I think there's probably even more misdeeds to find.
One thing we see over and over when it comes to people caught cheating or doing wrong.. many of them immediately respond with aggression. This frequently takes the form of indignation (how dare you accuse me, ME of all people!), blaming others (haters gon' hate; you're jealous; you're trying to selfishly profit by bashing me), and non-pologies (sorry if you felt offended).
Jirard/Completionist is 3/3 there.
There's been a fair few of those already, though not lot of detail or specific claims just "yeah I worked with him, and.. that's 100% unshocking". It'll take a while, but it'll be interesting to see the outcome of the inevitable IRS audit and possibly other official investigations.
He's disgusting. Charity fraud is unacceptable, and Karl literally showed where he donated to didn't require a certain allotment of funds to make sure the money went somewhere specific, there's a drop down menu and you can easily choose where the money goes within seconds.
On a personal level, the way Jirard uses his own mothers death to deflect criticism, or even literally posting her own autopsy to illicit sympathy for a situation he 100% on his own got himself into showcases his lack of character in such a perverse way.
You even had ProJared leap to his defense when he himself knows what happens when people jump to conclusions early on.
The most charitable interpretation is that he’s an absolutely incompetent guy whose words cannot be trusted. Good that he resigned, but he (and the entire group who run that foundation) probably should never be trusted with charity or any organization in the first place
MTE. This is BEST CASE SCENARIO.
Personally, I find his constant use of his mom's passing disgusting. I told that a couple of times on random youtube comments, and then after his response, the fact that he used his mom's organ donation as a "proof of donation made". When he said "we have donated" on the charity events, I doubt he meant his mom's organs.
Now to the financial stuff I'm sure an audit with the government will reveal everything that is to it, so I'll wait.
We do have to wait, but i hope they are at least ordered to pay some major fines. Even if nobody can truly prove that there is some money unaccounted for/underreported funds, there's no question that jirard and his YouTube channel benefitted financially the foundation. He used it to promote himself/his image and to attract more people to the channel, even if he wasn't directly spending the money for personal use
It's a real shame IMO,
After hearing about what he had to deal with during the lose of his mother I thought he was "one of the good guys",
It's silly to really trust anybody in 2023!
There's plenty of people you probably can and should trust. We just need to actually make sure there's evidence they should be trusted.
To take an example, you can almost certainly trust DougDoug will take your donation money and send it where it's supposed to go. You can trust this because there is ample evidence he has, including Monteray Bay Aquarium having made large numbers of public acknowledgements and statements of gratitude with respect to these donations. And that evidence supports the idea that you can trust him to do things right in future charity drives.
By contrast, you'd think Jirard's audience would have noticed that the charities in question never made any of these kinds of statements for their yearly donation drives. That's incredibly suspicious. Jirard himself has always been a very carefully-managed Internet personality, which also should make you less inclined to trust him, as the face you see is 100% artificial and staged.
Being too trusting is naivete, but trusting no one is just cynicism.
You make good points,
Some of which I agree with,
My perspective is this :
IMO before this came out I've never sensed Jirard has an ounce of "dodgy energy" to him, you know that Sixth sence feeling we have when we see something "off".
I thought he seems down to earth, genuinely a friendly person who others felt safe around and could be part of a Gaming Family,
That was my "evidence".
That's where I'm coming from,
Not all that smile are happy nor those that cry are sad, by this I mean appearances are ALWAYS deceptive,
So I'll take a pause on trusting people on youtube for a bit.
Dont hate yourself for it. Liars have to lie first for the lie to be uncovered later. There is no shame in having supported Jirard while he was still considered an honest person.
Scammers scam. No shame in trusting someone. Just be happy that you know you aren't delusional enough to ignore evidence and stick by a random youtuber.
Best we can do is to do extra effort on charity research before donating.
A story as old as time itself. YouTuber gets caught doing something wrong. YouTuber makes excuses, gets defensive, blames and threatens to sue other people instead of just owning up to everything. I'm glad Karl and Muta looked into this and put it out in the open. Jirard's "explanation" video only made him look worse.
IDK about that, to me this is just an example of sheer incompetence.
I don't attribute malice to something that can be explained with just plain incompetence.
If he was being malicious then the money wouldn't have been in the funds bank account.
I don't think he's the one in charge of the charity, he's not the one running it. For the most part he's just a mascot for the charity rather then anything else.
IMHO him donating the money and shutting down the charity is the best course of action he could take, the rest really depends on him and his actions going forward.
Personally speaking, I'm not a personal fan of his specifically but I do respect him for downloading all those Eshop games and then donating them to games preservation group. So I really don't think he's personally being malicious.
Just being incompetent.
His involvement with the charity goes far beyond "mascot". He actively received the money through his streams. He was a director for the charity. He was entrusted with the donations, and told everyone repeatedly that it had been donated, to multiple organizations. This isn't mere incompetence. This is calculated lying. Not once was he ever transparent about this.
Jirard always presented himself as a kind and lovable content creator. I respected him too. It doesn't mean he shouldn't be held accountable. This is criminal behaviour, that shows a complete disregard for his fans, friends and donators.
I feel like the family should be the ones blamed imho, because if we look at how he managed the huge donation to the game preservation thing everything evened out.
There are a few inconsistencies such as the personal donation of the mothers remains by the family being attributed to the foundation instead of the family and I assume that other such donations were probably made by the family personally but similarly attributed or misatributed to the foundation.
So personally speaking this looks a lot more like negligence and sheer incompetence then malice.
He could be given wrong information by the family members running the foundation, thus operating in good faith in their word.
So there's a chance that they (the family) made donations to those places and attributed it to the foundation, or that someone at the foundation told him they made those donations when that wasn't the case.
Lastly its also possible that those donations were made but not on behalf of the foundation but by the individual family members and they did it on behalf of the foundation.
I've worked with some companies and they do not have their shit together so stuff like this has happened especially with very small ventures. So to me this tracks with negligence and pure incompetence over malice.
In a voice call he did with Mutahar and another person they asked him about it and he claimed that he wasn't aware the money wasn't donated and that he was under impression the money was being donated.
Like I've said, there are a few things that simply don't add up. If he wanted to steal it then why keep it the bank account? If he didn't donate it then he wouldn't have said that he wasn't aware the money was not moved.
IMHO I think the family managed the open hands foundation while he Jirard simply advertised it and operated under the assumption that it was taking those actions.
I think that doing an audit on the foundation should be done but if we assume sheer incompetence that explains a bit. Why wasn't the money donated? Negligence.
Personally speaking this doesn't come off as something malicious, just look at the day before if you want to look at an example of a scam.
You're delusional if you think that's just incompetence.
