The whole copyright ordeal forced Angry Joe to confront YouTube themselves, naturally he didn't want to do it alone so he put out the call to the Angry Army to join him. The Angry Army was supposed to back him out outside of YouTube's Offices, but Angry Joe was the only one who showed up. He went into the building alone and started screaming at the receptionist demanding to see the man in charge, but instead he was thrown out of the building by security.
Days later, YouTube sends Maker Studio's (who owns Polaris, which Joe is partnered with on YouTube) a written warning, I don't know the actually content of the message but they were very upset over what happened. They put a restraining order on Angry Joe (Joe Vargas) stating that he's not allowed near any of their buildings again, and if he tries anything like that again he'll be arrested and brought to court. Then Maker sent Joe a message since this incident affected their standing, and his "position" within the Polaris was being downgraded. This is one of the reasons why they don't really bother with him anymore, and it's a running joke with the other networks on YouTube.
The source that send me this information claims to be from Polaris, whether this event happened is up to debate. But let's also consider that Joe deleted his tweets and posts about this even both of the forums and on his social media accounts. This is the only proof that can be found with a google search.
 |
| Not much, but it's a start. |
Angry Joe has since fired back against such claims, stating that this event is totally made up and never happened.
And, yes, Mad "Mad Demon" Miguel, STFU right there and now. Don't even think of opening your retarded filthy mouth, you dumb faggot. We all know who you are, you piece of shit.
You can certainly claim that I am Joe, but unless you can prove that I am Joe, you can't know that I am Joe. Then again if you can't prove that I am Joe then you can't continue to claim that I am Joe either. So really, it's a lose-lose situation for you. Maybe you should quit while you're behind?
Textbook example of an ad hominem fallacy right here folks: trying to claim I'm unfunny/wrong by mentioning stuff about my deviantart account.
Way to wow the crowds with your utter ineptitude dude. Maybe instead of failing at insulting me, you should actually try to refute my claims. You know, actually use a strategy that doesn't blow up in your face 100% of the time? It might actually help you win at least one discussion/argument.
If you claim you are not a troll, nor for the fact that you don't give a rat's ass about Angry Joe; why in the blue hell are you here? If it's trolling, you sure aren't a very good troll. In fact, you suck at trolling.
The fact that I suck at trolling should show you that I am not trolling (you're kinda disproving your own argument).
How so?
So in your head, strawman fallacy=avoiding the actual question? Nice job.
Nice job proving yourself wrong. You can go now.
You're the one sperging here, not me.
But keep going, I love reading those sorry excuses of fail-posts you put up. Did your mommy or daddy write them for you? Did you have the Queen of England type up your poorly crazed crackpot theories?
Debunk that, bitch!
That's fallacious reasoning. Consider yourself debunked. I doubt you could win an argument with a fetus dude.
Again you dodged my questions, did your mommy, daddy, or the Queen of England ghostwrite your responses to this site for you?
Don't like it? Tough: your logic, not mine. But to answer your question: if I answer yes, you will say "lol ur dumb" and if I say no, you will say "lol ur dumb" again. So really there is no point to answering your questions if you have no intention on changing your response depending on what answer I give.
Well, I guess that counts as an answer. So, now what, are you going to lie about me not answering a question I clearly just answered, or are you going to pull something stupid out of your arse?
Actually forget I asked that. No matter what you do it will be stupid regardless of where you pulled it out from.
What proof do we have that they were from Polaris, or that they even exist? Your good word? Don't make me laugh.
Well, ok I am laughing, but at the fact that you expect us to believe this...well ok there are some people here who do believe this, but they would believe it if you claimed that Angry Joe just tried to assassinate the President of the United States and the Queen of England simultaneously using a butter knife while not a single one of them was on the same continent.
There was a other incident with Studio Makers
http://allthingsd.com/20130626/maker-studios-weird-story-gets-weirder-as-former-ceo-sues-co-founders-investors/
I wouldn't say it the way MadDemon64 said but yea for such an accusation we would need something more then just a word.
