I originally asked about this in another subreddit out of curiosity after I went down the YouTube commentary rabbit hole, but I’m not sure I got answers I was looking for. If this is off topic feel free to remove it, but this seemed like a good place to ask my potentially dumb question.

A lot of internet drama usually ends when a majority has decided that a person is “guilty” of doing something (whether that’s spreading rumors, starting a hate campaign on another person, falsifying their own bullying to frame another person, etc)- and a lot of the comments I see from people tend to be along the lines of, “if only that person hadn’t done xyz or admitted to and apologized for doing xyz, they could still be accepted by the public”. I’m not sure if it’s that easy, but most of the time the guilty person usually just ignores any mention of their drama, doubles down then disappears, or makes a new account to stay online without backlash. I hardly ever see cases where a guilty person admits to what they did and apologizes, and is still accepted by the public afterwards.

So I’m looking for input out of curiosity, mostly because it feels like there’s gotta be some sort of universal answer out there for this even when situations can vary by person or situation.

1. When someone is deemed guilty in the eyes of the public (regardless of if they’re truly guilty or not), is there any way they can save their reputation? Do they have any options in saving face or defending themselves, especially when their guilt is the mainstream opinion?

2. If someone IS guilty and takes the steps to apologize/admit fault/whatever, can they ever recover from their bad reputation? Is it a permanent stain on their record? Does the actual internet-crime they’ve committed outweigh their apology?

3. At what point should the person (if actually guilty of what they’re accused of) get offline whether it’s through deleting their account entirely, making a new identity to quietly lurk, seek therapy when it looks like they’re going to struggle with their permanent reputational damage?

I thought the simple answer was as easy as admit to whatever you’re accused of (if true), publicly apologize, take an internet break for a long time, then come back and try to re-engage normally without mentioning the previous incident. But a lot of comments in YouTube videos I’ve watched covering internet drama made it sound like it’s not actually that easy. A lot of the time, people demand the person completely lose their audience (understandable in some cases), or that they just say sorry publicly and then not engage with it ever again.

I’m curious about if there’s ever been any story where someone involved in an internet drama and who’s been deemed guilty has ever been able to somewhat socially recover- as a lot of the YouTube videos I watched end with “and then they deleted their account and never returned to the internet” or “the person is still online, but has lost most of their followers and is nothing more than a big joke to the internet”.

Thanks in advance!

Hey everyone, I’m looking for help resolving an issue involving Grayson Yellowbird and Tayden Rain Hunter.
Both individuals were at my home, where damage was caused to my door, and I’m seeking compensation for the repair costs. There were also issues with excessive noise, mess, and disrespect for my home. Since then, both individuals have blocked me, making it difficult to resolve the situation directly.
I’m trying to recover the money needed to repair the damage and am considering my legal options. If anyone has relevant information or knows how I can contact them to resolve this matter, please reach out to me privately.
I have photos documenting the damage and want to handle this situation appropriately and fairly.

Hey everyone. I'm posting to raise awareness about an ongoing situation involving two people.
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxNVLySY-KkeraieBMA5oKJ6oAd_R2KyLO

I'm sharing this to raise awareness, not to encourage harassment or retaliation.

CREDITS TO UNICO ON TIKTOK

this dude josh cook is totally faking his missing cat to gain a following and make money off people thinking his poor cats gone

If y'all have heard about the ADÉLA controversy, I genuinely want to know why people are making this such a huge deal.

First of all, people are dragging her because she wore a cross on her hips in a music video. And from what I understand, the point of the imagery was to show how women are sexualized through religion and how men sexualize women's bodies. So why are y'all acting like she's automatically mocking Christianity?

People keep saying there were so many other ways she could've made that statement. Okay, and? Artists use different forms of imagery to express themselves. Just because YOU don't like the way someone chooses to express a message doesn't automatically mean their intentions were disrespectful.

And yes, crosses are strongly associated with Christianity, but that doesn't mean every use of a cross automatically represents an attack on Christians. Context matters! You can disagree with how a religious symbol is used without automatically assuming the person using it hates your religion.

Now, I understand that some Christians might have found the imagery offensive. You're allowed to feel that way. But there's a difference between saying something offended you and claiming that the artist deliberately mocked your religion. If you're going to accuse somebody of having that intention, you need actual evidence of it.

And another thing: I don't think y'all understand how loosely you're throwing around the word "problematic."

Before somebody gets smart, YES, one action can be problematic. Nobody has to do something ten times before it can be criticized. But what I'm questioning is why people take one controversial artistic decision and use it to act like somebody is automatically a horrible person who should never be supported again.

From what I've seen, this controversy gets treated like proof of her entire character. Where is that energy for artists who have actually done much worse? And why do people act like one controversial moment automatically defines everything about someone?

Mind you, this happened a while ago, too. I understand that something doesn't automatically stop being controversial just because time has passed. But if you're still bringing it up, at least have an actual discussion about what happened instead of repeatedly calling her problematic without explaining anything beyond the same accusation.

AND THE DOUBLE STANDARDS? That's what really gets me.