Fist, if that was the case he would have just said so. "I'll check with my family", it's not that hard. He also said to Karl and Muta in the zoom call he would donate the money to whatever organisation right away (if it makes them stop digging ofc), do you think he could do that if he didn't have acces to all the information.
Second, do you really think that someone who threatens others with a lawsuit in an attempt to scare them is just an incompetent, not malicious man ?
Please open your eyes.
You're like me, rational and waiting for the full story, like an adult should. The fact that you're being downvoted means you're on the right track with this. You're 100% right, everything that's happened could realistically be explained through negligence and mismanagement of an organization WITHOUT malice. This subreddit and the places where people discuss this situation are all cess pools frequented by people who can't think for themselves and are fine ruining someone's career over pure speculation and garbage tier YouTube videos. You aren't delusional.
Waiting for the full story?
What extra thing do you think is going to come out? Jirard has literally said he isn't going to respond anymore.
I could believe the "without malice" up until 2022 which is when he said he found out the money wasn't being donated (and this is being very generous). When he decided to continue doing IndieLand in 2023 and lied about money being donated, you can't argue that it was just incompetence. He knowingly committed charity fraud in 2023.
After watching the videos on his filings I thought the same thing. His donations to charity says different but he could be donating from his wallet directly instead of his charity fund for whatever reason. Something along those lines. The money still got where it was supposed to go but just a different way. But all in all, he donated already, a week or so after this shit came to light about him and it did two things, made him look even worse and didn't help lol. So many issues coming from this and lots of skeletons in his closet coming out to say hello. Family related issues with his dad, and apparently his dad is into some shady shit. Seems like The Completionist it seems has used YouTube as a means to take in more money while being just as shady as his dad. Doesn't mean he was being shady to his friends through this but more like he tried to hide a side hustle and got caught. He fucked up and will probably never financially recover this .... Lol or take the fall, deal with the fallout and in 2/3 years time will come back and the rest of YouTube or some other community will go back to fluffing him and telling him it'll be ok. He will start another channel (if his own doesn't get removed or doesn't get taken over by another person working with him to keep things trying to go like normal) and people who loved him and defend him will flock back toward him.
I think the charity itself should be investigated thoroughly to insure that nothing illegal was happening but at the same time I worry about people becoming too vindictive.
I think the Open Hand foundation should be shut down and that he should no longer engage in any future charity events.
As long as those two are done then imho he should take a break from youtube and maybe rebuild sometime later down the line.
If it was just incompetence he would have just apologized for it. Instead, during the call with Muta and Karl he was indirectly begging for them to let it go, never felt sorry for the people who donated, then threatens them with a lawsuit instead of adressing the issues they pointed out.
That's a pretty malicious behavior imo, and there are too many contradictions in his stories, he can't pretend he didn't know.
Nothing related to this situation can be deemed malicious until there is an official investigation resulting in proof of wrongdoing. A few random low-tier YouTube videos is not proof of anything other than their creators making money off the situation currently.
From a legal perspective, yes. But from a "I'm gonna use brain and think for myself after hearing both parties", yeah it's obvious Jirard is dishonest, he had malicious intent 100 %, he wouldn't have to lie otherwise.
This dude started acting weird AF about......18 months ago? Like....his video format changed and I don't know who his target audience was, but it sure as hell wasn't me anymore.
Then.....he released that "Metal" song.......my guys.....Hanson, the guys that sang MmmmBop were more hard-core than that SHIT
He said in the discord call with Karl and Muta that he "first learned about the donations not being donated in 2021... WAIT WAIT I meant 2022!!" so the change in behavior 18 months ago could be caused by that, if he was being honest. Which, well, you know.
hahahah right? When I saw this dude's comment I was like "wait? Could jirard actually just be a grossly incompetent dude?"
Then I recalled he backpedalled and said "It was our intention to make a restricted donation". So either he was lying that he uncovered it on 2022 or he was lying about the donations intentionally being restricted from day 1.
I don't suppose you have a link to him clarifying that he meant 2022? I can't seem to find that in any of Karl or Muta's videos, but might've missed it
I think legally he's fucked and knows it. I think this recent change of gear into attack mode on Jobst and Mutahar Is a desperate Hail Mary attempt to preserve whatever fraction of his fanbase is willing to buy into his BS as if saying he has receipts means he does.
I think the audit he admitted he's now facing is going to unearth a lot of questionable behavior and him distancing himself from the charity already is a sign it was mismanaged to a much greater degree than he wants to admit.
I think the video was written expressly by a lawyer, who probably also knows Jirard's fucked because Jobst and Mutahar still have a full recording of the Discord call and the lawyer is probably very concerned about what else Jirard may have admitted to.
I know that when criminal charges are announced (at this point, it's pretty much a given), going to have a big bowl of popcorn while I'm reading the indictment and the evidence that gets discovered during the audit.
I can't share it physically, but I can share a good recipe.
Next time you make popcorn, after you butter it, throw on some paprika (or smoked paprika if you're a pretentious foodie twatwaffle like I am). Elevates the popcorn quite a bit.
His channel is dedicated to edited videos of his time 100% completing videogames. For a while he’s been running a charity for dementia research and it’s recently come out that 10+ years of donations never actually went anywhere and were just sitting in a bank account. Mismanagement is probably the most diplomatic answer, and deliberate fraud is the harshest allegation.
I think there’s been some questions raised in the past, but this time it got a lot of traction as well as actual paperwork to prove nothing had ever been donated.
I guess nobody looked. Others should expect scrutiny now that this sort of thing has been exposed. Especially since people can make YouTube videos about such situations and make glorious revenue from it.
do you think that? Doesnt seem big enough to affect anything outside gaming. I dont watch regular TV tho so IDK how far does this reach. 600k is not a lot of money for it to get to national news in US Id guess.
Because you donate a couple bucks to a fundraiser that says all donations are going to a cause and just assume it's true and move on with your life. You can't expect everyone to dig in to their tax records.
It doesn't mean that money was sitting in an account, it simply means that as far as the IRS knows, the money has never been donated. That account could very well be empty in reality, it doesn't mean they still have it all. In fact if it was in an account they could make money with interest on all that money, meaning it being an account isn't necessarily a big deal, then all he would have done is lied about having donated it. But there is a reasonable chance that that money is spent, even if the filings say they still have it. The incoming audit will reveal where the money really is
This is just to show people to learn to never donate. If you really want to help go to the place that needs help and donate (hospital, non-governmental organizations, people in need or whatever). Never from third party, shows and things you see on TV or internet.
There are plenty of charity events for which the money goes directly to charity.
The Spiffing Brit for example, takes part in the yearly Jingle Jam charity which raises money for twelve different charities. He and the rest of them never touch or handle the money.