Still i would not be suprised if that was actually true but yea we need to wait and see.
Do you even read what you post? You titled this blog entry, "Youtube Put a Restraining Order Against Angry Joe." That shows that you believe it 100%.
Now if you had titled your entry, say, "Youtube Allegedly Put a Restraining Order Against Angry Joe", then you could argue that you never said that it was true. Or at least you could say that if you didn't try to poison the well with your second to last sentence, "But let's also consider that Joe deleted his tweets and posts about this even both of the forums and on his social media accounts." You are stating "Yea, it might not be true, but let's face it I hate Angry Joe enough to consider it true regardless of the dubious nature of the "evidence"".
You believe that this happened 100%. The way you word your blog is proof of this.
Get help.
A few blogs back there was this huge back n forth from ciaran and joe by email where he says HE HAS SEEN THIS BLOG...
Look you fatso, THAT IS PROOF, but we all know the next 3 weeks you are going to keep whining about 'well if joe was here prove it' like you do with all the things we already proved your fat retarded ass.
you are the one needing help hiding your identity shilling for a sellout faggot, your soul is almost rotten away completely, im safe I dont need any help but if you dont seek help fast you are going to burn eternally for sure!
Since you white-knight Joe so much, where were you when he needed his Angry Army to confront the Youtube Offices?
And Eric, so far there is no proof that that event ever even happened. Might as well ask me if I was there when Batman saved President Al Gore from an assassination attempt by Mecha Hitler.
That shows that on some level that yes you are attracted to him, as if you did find him truly despicable, such a thought wouldn't even enter your head. I don't hate him, yet I never thought of such a thing. But you did. That says something, and it doesn't take a regular Freud to tell you what it is.
You trapped yourself the second you typed the words. You pwned yourself the second you pressed the "publish" button.
Now, care to try again? I look forward to how you will royally screw up next time.
Considering the fact that you white knight Joe constantly, you must have some motive behind it. I mean, you go after anyone that says one negative remark about Joe; whether it would be Ciaran, Asalieri, etc. What is your motive, Maddemon64?
Well i already know how you write here and like Ciaran Hillock in the past, you made it to the other extreme. Yea Ciaran did exagurate some stuff but in this post.... dude you can't say that " 'Youtube Put a Restraining Order Against Angry Joe.' That shows that you believe it 100%." becouse it doesn't. If you read any article on the internet for any site or on a newspaper you would know thats how you interest reader to read the article.
Plus He wrote "The source that send me this information claims to be from Polaris, whether this event happened is up to debate.".
"Joe's not here harry. He never was here. You're being schizophrenic again." OBJECTION! Well that's Pheonix Wright games for you but on to the point... dude AJ wrote mails to the author that are public, AJ said about ant AJ blog, he freaking tweeted about it. Do you think that anyone would be curious to read what such a blog writes about you ?
So Claiming that "He never was here" is a lie till you prove it.
Oh, and goracyi, that's not how proof works. You claimed that he was here in the comments, so it's up to you to prove it. I'm merely supporting the null-claim that states that he wasn't here that you made when you made the claim that he was here. It is your job to prove that you're not lying, which you have failed to do so, so we must assume that he wasn't here.
Now do you want to provide some actual proof that he's here in the comments or do you want to embarrass yourself again?
It's because you guys keep using them. You don't refute my claims, you just say, "So why do you think that Angry Joe is immune to criticism" or "Well what you say doesn't count because Ciaran called you a fanboy!" Those are logical fallacies, and I keep pointing them out because you keep using them.
And again, using my "fetish" as a means of combating my claims that refute yours, Ciaran's and everyone else's claims that Joe is a shill and so on and so forth is, once again, an ad hominem fallacy due to it attacking me instead of actually targeting my claims.
Again, and this is why I never stop talking about the fallacies you use, you use logical fallacies instead of logic. Maybe if you actually tried debunking my claims like I debunk yours, maybe I would actually be able to stop pointing out that you use logical fallacies. Maybe if you tried using an argument that couldn't be debunked simply by saying "Um, dude, that's a logical fallacy." I could stop citing them.
