical.
Okay one more bit of exonerating evidence in addition to what I mentioned above would be this comment on the original video, which does not say "(edited)" next to it:
And also google's cached version of the channel (at least when I checked earlier) showing it was there Mar 27. (EDIT:, thanks for corroborating TheStatPow).
Thanks for clarifying the matter. That unedited post is indeed significant.