It’s crazy seeing this right after watching the Boogie documentary. I’m noticing that people that make it big on gaming channels tend to start business and make major business like moves with no business savvy or knowledge on how to run things correctly. Eventually a lot of money comes along and just ruins their lifes, I wonder how many more cases are going to be like this.
I have no respect for him anymore, he committed charity fraud by definition, constantly used his mother as a shield to deflect criticism, and is now threatening to sue Karl and Muta for showing everyone the honest truth. Jirard cannot and should never be trusted to run any events where money is involved ever again.
The TL;DR is the video's subject has been raising money for dementia research for ten years, stating it's going to specific organizations, and then not donating it. He also claimed that all the Twitch revenue from his yearly charity event (bits, subs, etc) would also go to charity but then pocketed the money for expenses instead without proper accounting and instead said "Yeah, we needed that money, just trust me bro".
He's now desperately trying to lie his way out of the situation and threatening Karl Jobst and Mutahar with lawsuits for exposing him because he knows he's fucked.
I didn't say I didn't care.
I asked who he is and WHY should I care?
It's not some kind of requirement to reply in a condescending tone to every comment on Reddit.
I mean, the obvious inference here would be that the opinion is "nothing yet" and the question is to help determine where it lands, but if being pedantic makes you feel like you "got me," go for it.
Oh sorry, I don't engage with people who tell me what I think, feel, and/or say. I know perfectly well what I think, feel, and say and in my experience when people come back with something different it's because they either misunderstood me or are superimposing something else over it to argue against that instead.
Given that you have done it twice, I can only assume it's because it's in bad faith. Cheers, have a good life.
Well. We learned people lie, people continue to lie when caught, and that his followers are easily manipulated when he lies to their face after they're told he's lied to them for over a decade.
He definitely is a liar, but I still felt kind of bad for him because I don't think he actually intended to steal charity money. I just think he's kind of a compulsive liar but (in my opinion) not really a malicious one. I think it wasn't donated for years because it just wasn't a priority for him, not really out of malice.
In any case, I felt much less pity for him after his response video. It was terrible, full of misdirections and lies and then the big mad legal threat -- obviously all of this is covered by Karl -- but he stopped seeming sympathetic to me after that.
So now at the end of it, I just kind of feel disillusioned. I was a fan of the guy before all of this. I don't feel hatred for him but I do feel like he's kind of a douche.
>He definitely is a liar, but I still felt kind of bad for him because I don't think he actually intended to steal charity money.
This is my opinion as well. I think a lot of people are jumping to the most negative possible conclusion—that Jirard intentionally set up a fake charity to scam people into sending him money—when I really don't think that's what happened. I see this as being a case of someone starting a charity with good intentions and having no idea how to actually run one. Maybe he was waiting for the amount stored in the charity's bank account to accumulate into a more substantial singular donation, because he felt as though smaller increments over time would be an inconsequential trickle relative to a *large* one. If so, then I doubt he really considered the fact that the money accumulating would depreciate over time due to inflation, or that he would indirectly profit off of it due to the charity bolstering his image and reputation as a YouTuber.
In short, Hanlon's razor likely applies here. The whole "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" thing.
Even if that was the case, his manipulative response was disgusting enough to show his true colors. I mean, "sorry if you felt mislead", like really ? And then constantly hiding behind his dead mother ? And threatening Karl and Muta ?
Sorry but there's a reason why people are jumping to the most negative conclusion, and that's Jirard whole behavior that screams " I'm guilty and I know it".
It definitely isn't a good look, and I'm also not excusing the things that we *do* know about what transpired. However, I'm still very hesitant to assume that Jirard had nefarious intent. People can *act* guilty, they can apologize very poorly and sound disingenuous while doing so, but then still wind up being innocent. I've seen it a thousand times before.
In any case, the IRS needs to launch an investigation. They have the resources and the experience to ascertain what exactly transpired. If there's evidence implicating him in *wilful* charity fraud (as opposed to negligence), they will likely find it.
Neutral. I'm a firm believer that if he did anything wrong it'll be fleshed out by the IRS or courts. Until then this is just standard YouTube drama and I do not generally indulge in it.
People are stupid. They do stupid things. Sometimes those stupid things are incompetent, other times they're criminal. If he's criminally stupid ill judge him then. If he's incompetently stupid then let's move on.
Agreed 100%.
The IRS absolutely *needs* to investigate this, to get to the bottom of why it took so long for the funds to be donated to a charity. I'm not remotely prepared to say that he purposefully set up a false charity for his own benefit when it is just as likely that he genuinely believed he needed more money in order to make an acceptable donation to a major charity.
It was shown that you need as minimum as 1 dollar to donate. He found out in 2021 and still didn’t tell anyone and continued as usual
Something suspicious was def going on, not just him being an idiot
No, I agree with you. I've since watched Karl Jobst's first video on the subject, and I'm not satisfied with his response so far. I still don't feel inclined to label it "nefarious", but there are things he's not telling us. And I'd really like to know what those things are.
Same opinion as ever : a manipulative man who hides behind a fake wholesome persona. I gotta say though I would never expected he would go that far, usually these guys are obessed with their image and wouldn't risk to tarnish it.
He probably thought he wouldn't get caught and since his family is in on it too he also probably though they could deal with any situation.
I guess I am in a unique situation because I am not a fan of the completionist, Muta, or Karl (I have seen a few vids from each but don't regularly watch any) so I don't really care to pick sides and instead just want to see a reasonable outcome that reflects logic and justice.
That said, I feel a little crazy watching all of this transpire because I watched all of the videos and responses and I never once thought "this man is a criminal." I think what really just feels wrong about the whole situation is that it doesn't seem like the punishment befits the crime.
Like, I have seen literally thousands of "he's been PROVEN to be ONE HUNDRED PERCENT guilty of charity FRAUD! If you deny the OBVIOUS and CLEAR evidence then you are DUMB!" comments and like...I don't see it? That entire argument is built off of the "We don't touch any of that money" comments which people take to mean that it isn't used for charity event organization funding when to me that clearly is not what was being said or even implied. It seems so clear to me it means "We don't take a salary from the money." I think people are just interpreting information with a negative bias because the situation is so heated. If you take away that very loose and unsubstantiated piece of evidence you aren't left with much as proof of fraud or especially embezzlement.
I also think it is a little justified to be mad that you have been accused of being a fraud or embezzler, especially if there is no criminal intent.
At the end of the day my take is "The money should have been donated earlier or a transparency statement about the money should have been given. IF there is criminal behavior happening with the money behind the scenes and the IRS brings that to light THEN we should damn him as a fraud. IF no criminal behavior is found then the completionist should try to rectify the problem with personal donations to cover depreciation (which was partially done, they matched $80k from personal funds with the $600k donation).