Seriously, that's about the most feeble attempt at a comeback I have ever seen. No rebuttal of my claims, not even a misplaced faith in a logical fallacy, just a childish claim by a sore loser.
It's really pathetic.
You on the other hand, thing I lose because of an ad populum fallacy. Sorry, no, but you just lost again. Heck, you willingly made yourself lose by using that fallacy.
And...yea...muscle fetish? Do you really think that any fetishes I do or do not have have any impact on the validity of my claims? If you do, well that's yet another logical fallacy (ad hominem to be precise) that you have made to add to the list that cements your losing streak.
Also, mountain dew? Seriously? If I was a fanboy of angry joe like you claim I was, do you honestly think I would be drinking mountain dew? Or did you just admit that you don't think I'm a fanboy? Or were you just flailing at your inability to come up with a good comeback and just threw everything at the wall in order to see what stuck?
Do you ever check to make sure you know the words you use, or do you make up an imaginary definition and pray it's correct?
C'mon man, you're really losing it. What happened to the novel like posts you put up? Those were funny, even though you are full of shit. Are you losing some steam.
As for what happened to them: they still exist, but I really only save them for people who don't rely on the same old tired lies again and again. I save them for people who actually are intelligent enough to say something novel (but still stupid enough to believe Ciaran).
Honestly, I'm glad you enjoyed them (even though you enjoyed them for the wrong reasons), but right now you're just boring me. You're not worth the extra effort. Maybe if you actually said something smart (or borderline retarded) I would make one for you. But right now, all you guys do is just parrot the same lies over and over again, thinking that repeating them somehow makes them true. It's kinda disheartening.
But to the question at hand; Did you had your mommy, daddy, or the Queen of England write that post for you. Or did you just pull a Shia LaBeouf and plagiarize that whole post?
I look forward to your attempted debunks on my questions.
But to the question at hand; Did you had your mommy, daddy, or the Queen of England write that post for you. Or did you just pull a Shia LaBeouf and plagiarize that whole post?
I look forward to your attempted debunks on my questions.
And I stopped reading right there. If you can't be bothered to type correctly, I can't be bothered to answer your inane/insane questions.
Plus I don't think you even know what plagiarize means.
P.S. Stop double posting.
Plus, I don't think you know what white-knighting actually means.
P.S. Stop dodging my questions and give a simple answer.
Again, what is your motivation for defending Joe against his detractors? See, I don't know if you realize this, but don't you think that the more you white-knight and debunk, the more you're hurting Joe's reputation?
Not that he already messed himself up due to the moronic shit he pulls; but just that fact that fanboys like you tend to make him look bad?
Also, you seem to have a Youtube account, that I see. Judging from the comments on your channel, you are a fail-troll. Wanna deny that YT and the Deviantart account?
then the youtube channel....he subscribed to angry joe.....
now this makes sense,the fact the name maddemon64 in devianart and YT profiles proves that MD here right now is the same person. names are the same in these accounts that I'm seeing,so it's probably MD....
youtube: MadDemon64
devianart: MadDemon64
this blog: MadDemon64
everyone has dark pasts that they hide.... don't worry bout showing them... :D
and a question to you MD,why do you like muscle girls?
not saying I hate those kinds of girls..... :D
YT:https://www.youtube.com/user/MadDemon64/feed
Devianart: http://maddemon64.deviantart.com/
:D
Not to mention that MadDemon64 is a moderator at the AJSA forums.
tnx.
And Satoshi...dunno. To each his own is the best explanation I can give. But don't believe Eric's lies. I'm not a moderator. If you look on the blogs you will see "advanced member", not "moderator". Eric is trying to trick you.
Probably as soon as you learn that me pointing out that a claim that is backed by zero proof utterly disproves such a claim.
Let me ask you this Maddemon64 (or is it Aaron, according to your Deviantart account profIle). What do expect to get from your feeble attempts of debunking and refuting this blog? Some brownie points from Joe?