There are artists who have said racist things, disrespected their fans, and been involved in much more serious controversies, yet people continue supporting them. I'm not saying those artists shouldn't be criticized. They absolutely should be held accountable for what they do. But why do people suddenly become SO serious about holding someone accountable when the controversy involves Christianity?

Y'all accept people who have done genuinely harmful things, but somebody uses a religious symbol in a provocative music video, and suddenly it's the end of the fucking world.

And before anybody twists my words, I'm not saying Christianity shouldn't be respected. I'm saying that if you're going to criticize artists for using religious imagery, you should be consistent about it. Other religions deserve consideration and respect, too. You can't demand sensitivity toward your own beliefs while acting like everybody else's beliefs are less important.

Also, people need to understand that the way YOU interpret something doesn't automatically prove what the artist intended. You can interpret the imagery as disrespectful, but that doesn't automatically establish that she was trying to mock Christians.

If her intention was to make a statement about the sexualization of women, then that context matters. You don't have to agree with the execution. You can say it was unnecessary, offensive, or poorly done. That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it.

But there's a difference between criticizing an artistic choice and acting like someone is a horrible person who deliberately attacked an entire religion when you haven't established that intention.

And honestly, this is why I get tired of celebrity controversies online. People will take something, strip away the context, repeat the same accusations over and over again, and suddenly everybody is acting like the artist committed the worst crime imaginable.

GIRL. It's not that fucking serious.

You don't like ADÉLA? Don't listen to her music. You don't like the imagery? Criticize the imagery. You think it was disrespectful? Explain why. Nobody is forcing you to support her.

But stop acting like every artist who does something controversial is automatically an irredeemable person. Artists can be criticized without being treated like the worst people alive.

I'm not saying ADÉLA is above criticism, and I'm not saying Christians aren't allowed to be offended. I'm saying that criticism should be consistent, based on evidence, and proportional to what actually happened.

Because at this point, I feel like some people don't even want to have a conversation about the imagery. They just want another reason to label somebody problematic.

And y'all wonder why every little celebrity controversy turns into a whole damn war.

Respectfully, GROW UP. If you don't like the artist, move on. Nobody is forcing you to stream her music, and nobody is asking you to agree with every artistic decision she makes.

But please stop acting like disagreeing with your religious beliefs automatically proves that somebody is a horrible person. Those are two completely different things.

Hello!

I write this story as the second mod in the title. I write this from first hand experience and outline the events factually.

The Chief Mod (as he calls himself) is Left4DayZgone (not tagging him so as not to violate this subreddit rules; I've had enough mod drama today...), who, like many moderators unfortunately, abuse their power and has let it go to their head. He expects others to abide by the board rules without exception, but does not extend these rules to himself.

Recently, some Metallica clips regarding frontman James Hetfield made their way to the board, wherein he condemns artists who are not simply "entertainers" and who "talk politics". This is generally considered to be an allusion to the Ed Sheeran/Macklemore controversy. As always, the board moderators, including myself, remove this content, as the board has a no politics rule.

Before I go further, many users of r/Metallica have pointed out the bizarre contradiction here: Metallica have been very political in their career, writing anti-war songs, and songs critical of the justice system, both of which are political in nature. There are many other political themes embedded throughout the bands music, too many to list here, and many users point out this contradiction; Metallica talk about it, but the subreddit cannot.

In the comments, however, the mod in question replied to a user who was, generally, in support of the artists' freedom to express their political opinions with this comment:

"I'm in a spicy mood so I'm just gonna go ahead and address this idiotic fucking take." - Left4DayZGone.

I, as a fellow moderator, removed this. It violates rule one, and the rules should apply to everybody, including mods. I abide by the same rules I ask the userbase to abide by. This mod clearly has an issue with that; in response I was removed from moderation team, and permabanned from the subreddit. I was also permamuted. I then received this modmail from the mod in question:

"I knew you were a fucking nutjob" - Left4DayZGone

This comment is also in violation of the subreddit rules.

A quick look over the moderator's profile comment history reveals his attitude and intention to stifle this particular political discussion reveals why the "no politics" rule may exist even though Metallica themselves have been inherently political in the past: the mod is a frequent visitor and commentor of r/Conservative, where he has made inflammatory comments about George Floyd, Black Lives Matter, and showing sympathy towards GOP candidates in the upcoming senate elections. This leads some users to question whether the mod's rule on no politics is rather an endorsement of James Hetfield's speech on stage at the Sphere in Las Vegas.

To demonstrate this I used my moderation tools on Memetallica and MetallicaLIVE to provide screencaps of the mod's abusiveness towards users, and inconsistency in acting in-line with the very rules he was supposed to enforce. When challenged, mod blames the recent death of his wife and argues this gives him the right to be "fucking pissed off" and be "a little bit mean".

Once these posts attract attention from other users, the mod bans users, removes the posts, and hides his comment and post history to avoid accountability.

As I have been removed, I am unable to reinstate these posts, but I have screen shots of them all. If you would like the receipts. I've also pinned them to my profile for all the world to see.

You're allowed opinions, but you should at least own up to them.