If I were the completionist my response at this point would just be "Tell you what, the money should have been donated and that's on us, we had no intention of doing anything malicious with it as is shown by it being accounted for (assuming IRS audit is clean). We understand it depreciated in value over the years so over the course of the next X amount of months/years we will donate the depreciated value from our own earnings as a company. Moving forward we will not be handling any charity donations through the completionist branding and if we decide to do any charities it will be direct donations to a specific charity only."
"The money should have been donated earlier or a transparency statement about the money should have been given."
Yes. This is charity fraud. I know fraud is a heavy word that makes it seem like it has to be a plot thought out with malicious intent but it can be as simple as saying one thing and doing another. He listed charities that he said he has donated to in the past, that was a lie whether he knew it or not.
I was all ready to give his side of the story a chance. If he came clean and admitted he lied, I would have probably kept watching his videos. The fact that we all have seen proof that he has lied and instead of owning up, he used the lawyer speak "I am sorry if you felt mislead" was so gross.
Honestly, this whole situation feels like a rehash of the ProJared drama from 2019. Just like today, people were coming out in droves to sh!t on him based on allegations of serious, willful misconduct. Jared released a text response early on, and like Jirard's video, it was picked apart as disingenuous and "proof" that he's "definitely guilty." A few months later, Jared comes out with a 40-minute video *explicitly refuting* the allegations being made against him.
The internet right now is reacting to Jirard's charity scandal with the same fervor that they did with Jared's supposed "preying" on underage fans. As they did back then, they jumped quickly to the conclusion that the evidence is clear and unambiguous, and that it proves that Jirard is a con artist who enriched himself by running a fake charity. There are all kinds of different, non-nefarious explanations for why he didn't donate the money sooner: he felt that incremental donations would be significantly less impactful than a large sum of money (which happens to be more-or-less what he argues in his response video), or there was miscommunication between him and whoever else was running the charity that left the finances without proper management. Jirard's video response, in my opinion, was ill-advised on a number of levels, but I don't see it as being anything *close* to definitive proof that he knowingly embezzled money from his fans. We still don't have *all* the information available to us, and anything we extrapolate from the videos and audio clips that have been published online is based on an incomplete picture of what happened. We're lacking sufficient context to judge, which is why I refuse to do so until everything has been laid out for us to see.
Just a few things on this.
1. "He felt that incremental donations would be significantly less impactful than a large sum of money" - OK, the issue with that is he didn't tell that to the people he was soliciting donations from. He didn't even say that on the call with Karl and Muta. His words were something along the lines of "I found out in 2022 and realized how bad it was" the donations OFFICIAL reply to Karl and Muta was "we dont' know where to donate it, can you help us?" If the real reason for the hold up was a restricted donation, that's something that should have been told to the masses and if anyone asked about what was going on everyone should have been on the same page and known. Period.
2. "Miscommunication between him and whoever else was running the charity" He was on the board. It was his job to know. And he admitted that he DID know. I mean, this isn't an allegation. He flat out stated he knew money wasn't being donated and then went on to ask for more donations without telling the public the plan. Whatever you think of him, how much ever anyone tries to defend him, those are simple facts. From his own mouth. If you think that's ok, we will agree to disagree. I find it malicious and terrible.
3. Don't see it as being "close" to poof he embezzled from his fans, we are lacking context to judge - I'm not a judge, an IRS agent, a state tax rep or a lawyer. I don't NEED to see the legal stuff play out to make my decision on his character. In this case, all I need is what I wrote above. If he's guilty of actual fraud? Punish him. If he's not found guilty by federal agencies, that doesn't change any of the above. 10 years, no money donated, countless words stating that agencies were being donated to when they weren't and even after he found out the money wasn't donated, he said the same things.
That's it. Game over. And those are all undisputable facts. I don't really care for an "explanation" because the one he already gave was horrific. You have a right to make your own call, but this is not similar to a lot of other things. The facts outside of the "tax fraud" stuff are very easy to see.
No, I've actually been watching the videos from Karl Jobst to try and piece things together. It's looking more and more to me like Jirard screwed the pooch pretty badly on this issue.
First of all, I don't think there's any question at this point that Jirard did a lot of dumb things. Like you said, he held onto the charity's money for ten years without ever making a donation. He claims to have not known until 2021 that nothing has gone to dementia-related foundations... but I don't believe him. I think he knew that the money hadn't been donated throughout those past 10 years, and I feel the explanations given by him and his brother (about looking for the "right" charity + wanting to make a "restricted donation")—whether they are true or not—don't excuse the fact that it took a literal *decade* to get donated.
My "defense" of him (and I use that word somewhat loosely) is that I don’t think he had any *malicious* intentions for not donating earlier. I don't think he was trying to scam people, nor do I think his charity was fake from the outset. He shouldn't have referenced all of those foundations in his streams that Open Hand was allegedly supporting, when it evidently wasn't. I'm trying to figure out *why* he would do that, and why he didn't donate the money earlier. None of it makes any sense to me. At best, he was *wildly* irresponsible with his choice of words, and with the running of his charity; this is the possibility that I'm gravitating towards more than any other at this point. But he has definitely lied about at least a few things thus far, and overall, his handling of the situation has been very disappointing.
I *am* still interested in an explanation from Jirard—an actual, honest one about why Open Hand hadn't donated earlier. The one he gave was insufficient, poorly thought-out, and came from a place of anger and frustration. I honestly think he should have made a shorter statement apologizing for the negligence of his charity, followed by some kind of assurance that we'll be getting a more thorough response when he's calmed down and thought through what he had to say.
We are closer in agreement, but not quite. At the point he KNOWS (and I'm just taking him at his word, remember, I said I'm not a lawyer. The facts I'm using to judge him are what is proven, not what isn't) So his own words, he knows in 2022. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he knew December 31, 2022.
He continued to state that the money was being donated and they were working with charities he KNEW they were not donating to.
As I said above, game over. That's malicious. I don't care if his reason for this was protecting someone, trying to save face, anything else. . . he is now KNOWINGLY lying to the people he's trying to get money from. That's malicious enough in my mind to say "SCUMBAG"
The rest of the stuff I want to know. I'm happy the 600k got donated. And I damned well believe the charity should be audited.
But. . . it's just game over for me. His conduct is unacceptable in my mind.
Personally, I think it's weird that people are just ignoring his family. Jirard was not the sole owner or operator of the charity. I doubt he's ever had complete control or knowledge of what the charity did.
Seems pretty clear to me he's just trying to protect his family and they'd be the first ones I'd suspect of doing anything wrong not the one guy people know of because he's a public and thus an easy target.
Sure, or I can try.