Another thing, since you enjoy debunking and refuting, why do you debunk and refute that the Deviantart and YT accounts are not you, huh? Go ahead, I'll wait.
One more thing; so I made the mistake of saying you are a moderator, instead of advanced user (Whatever the hell that means), doesn't change the fact that you're a fantard of Angry Job. Great job at exposing yourself as the fantard you really are.
As for what I expect, well for starters you stop making baseless claims, stop thinking that it's ok to make up vitriolic slander at a man just because you can't come to terms with the fact that he hates games you love and vice versa, and learn how to do some actual research instead of agreeing with someone who appears to agree with your baseless claims. In short, I expect you to get back in touch with reality.
And as for why I haven't debunked or refuted the deviantart or youtube accounts, well really I don't need to; any attempt to use them as a means to claim that I'm wrong in my successful debunks and refutations of yours and Ciaran's claims is an act of an ad hominem fallacy, as it is an attempt to attack me instead of refute my refutations. Really, I don't need to refute them because anyone who uses them in an attempt to refute my claims is in actuality refuting their own claims just by using those accounts as an attempt to refute my claims.
And again, it doesn't matter what kind of forum member I am, because pointing that out when trying to refute my claims, once again, is an attempt to refute my claims by attacking me instead of actually trying to refute my claims. Plus the label is a reflection of how many times you have posted, not your opinion of Angry Joe. By your own logic, Ciaran, the person who runs this blog, is also a "fantard" of Angry Joe due to him being a "user" on the AJSA forums. So yea, great job at exposing your lord and master as the "fantard" you really are. I'm sure you're proud of yourself.
Yes, I am proud of the fact that I am exposing you more as the fail-troll you are. From my observations, this blog has more weight and platform for their arguments against Joe; you MadDemon64, not so much. Admit it you are a white-knight, otherwise, you would have realized that this is an Anti-Angry Joe blog and moved on with your life. But you won't. I can go on, you know. All I can say is debating with me, you will lose. So bring it, try and debunk the fact that you have a hard-on for muscular women.
I'll wait. I have all day.
And on that note, it is impossible for me to be a fail-troll, since I have done no trolling and have yet to fail here, so you exposing me as something I am not is impossible in every sense of the word.
I will leave you waiting, because I will not be bothered to try to debunk something that has no impact on anything; regardless of whether or not I do or do not like muscular women does not change the fact that I have refuted all of your claims and exposed Ciaran's hatred for what it is. My sexual preferences in women and whether or not they are different from yours does not change the fact that I have been 100% correct in every one of my statements.
Now, do you want to actually try to refute my claims, or do you want to be the world's worst white-knight yourself (ironic, I know, but that's what you are).
But satire does not involve vitriolic slander. Satire does not involve making up baseless lies. Satire does not involve being hate-filled.
Your blog does not meet the necessary qualifications to be considered satire. Now do you want to provide further proof that your blog isn't satire, or would you rather cut to the chase and actually admit the truth about the nature of your blog?
He cries so much every time Angry Joe posts something he feels the need to write in his blog so he can QQ moar.
And yes, I do have some insight. I know how people think. I know how you think. The only reason why this blog exists is because you cry every time Angry Joe disagrees with you.
And for the last time, I can't continue to do something I never started. Why does this simple concept escape your limited grasp on reality and facts?
You were my earth
But you didn't know all the ways I loved you, no
So you took a chance
And made other plans
But I bet you didn't think that they would come crashing down, no
You don't have to say, what you did,
I already know, I found out from him
Now there's just no chance, for you and me, there'll never be
And don't it make you sad about it
You told me you loved me
Why did you leave me, all alone
Now you tell me you need me
When you call me, on the phone
Girl I refuse, you must have me confused
With some other guy
Your bridges were burned, and now it's your turn
To cry, cry me a river
Cry me a river-er
Cry me a river
Cry me a river-er, yea yea
I know that they say
That somethings are better left unsaid
It wasn't like you only talked to him and you know it
(Don't act like you don't know it)
All of these things people told me
Keep messing with my head
(Messing with my head)
You should've picked honesty
Then you may not have blown it
(Yea..)
