Jump to content
The King of Hate Forums
Reality_Check

Phil mentioned in UK magazine in 2014

Recommended Posts

Oh yeah this is from Play UK Magazine. Im not sure if Phil either called the writer a moron or just a product of the 24/7 slanderous movement out to get him.
Either way, calling Phil "possibly the whiniest man to have fallen out the womb" is pretty outlandish for a writer to type and a senior editor to "OK" for print on a magazine that is read by millions. I understand Phil can get quite ridiculous with the reasoning of him losing online matches and the pressing of buttons when trying to block, but that statement is kinda low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, BrotherLono said:

Interesting article.  Where did you find that particular piece of txt?  The bit about derpy citizens laughing at failure though :laugh:

So you do follow the detractor movement. I knew you seem the type to love to hate the people you talk about. I mean literally every post since I been here you've weaved them into every post you make. Whats your @ on Twitter?

38 minutes ago, Bailey_Dakota said:

I chuckled at their comment about how Phil loses at Street Fighter a lot, that's absolute slander right there. 

Well he does lose alot when he plays online.

2 hours ago, TraditionalGames said:

You might also wonder why a gaming magazine that hires journalists to talk shit about a YouTuber has the credibility to last over 200 issues.

Even though this was a little harsh, I use to read Play Mag and people would send questions for them to answer. Every so now and then they would post a really dumb question and they would light them up with a fiery response. It was hilarious, but I'd be a little salty if I was on the receiving end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BrotherLono said:

Not on Topic

Alright lets try to stay on topic. Thanks.

Anyways,

So unlike Nintendo im sure Play will have a stash of their magazines on the internet, im going to try to find the issue and see the context of why they even mentioned Phil.

Edited by QuadLache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, QuadLache said:

Either way, calling Phil "possibly the whiniest man to have fallen out the womb" is pretty outlandish for a writer to type and a senior editor to "OK" for print on a magazine that is read by millions.

Seems standard fair to me. Admittedly been a long time since I read any gaming magazines, but that level of hyperbole and style of outlandish writing is exactly how I remember a lot of gaming magazine being written. I suppose it was their way of adding flair.

5 hours ago, QuadLache said:

I understand Phil can get quite ridiculous with the reasoning of him losing online matches and the pressing of buttons when trying to block, but that statement is kinda low.

I disagree about it being kinda low, or at least that it was their intention. Maybe it's due to how many people deride Phil that their statement is being taken so seriously right now or maybe it's because what they said hits just a little too close to home to be considered comedic or as good-natured teasing. After all, I think we can all admit that Phil does complain a lot about a great many things.

 

I would like to know the context of this though, so godspeed on finding some back issues.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sam said:

I would like to know the context of this though, so godspeed on finding some back issues.

Found it. And the article itself is not slanderous at all.

issue 240, p. 89

88-0395efa7c0.jpg89-0e74c9a29c.jpg

Mild slander for being "whiniest player ever" to be apart of a Top 10 Twitch Channels You Must Follow. I'd take it. Though deep down I would like to make that list on more reputable terms but whatever.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, QuadLache said:

Found it. And the article itself is not slanderous at all.

issue 240, p. 89

88-0395efa7c0.jpg89-0e74c9a29c.jpg

Mild slander for being "whiniest player ever" to be apart of a Top 10 Twitch Channels You Must Follow. I'd take it. Though deep down I would like to make that list on more reputable terms but whatever.

Nice find!

It doesn't seem to be a terribly reputable list in the first place, but yeah, I agree. I'd probably want to be on for a more prestigious reason too. Being called entertaining for the wrong reason would be a shot to my pride, but I'd still take it and run with it full steam cause entertaining is entertaining in the end. Better than the only reason people should watch me is that I'm loud and swear a lot.

That does remind me, doesn't a healthy portion of Phil's fans watch him expressly for his rage? If we don't squabble over semantics, then that's pretty much what the blurb is describing: that fanbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when he's on a rage, it's because he's right and that's what viewers emphasize with, that's just one part of why DSP is awesome to watch. but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. 

Edited by Bailey_Dakota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bailey_Dakota said:

when he's on a rage, it's because he's right and that's what viewers emphasize with, that's just one part of why DSP is awesome to watch. but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. 

.....

You realize you just contradicted your own statement? And I only watch DSP when he rages cause thats the only time I feel his commentary is worth the watch, why do I have issues?

Edited by QuadLache
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, QuadLache said:

Found it. And the article itself is not slanderous at all.

issue 240, p. 89

88-0395efa7c0.jpg89-0e74c9a29c.jpg

Mild slander for being "whiniest player ever" to be apart of a Top 10 Twitch Channels You Must Follow. I'd take it. Though deep down I would like to make that list on more reputable terms but whatever.