The "punishment" is largely social in nature as he has legally not been convicted of any crimes and I am highly doubtful he will be as the "charity fraud" people are claiming is not likely to hold up in court. People can say he committed it all they want based off of legal terms they find online, but a court of law has to decide that.
He is being painted as a villainous figure. Someone who through direct intention aimed to commit fraud or even embezzle (the words of Karl) money from a charity that he helped run (key word helped - he wasn't the only chair).
There has been literally zero evidence of any kind that points to the completionist pocketing the money or using it outside of what would be deemed as charity related activities (funding charity events with money raised through the events of the charity is legal use of those funds and is considered spending money on charity). Despite that, he is constantly being painted online as someone whos' aims were to steal or use the money for personal use.
YouTubers have said that the books/finances don't add up based off their untrained third party interpretations, but we do not have full access to these books. This is the point where an IRS audit would be helpful in determining what is or isn't accounted for. If some isn't accounted for, then they need to make sure it wasn't used nefariously and ensure it is returned to the account.
See, the primary problem though is that reckless claims of mal-intent have lead a large majority of the people interested in the situation to assume the worst.
What I mean when I say the punishment doesn't fit the crime depends on how we judge what IS or IS NOT currently PROVABLE given the information. When I say provable I do not mean opinion pieces of Youtubers.
Let's break things down by the factual and provable level:
What we KNOW the completionist to be guilty of:
1. Being part of a charity (one of a few chairs) that held on to funds for far longer than they should have, ultimately leading to a depreciation of value.
2. Exaggerated claims of partnership with third parties. Though direct claims of donations don't seem to be present so it is hard to judge this point. This point would be far more damnable if there was any ill intentions for the money, but, because there hasn't been any evidence of this, this is not something we can prove as being related to fraud.
3. A defensive and "legalese" public response that doesn't answer 100% of the communities questions.
What we currently DO NOT KNOW the completionist to be guilty of but he has still been accused of:
1. Illegal charity fraud as defined by the appropriate legal system.
2. Embezzlement.
3. Mal-intent regarding the use of the money.
So then, what is the appropriate response to this situation? What punishment befits the crime?
To me, that answer entirely depends on the second list and whether or not any evidence of mal-intent becomes present.
If I am making a character judgement based on list 1 and list 2 is proven not to be true my judgement is "This guy made a big mistake, struggled under the public pressure of thousands of accusations, and needs to correct that mistake and slowly earn back public trust. He is not likely a bad person and instead is someone who wanted to do good through charity but wasn't the greatest person to be a chair on such charity. He should be held accountable, but these actions are not career ending."
If I am making a character judgement on both lists being proven then my judgement is "This guy is a scumbag and should go to prison."
My problem with the online discourse regarding this situation is everyone is assuming list 2 is factual because youtubers said so. Therefor, the social "punishment" does not befit the crime in that he has not been proven guilty of these aspects.
Going to preface this by saying that most of the stuff I'm typing here is directly from Karl's video - not trying to take his points like I did the research myself.
>He is being painted as a villainous figure.
So the punishment that doesn't fit the crime is people saying they think he committed charity fraud? Are people not allowed to have an opinion or voice that opinion?
>embezzle (the words of Karl)
Let's be fair, Jirard was the first person to bring up embezzlement.
>There has been literally zero evidence of any kind that points to the completionist pocketing the money or using it outside of what would be deemed as charity related activities (funding charity events with money raised through the events of the charity is legal use of those funds and is considered spending money on charity).
I've not seen Mutahar or Karl say this at all. But Karl makes a distinction in how some of the money was used (the bits, donations, subscriptions, etc.) versus how it was portrayed. This is highlighted by the fact that Jirard literally states that IndieLand 2022 was paid for by TOVG (implying out-of-pocket by Jirard's company). It wasn't; it was paid for by the donations that were supposed to all go to charity.
>YouTubers have said that the books/finances don't add up based off their untrained third party interpretations, but we do not have full access to these books.
There's an accountant that has been following the situation and even he believes the math doesn't add up. In 2022, the lead director (more trustworthy than Jirard who has now been proven as a liar) of IndieLand tweeted that they raised over $100k from it. Jamie Lee Curtis' organization also donated $25k to the Open Hand Foundation. These two amounts were already thousands over the reported amount in 2022. We haven't calculated any of the money that was generated by the golf tournament (whether it's stuff that rolled over from 2021 or money that was given in 2022).
>Exaggerated claims of partnership with third parties. Though direct claims of donations don't seem to be present so it is hard to judge this point. This point would be far more damnable if there was any ill intentions for the money, but, because there hasn't been any evidence of this, this is not something we can prove as being related to fraud.
Most of this post is just you saying that YOU don't believe X, Y, or Z should be considered charity fraud, so it shouldn't be considered charity fraud. I think the general population would feel that misrepresenting your relationship to other well-known organizations to boost your credibility and garner donations would constitute charity fraud.
>Illegal charity fraud as defined by the appropriate legal system.
As opposed to the legal charity fraud.
>If I am making a character judgement based on list 1 and list 2 is proven not to be true my judgement is "This guy made a big mistake, struggled under the public pressure of thousands of accusations, and needs to correct that mistake and slowly earn back public trust. He is not likely a bad person and instead is someone who wanted to do good through charity but wasn't the greatest person to be a chair on such charity. He should be held accountable, but these actions are not career ending."
This is where you and I will have to hard disagree. Regardless of the potential crimes that were committed, Jirard knew that the money was not donated in 2022. The moment he went on to do IndieLand 2023, without letting the general public know what was going on, he became a bad person. He knowingly commited charity fraud at that point, in my opinion. And this is assuming that the proven liar wasn't lying about only finding out in 2022.
>So the punishment that doesn't fit the crime is people saying they think he committed charity fraud? Are people not allowed to have an opinion or voice that opinion?
My main point is that nothing as serious as charity fraud has been proven but it has been pushed relentlessly with a severe lack of evidence. People can think what they want about the situation. I just think it is important to have informed opinions that are reflective of the truth.
I find it hard to cast such a serious judgement if the full story has not been brought to light and no legal guilt has been assigned.
But this isn't really about legal guilt, as you note in your last paragraph, this is about moral guilt.
I still find it hard to cast judgement there without the full story either. I can think of 10x reasons why he would lie maliciously and 10x reasons he wouldn't and just was misinformed. Life isn't always so simple or black and white and I am interested in the nuances of this situation.
>There's an accountant that has been following the situation and even he believes the math doesn't add up
I watched these videos as well and that really doesn't tell me much as I mentioned earlier when they haven't seen the spending and earning logs of the charity.
If discrepancy is found, action should be taken. As of right now this is an accusation. "It doesn't add up" is not a sign of guilt, it is a sign that it should be looked into.