You don't have to say, what you did,
(Don't have to say, what you did)
I already know, I found out from him
(I already know, uh)
Now there's just no chance, for you and me, there'll never be
(No chance, you and me)
And don't it make you sad about it
You told me you loved me
Why did you leave me, all alone
(All alone)
Now you tell me you need me
When you call me, on the phone
(When you call me on the phone)
Girl I refuse, you must have me confused
With some other guy
(I'm not like them baby)
Your bridges were burned, and now it's your turn
(It's your turn)
To cry, cry me a river
(Go on and just)
Cry me a river-er
(Go on and just)
Cry me a river
(Baby go on and just)
Cry me a river-er, yea yea
Oh
(Oh)
The damage is done
So I guess I be leaving
Oh
(Oh)
The damage is done
So I guess I be leaving
Oh
(Oh)
The damage is done
So I guess I be leaving
Oh
(Oh)
The damage is done
So I guess I be... leaving
You don't have to say, what you did,
(Don't have to say, what you did)
I already know, I found out from him
(I already know, uh)
Now there's just no chance, for you and me, there'll never be
(No chance, you and me)
And don't it make you sad about it
Cry me a river
(Go on and just)
Cry me a river-er
(Baby go on and just)
Cry me a river
(You can go on and just)
Cry me a river-er, yea yea
Cry me a river
(Baby go on and just)
Cry me a river-er
(Go on and just)
Cry me a river
(Cause I've already cried)
Cry me a river-er, yea yea
(Ain't gonna cry no more, yea-yea)
Cry me a river
Cry me a river, oh
Cry me a river, oh
Cry me a river, oh
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river, oh
(Cry me, cry me)
Cry me a river
(Cry me, cry me)
Aside from pointing it out, I got nothin'.
I see concepts like irony are foreign to you.
Ok, even you can't be stupid enough to think that makes any sense.
At least that event has records proving its existence. This...for all we know Ciaran just made it up on the spot and made up the claim that he got it from a "member of Polaris who wishes to remain anonymous" in order to trick you into thinking it actually happened.
We only have Ciaran's word to go on this, and for all we know, he's lying (heck, he's already proven himself to be a liar in one respect or another, either by lying on the AJSA forums that this blog was meant to be a satire and that he doesn't really hate Angry Joe and has been trolling you this whole time, or he was telling the truth on the AJSA forums, meaning he lied to you and doesn't really hate Joe and has been trolling you the whole time. Either way, he lied to someone, which makes his word highly questionable at best, especially when there is no proof to back it up).
That is one of my problems with the guy, and i personally don't feel it's from anger issues as you claim respectfully speaking. More like he has the personality of a bully, and I cannot defend a man who acts so immature, and disgustingly arrogant at points. I don't care if people like his content or not, but i disagree with people who say his behavior is justified at times.
Mind updating your title to reflect the truth now?
I don't think you thought this through.
Do you even know what it means to white knight, or do you consider it a catch-all in your failed attempts to insult and use ad hominem fallacies?
You're a real crappy reviewer. You are worst than Irate Gamer. Now, try and debunk that site, bitch. Go on, I look forward to your unintentionally hilarious, full of shit, posts. Bring it!
Are you going to actually refute my claims, or are you just going to keep stalking me like an internet creepo who's only means of defending himself is crying wolf and thinking that proving that I having multiple accounts that share the same name somehow proves that I have lied on this blog?
I weep for your parents, the shame they must feel knowing they raised an idiot who thinks that an ad hominem fallacy is a valid means of debunking a claim.
But, tell me, do you think you can do better? Please, show me the 90 you gave Mortal Kombat X or the 12 you gave Dragon Age Origins. Oh, and don't forget to ensure that your complaints are actually valid; please try to remember that "Angry Joe gave this game a good review but since he's a bad reviewer he must have lied so therefore this game sucks!" is not a valid point of criticism.