"Not slanderous at all"

"Mild slander"

So which is it?

-----

but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. This says people as in more than one person.  The article mentions people watching Phil rage, nobody said it alluded to whoever this QuadLache is.  Total lolbutta

Edited by BrotherLono

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, if this gave him more followers, people can make up their own mind. It is in a way just free avertissement,  OP posted it out if it's original context and didn't mention it. And that what made it look especially bad.

6 hours ago, Bailey_Dakota said:

when he's on a rage, it's because he's right and that's what viewers emphasize with, that's just one part of why DSP is awesome to watch. but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. 

People constantly saying things like this also have some Issues. So don't worry too much about others. 

Edited by BrightSideViking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, BrotherLono said:

"Not slanderous at all"

"Mild slander"

So which is it?

-----

but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. This says people as in more than one person.  The article mentions people watching Phil rage, nobody said it alluded to whoever this QuadLache is.  Total lolbutta

exactly. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bailey_Dakota said:

when he's on a rage, it's because he's right and that's what viewers emphasize with, that's just one part of why DSP is awesome to watch. but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. 

most of the time i watch Phil is to see him rage.

also his rage not always justified and he is not always right 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlonderSTS said:

most of the time i watch Phil is to see him rage.

also his rage not always justified and he is not always right 

Just like with any people. But you know he is just baiting for a response. Being that "dedicated and fantical" and not even a patron. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BrotherLono said:

"Not slanderous at all"

"Mild slander"

So which is it?

It is both. "Not slanderous at all" refers to the article as a whole. "Mild slander" refers to specifically what was said in the brief section about DSP. The two statements had different subjects.

In reality though, I disagree with Quadlache calling it slander, even mild. There is no slander there. Slander is far too overused by the people associated with Phil( be they fans, detractors, what have you) and the man himself. Besides, as this is printed, it would be libel instead of slander, but it is not libel either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BrotherLono said:

"Not slanderous at all"

"Mild slander"

So which is it?

-----

but people saying they watch him just to rage have some issues. This says people as in more than one person.  The article mentions people watching Phil rage, nobody said it alluded to whoever this QuadLache is.  Total lolbutta

Ok again, reading is fundamental. This is the second time you missed information from failing to read the entire statement. You should definitely look into some reading comprehension products that can help you overcome this problem.

On 8/30/2016 at 5:04 PM, QuadLache said:

And the article itself is not slanderous at all.

Meaning the prethesis of the whole article, isn't slanderous at all. The whole article isn't about how terrible Phil is or even titled "The Worst 10 Twitch Streamers Ever". Its titled 10 Twitch streamers you should FOLLOW. Nothing slanderous with that statement at all. Get it?

And im with @Sam the word slander is thrown around too much so I retract my "mild slanderous" comment.

8 hours ago, BrotherLono said:

The article mentions people watching Phil rage, nobody said it alluded to whoever this QuadLache is.  Total lolbutta

I put myself into the group of people he's insulting. He's talking about everyone that watches Phil rage playthroughs have issues.. Most of Phil's fanbase (a fact Phil acknowledged) are here to watch him rage, why do you think all of the rage playthroughs do so well compared to the other ones? Alright then. So how you think I was personalizing what PlayUK Mag said is beyond me, more than likely cause of the level of reading comprehension.

It seems you have some sort of vendetta against me, totally fine, but if you don't like me and want to disprove me..make sure your rebuttal is totally infallible or at least hard to disassemble. These straw-man arguments you're pulling out of god knows where is more embarrassing to yourself than any sweat you think will permeate on me.

In shorter words, try a little harder.

Ok then.

 

Edited by QuadLache
grammatical errors, restructured some sentences, added content.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, QuadLache said:

It seems you have some sort of vendetta against me, totally fine, but if you don't like me and want to disprove me..make sure your rebuttal is totally infallible or at least hard to disassemble. These straw-man arguments you're pulling out of god knows where is more embarrassing to yourself than any sweat you think will permeate on me.

In shorter words, try a little harder.

Ok then.

 

I don't think you're butta, if you are, you are making a god effort to hide the fact. In fact I think you seem supportive of phil. But to his defense butta has had more sock accounts than a normal person have socks in their drawer, and we expect a new incarnation of him very soon. 

Other than that this old article about phil is good covered and I think you and sam actually are right on this one. 

Edited by BrightSideViking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was butta like a troll or something?  Im not trying to troll at all just stating facts. I know some people wont sit tight with what im saying but its the truth.

Edited by QuadLache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...