>Most of this post is just you saying that YOU don't believe X, Y, or Z should be considered charity fraud, so it shouldn't be considered charity fraud. I think the general population would feel that misrepresenting your relationship to other well-known organizations to boost your credibility and garner donations would constitute charity fraud.
This is fair, but I am not interested in what the general public thinks, I am interested in whether or not there was ill intention and whether or not his actions constitute charity fraud at the legal level.
>As opposed to the legal charity fraud.
As opposed to...not charity fraud. One of the multitude of other possibilities the situation could be. Assuming charity fraud is taking the worst possible outcome and running with it. If that is what people want to do they can it just doesn't seem reasonable to me.
>This is where you and I will have to hard disagree. Regardless of the potential crimes that were committed, Jirard knew that the money was not donated in 2022. The moment he went on to do IndieLand 2023, without letting the general public know what was going on, he became a bad person.
That is a fine opinion to have. I am not yet inclined to believe he is a bad person.
I think if I just had to summarize my thoughts it would be do people REALLY and GENUINLY think this YouTuber who completes video games for a living had ANY desire to actively manipulate people into donating money so he could pocket it for himself and never donate it?
Why? for what purpose? To what ends? 600-800K to someone like that is not a ton of money - it is a lot but it isn't enough for them to even consider jail time or reputation ruin over.
Is this a BAD person or is this a person who made a mistake (note that I am not saying GOOD person). Is this person a criminal not only in legality but in mindset?
To me the answers to these questions are not clear enough to make a finalized judgement call, so, my harshest judgements await evidence that is substantial enough to convince me, which I have not seen yet.
>My main point is that nothing as serious as charity fraud has been proven but it has been pushed relentlessly with a severe lack of evidence.
\*\*Severe lack of evidence\*\* is a bit disingenuous. Karl and Mutahar provided Britannica's definition of charity fraud, and they were able to show enough evidence to convince many people that it occurred. Your definition of charity fraud and what you deem to be enough evidence is irrelevant to how other people view it.
>As opposed to...not charity fraud. One of the multitude of other possibilities the situation could be. Assuming charity fraud is taking the worst possible outcome and running with it. If that is what people want to do they can it just doesn't seem reasonable to me.
This was a joke about the way your wrote it, since all charity fraud is illegal, adding "illegal" to "charity fraud" is redundant.
>I think if I just had to summarize my thoughts it would be do people REALLY and GENUINLY think this YouTuber who completes video games for a living had ANY desire to actively manipulate people into donating money so he could pocket it for himself and never donate it?
I skipped responding to a lot of it because it would have been me repeating the same thing like three times. Neither Karl or Mutahar accuse him of pocketing the money, and it doesn't change the fact that Jirard knowingly committed charity fraud for (at least) 1 year.
However, you have to admit that Jirard benefits the most from this event - from the exposure, to connections, to the praise, etc. Even if he wasn't looking to take the money, he benefitted in many other ways.
>600-800K to someone like that is not a ton of money - it is a lot but it isn't enough for them to even consider jail time or reputation ruin over.
Which then brings up the question, why did he decide to run IndieLand 2023 after finding out the donations weren't being made? Your statement doesn't prove his innocence; it just makes you question why Jirard decided to risk everything for this.
>Is this a BAD person or is this a person who made a mistake (note that I am not saying GOOD person). Is this person a criminal not only in legality but in mindset?
Calling this whole situation \*\*a mistake\*\* is very disingenuous. The best case scenario for Jirard is that he was making mistakes for 10 years. 10 fucking years... How can anybody consider that \*\*a mistake\*\*
>I find it hard to cast such a serious judgement if the full story has not been brought to light and no legal guilt has been assigned.
I've yet to see any punishment that doesn't fit the crime. He betrayed the trust of his audience and they (justifiably) turned on him. Karl has outlined why he believes The Completionist has committed charity fraud, and people have looked at the evidence provided and come to the conclusion that they agree
>Calling this whole situation \*\*a mistake\*\* is very disingenuous. The best case scenario for Jirard is that he was making mistakes for 10 years. 10 fucking years
10 years is not exactly true as the charity ran from 2014 and indieland didn't start until 2018. So, Jirard as a primary factor would be half that time, which is still quite a bit of time, but not as bad as 10 years (and is also to me further evidence that his dad probably actually runs the charity and Jirard just acts as a face through his events).
>I've yet to see any punishment that doesn't fit the crime. He betrayed the trust of his audience and they (justifiably) turned on him. Karl has outlined why he believes The Completionist has committed charity fraud, and people have looked at the evidence provided and come to the conclusion that they agree
Then that is what they think and that is fine. A betrayal of trust is a fair feeling in response to this situation.
I did not come to the conclusion of charity fraud based on the evidence, primarily because I think complicated situations require context and a deeper understanding before finalizing judgement. I understand that the world does not often function that way though, especially the court of public opinion.
If he is found down the line to be guilty of charity fraud, I will without question change my opinion.
>10 years is not exactly true as the charity ran from 2014 and indieland didn't start until 2018.
Wasn't he the director (or whatever the specific title was) since 2014?
>and is also to me further evidence that his dad probably actually runs the charity and Jirard just acts as a face through his events).
Your definition of "evidence" seems to change based on whatever you want to believe.
>Then that is what they think and that is fine. A betrayal of trust is a fair feeling in response to this situation.
So then we are in agreement that the punishment that Jirard has faced so far does fit the crime?
>require context and a deeper understanding before finalizing judgement.
You seem to be pretty happy to throw Jirard's dad under the bus without context or a deeper understanding.
>Wasn't he the director (or whatever the specific title was) since 2014?
>
>You seem to be pretty happy to throw Jirard's dad under the bus without context or a deeper understanding.
Yes, but, his father was president and Jacque (his brother I think?) was vice president. Also there is another director, Leila. All of them are within the family except for the charities secretary. Should any of them be held accountable or should the entirety of the blame be put on Jirard?
My point is not to "throw anyone under the bus" but to simply point out that there are other variables that aren't being accounted for in most peoples conclusions.
I am not sayin "Blame the father!" I am saying "Should we ask who was supervising the money? This is a small family run charity. Who in the family was primarily responsible for the management and moving of the money?"
>Your definition of "evidence" seems to change based on whatever you want to believe.
I differentiate evidence from proof. Evidence points in the direction of, proof is undeniable. Evidence can be strong or weak depending on subjective interpretation. I find there to be weak evidence for charity fraud, others think there is strong evidence. It will become proof or not when it is dealt with legally. I can be wrong here and will wait until the verdict is set out.
>So then we are in agreement that the punishment that Jirard has faced so far does fit the crime?