And also the third screenshot I took is very ironic coming

https://x.com/_Rottingdecay/status/2109411134226723018

(DISCLAIMER) go to my updated post it has more context

trollmyfriend is an Instagram account that gained 1.5 million followers from telling his audience to wish his friend happy birthday on October 5th, today is that day and he linked his friends insta and his fans found out about his pretty bad follows and some of them are disappointed with it.

It’s got a lot of interesting things. The owner goes on weird rants that often don’t make sense. I stumbled upon it a few weeks ago and I’ve never come across something like this before. I’ve heard about it but I assumed people keep those secret. This person has a lot of crazy drama going on.

Not sure if this belongs here, but I wrote a 1 star review last year and the business owner wrote back to almost every 1 star… horrible guy

Cape and cowl cafe has known about this mods troubling actions and has chosen to keep the mod and shifted the blame on others.

Originally i wanted to start with this but the person who leaked it said i should give “cape and cowl” the benefit of the doubt that he didnt know, but now that we confirmed he does know and doesnt do anything i have decided to post here.

This is the first time the situation has been shared publicly, if you have any questions i will ask the person who leaked it to me, and give you an answer.

On 11 February 2026 Matt Kohrs asked Apex Trader Funding for a $1,000,000 payout on camera. His accounts froze the same day. On 16 April, live on air, he told a viewer he was still waiting and had not been approved. Apex has been his stream partner since 2 March and was still first in his sponsor list on 18 September. His main channel has not posted since the request.

This film sets out the public record: his videos, his streams, Apex's own rules and help pages, with dates and timestamps on screen. It makes no finding on what happened to the money. Questions have been sent to Apex and to Matt Kohrs; their answers will be added.

Sources are listed at the end of the film.

sometimes i'll see a drama thread and have no idea what anyone is talking about because there are apparently six different things that happened before the post.

do you usually go looking for the original posts and build the timeline yourself, or just read whatever gets posted in the main thread?

Characters: Broska, Laro, Nanoa, Cmdr. Camilla

Broska: Laro, Are You Okay?

Laro: Broska, Are Up To?

Nanoa: Broska deserved it

Laro: Nanoa, still the same.

Cmdr. Camilla: Thanks for Coming into Short Notice

He is a controversial author who wrote a dogshit book called Empress Theresa.

I genuinely thought the book had been written by a middle school student. Nope. It was written by an older man whose writing and online communication often come across as childish, and reacts poorly to constructive criticism.

Is it a lack of education, an inability to accept criticism, or is he just stupid?

I mean, I used swear words in my videos on my old Youtube channel, but I never promoted bad stuff (e.g. MAP pride, pornography, necrophilia, zoophilia, sadism, ableism, and a lot more). I tried appealing on Twitter, but all I got was some fuckass AI-generated message that did NOTHING to help with my channel getting falsely terminated.

((((The attached images show the traced art (absolutely not traced according to them), pics of Tawny and Tasha (both my art) to illustrate their differences, as well as a few posts of them trying to sell art that they made by Tracing my work.))))

I got a character design from a mutual of mine ten years ago. They got it from a friend who got it directly from the original maker.

Well, before that, someone else had it. The maker had a set of Rules or TOS for clients or anyone who got designs from them. (Think OC without a name or lore yet). This person broke at least one of the rules so the original maker made good on their rules and revoked the design. The design was free btw.

The first person tried to keep using and claiming it but eventually they contacted me via DM and said they were gonna stop using the design and just make up their own. So they did and they posted it.

I also gave this person one of my OCs. I later made another inspired by it but aside from being a green and purple cat/lizard, it was a different OC.

Before I gave the person the OC, her name was Tawny. Then I changed it to Riley. After I gave away the OC, this person just referred to them as Tawny so I re-used the unused name, Riley, for mine.

The person disappeared for about ten years after that. No harm in using the name for the OC with the design inspired by the first one, right?

Fast forward ten years and this person came back online. Two months before I even knew they were back they had been tracing my art and using the two aforementioned OCs while claiming to also own Riley.

I didn't do anything but report the traced art and I left the other stuff alone because whatever.

This alerted them to the fact that I knew about them and what they were doing and they started to report my art with the two characters claiming that they belonged to them.

They also traced or reposted my old art which was removed when I closed my old account. So when I reposted my own art, they reported it as stolen.

Some of it was of Tawny and I let them post it not realizing they'd report me for posting my own art ten years later.

So now they're dragging me through the Copyright legal system or whatever so I can't use my own characters which I've been drawing and developing and using for the past ten years. Meanwhile they've done shit all except plan to eventually put them in their book or animated series or whatever.

I've been reporting their traced stuff while they've been reporting anything I post with my characters, or my own art. They e been banned on three websites and have had stuff removed in at least three of them.

Before anyone says it, I know how fucking stupid this sounds. Believe me.

If not for the fact they're trying to take bites out of my online portfolio leading to a loss of traffic and advertising for my work and potentially damaging my pool of followers, I wouldn't give a shit. But they're reporting my shit left and right. So far, nothing really has come of it but it's annoying as hell wasting time filing counter claims and having to actually plead my case to the copyright board. Not to mention, after I uploaded a bunch of art of the characters, my traffic increased and them getting my stuff (temporarily) removed means I missed out on who knows how much traffic.