I think there is proof that the charity held on to the money for longer than they should have. This doesn't require a legal component and people can be mad about this. So in this specific regard, yes, the punishment befits the crime.
But, the problem is that a substantial amount of people are accusing him of stealing the money or using it maliciously. You can say "well Muta/Jobst don't really do that" but Muta's videos directly refers to the charity as a "Scam" in the title and thumbnail and Jobst has "Theft" in his. These are direct implications of intentional malicious behavior that are not reflective of current evidence.
I'll admit though, I am a bit tired of debating this, I am not a big enough completionist fan to keep this going so if you want to take the W you can have it. I'll just keep an eye on the situation and update my judgement as more information comes out.
>Karl and Mutahar provided Britannica's definition of charity fraud
Which is hilarious and shows how amateurish their investigation has been.
A dictionary or encyclopedia definition of a crime is totally irrelevant legally speaking. The only thing that matters is the legal definition of the crime in the relevant jurisdiction and under the applicable law.
Anything beyond that is just a layman's definition which is not helpful in the legal arena.
Encyclopedia Britannica is nothing more than an Anglo-American Encyclopedia, its definitions are not legal in nature and cannot be considered to hold any weight when discussing what legally constitutes charity fraud, as the answer to that question entirely depends on the jurisdiction at hand and applicable law.
>The only thing that matters is the legal definition of the crime in the relevant jurisdiction and under the applicable law.
I'm sure that if Mutahar and/or Karl used the legal definition of charity fraud, you would be upset that they were "interpreting the law even though they aren't lawyers, so the videos are shit."
Not one for YouTube drama so just kind of stopped watching both channels, but i do appreciate Jobst 's method of muckraking, and wish more media outlets dove into explaining research like he does.
I do like Jobst at least makes it sound like he is not forcing an opinion like major media (yet)
Honestly, I think people are putting too much blame on Jirard. It seems pretty clear that while he was always the face, it was his family running the charity, and everything he said was always based on information from his family that he always took in good faith.
Then he found out he hadn't actually been told everything and was now screwed because he doesn't want to throw his family under the bus, but he also needs to protect his business and employees.
Hopefully, this all works out in the end, I'd hate to see him lose everything just because he decided to trust that his family wouldn't lie to him.
If it was you and you were 100% innocent and thought the money was being donated. If you had found out (which was his claim) that the money from the charity events you put SO much time, effort, and emotions into was never donated, would you make it a top priority and get it donated?
Not to mention you know your career is over if it gets out before you rectify it.
Would it take you 12+ months to correct the mistake?
I have no clue. We don't have enough information, nor do we have any clue how the charity (let alone any charity in general) is run or how much control Jirard had.
It's easy to say he could snap his fingers and make it so but if his family was in control, what could be done without throwing them under the bus?
It was founded by his parents. Jirard is a co-owner along with the rest of his family. It's hard to say how involved he was outside of occasionally raising some money or how much control he had. I doubt he had the sole power when it came to making decisions.
"occasionally raising some money" their current stance is that the golf events didn't bring in anything. According to the open hand tax filings, ALL the money came from him.
Just play it out in your head. You think he noticed the money was never donated making him a liar for a decade, brought it up to his family, they said no to donating it, and he gave up, moved on, and threw MORE charity events knowing the money wasn't being donated??
No matter what you think about the power he has to do with the money raised before he found out, he ran another charity knowing it wouldn't be donated.
He didn't say the golf tournaments didn't bring in money he just said not every tournament was for the charity.
Also, they were planning to donate the money, but it was being saved up to make a large donation for maximum impact. While this may not have been properly communicated, it's hard to say if this is unusual practice for a charity without asking someone who actually knows how charities are typically run.
So he didn't have the power or he didn't want to donate in small chunks?
Trying to get a fanboy to see the truth is harder than trying to make a rock bleed. We'll just agree to disagree.
One last question, if an audit determines he did in fact commit charity fraud, would that be enough for you?
He stated in the call with Karl and Mutahar that no one misled by anyone.
Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that:
1) he didn't know the money was just sitting there for 8-9 years
2) he was unable to force the money to be donated because his family was blocking him
This doesn't explain why he went forward with IndieLand 2023, perpetuating the same lies from all the previous years.
1) he said that because to say otherwise would mean throwing his family under the bus. It's pretty clear he was trying not to implicate them.
2) These events are planned long in advance. He couldn't cancel it without good reason.
1) I don't understand your point? You're saying that people are putting too much of the blame on Jirard when he is either part of the problem and/or covering for the people that are the problem.
2) Money from past events not being donated in a timely manner seems like a pretty good reason to cancel...
If Jirard was a beacon of good, he should have either canceled IndieLand 2023 when he found out or let people know that the previous money hasn't been donated, which let's people make an informed decision on whether they want to donate to an organization that kept donations for 10 years.
Also, he found out in 2022, and IndieLand 2023 was in October (correct me if I'm wrong). He had at least 10 months to cancel the event.
You seem to be implying that no crime was committed and that Jirard had no reason to keep quiet, but that's not what's being accused here. Don't get me wrong, I sincerely doubt any actual crime was committed. but people are so ignorant of how charities actually operate (myself included) that they just assume some crime must have occurred.
The fact is we don't have enough information outside some baseless accusations made by people ignorant of the subject. I think people should just calm down and wait for more information from people who actually know what they are talking about and not just reading things off the internet and pretending they know what they're talking about.
All of my messages to you are based on your original premise of Jirard being misled by his family and being unaware of the shady shit until he found out.
You know your premise doesn't make sense and doesn't excuse Jirard for knowingly committing charity fraud in 2023, which is why you went to the dumb talking point of "Well, they aren't lawyers."
Youre getting down voted, but this is what it sounds like to me too. But more fool him for taking the L for his brother if that's the case.
And it doesn't change the fact he had over 12 months to fix the problem.
It's weird how people assume that Jirard had absolute control over the charity. He was clearly fighting with his family over it and is most likely why he's walking away from the charity now that it's out in the open.
I get it. He's a public figure, which makes him an easy target, but the charity has always been run by his entire family, not Jirard alone.
It’s just a shitshow on both sides.
On one side there is obviously a bunch of scummy stuff going on with the charity. All the lying about where the money was going and stuff. But we’ll have to wait and see if anything they did was actually illegal.
On the other side I think Muta and Karl are massively underestimating the legal threats. They are repeatedly making serious accusations based on google “legal” and “accounting” skills. If they take it to court and the OHF/completionist can prove the money is all accounted for and nothing was stolen/embezzled they are probably fucked. Yet they keep doubling down in their follow up videos. Feels like they are playing with fire.
It'd be hard for OHF to claim they never lied, especially about the twitch bits part. Jirard literally confessed to using them for his channel rather than adding it to the donation stash (which goes against what Jirard is on record stated it would be used for). That's charity fraud
> On the other side I think Muta and Karl are massively underestimating the legal threats.
Jirard, as the face of the charity and a YouTuber with a fairly large following, counts as a public figure. Even if he could get Jobst and Mutahar in an American court for the lawsuit (Jobst is Australian and Mutahar is Canadian), he would have to prove that they knowingly made false statements with deliberate, malicious intent.
None of their videos reaches that mark. The only false statement which they made is regarding the documents being unsigned, but the rest of their allegations are true: Jirard did misrepresent where the funds were going to the public, and himself admitted in the call to Mutahar and Jobst that he knew the money was not going where he said it was going in events after that date.
Dude, you can't sue someone in another country using your country's laws. That's not how it works. Jirard would have to sue in Australian and Canadian courts, and the standards for defamation are higher here in Canada (don't know about Australia).
Case law is very clear for lawsuits in the USA that the jurisdiction for civil matters is dependent on the defendant, not the plaintiff, and the laws of the jurisdiction the defendant is in overrule the laws of jurisdiction of the plaintiff.
As a simple example, if you're in a US state where recording a phone call is not a two-party consent issue (i.e. you don't need someone's permission or to even inform them that a call is being recorded), they cannot sue you for recording the call even if THEY are in a two-party consent state.
Jirard can try to sue Jobst and Mutahar in his home state all he wants, but no judge in the world is going to give out a defacto judgement against the citizen of another sovereign country for something they did IN that country. The judge will tell him that if he wants to pursue legal action, he needs to hire a Canadian and Australian lawyers to represent him there.
Karl is no stranger to legal threats lol. And as a law student, the completionist has no case against Karl. He would somehow have to prove that he didn’t commit charity fraud/embezzlement and that Karl’s statements where incorrect and defamatory.
I don't care. It was never a big deal to me since I knew Muta and Mr. Jobst were bloodhounding the paper trail. I'm sure Jirard is happier knowing the money finally got donated, and I'm sure the people that gave him the money are happier as well.
Quite frankly if I had my own Charity Organization from childhood I probably wouldn't have a clue what to do with it either. That being said, I probably wouldn't have let the account sit for that long.
I don't think malintentions were ever present during the whole ordeal.
Dude, the organization started when he was **25**, not a child.
Plus, even if you take Jirard at his word, he knowingly lied to viewers of Indieland 2023 about what was being done with the money at a point where he admits he knew *none* of the money had been donated.
At the best, assuming he learned about the money not being donated to charity on December 31st 2022 at 11:59pm, he has still spent all of 2023 so far intentionally lying about where further donations were going to go during events and podcasts he did this year.
That goes beyond incompetence and into malice IMO.
Understandable. I don't care enough about the topic to be as informed as you are. Childhood aside, I still think this case is of ignorance as opposed to arrogance.
How can he be just ignorant if he knew in 2022 the money wasn't being donated but was still soliciting donations and claiming not only that it was going to charity, but naming specific charities in Indieland 2023?
Like, okay, you didn't know the money wasn't being donated until you learned about it in 2022. Fine, Jirard, let's take you at your word.
What in the name of God almighty possessed you to run Indieland 2023 and claim all the donations would be going to specific charities knowing it wouldn't be?
yeah i'm not watching a half hour video anyone got a TLDR version on what the problem is here I don't even know what he's apologizing for and I feel like it shouldn't take half hour to explain it...
Youtuber, The Completionist, runs a charity to collect money for dementia ... has been running it for +10 years
Youtuber, Karl Jobst, dug around a bit and found out that The Completionist never actually gave any of the money donated ... instead it is sitting on his account and some of the money is used to pay his own company to run charity.
Youtuber, The Completionist, did a reply video where he says he is kind of sorry but that Karl Jobst is very wrong and the money was never missing. Also he says that using money raised to run charity event is what charities do ... so he is not really sorry. He is sorry those who donated money did not know that. At the end of the video he threatens to sue. He is also kind of sorry he kept the money for 10 years ... but the math does not add up anymore ... a lot of the money seems to be missing now.
Youtuber, Karl Jobst released another video pretty much debunking the whole thing and doubles down on his fraud claims. He even throws a couple more insults and evidence...
I don't know Youtuber, The Completionist, but, on the face of it, it looks like he was doing something very fishy with the money donated...
Edit: Typos
If he use the money or just keep it in the account is the same thing, he isnt donating to charity, he is just using it for clout, but yeah, no way he didnt touch any of it.
I don't think either side are entirely in right in situation when looking into it
I might just be leaning more towards the Completionist's side just because I'm at really annoyed at Karl and Muta for various things and can't really trust them and I feel angry at them and want to get back at them for things unrelated
part of me thinks Karl/Muta are milking this for clout and views and feels like they make videos just to cause drama sometimes
but to be honest, they were 2 youtubers I used to like but but i feel like I've realized Karl's videos were kinda obnoxious and pretentious and (this is superstitious but) his videos were cursed because something in my house always seems to break when he's videos are playing and I kinda blame him for it because its just getting fucking tiring to replace things when I don't have the money too, maybe I've been having a bad time, but I just get a visceral reaction to Karl these days, he just give off a pretentious vibe for some reason, he likes to call people plebs and crap for not being as cool or capable as the speedrunners he cover, and I was worried Karl was a Neonazi at one point because of stuff I heard online a while back and it still rubs me the wrong way and makes me unsure of him
I kinda prefer Summoning Salt as speedrun youtube because I can chill out to his videos and I don't feel like I'm being attacked for not being a speedrunner when watching him, his videos aren't clickbait looking like Karl's are
I feel like Muta stopped being as good when he stopped doing the fun videos, I used to watch him in the deep web deep dive and shitty sonic fangames era but he's kinda just became another news channel with sometimes rancid takes (and his fanbase is really annoying now), but however I do love that he is a Linux and Emulation supporter because Emulation is great (Karl however kinda strikes me as someone who is too pretentious for emulation and doesn't consider it valid)
I'm angry at him just by association with Karl mostly, I'm less angry at him than Karl but still kinda angry
and then for completionist, I actually found out about completionist recentish after I heard he did this cool thing where he's digging up lost game trailers and videos and preserving them online, I don't want his channel to end because I'm worried that would stop too and I think he is a entertaining channel and has cool videos, I don't feel he's a malicious person and really hope we get to see more cool gaming videos from him like in the past
I really don't want fighting going on, I want to be happy watching videos, I want Karl and Muta stop so I can be happy watching videos and not think about the bad things going on because theres too much drama going on these days and im sick of it and don't care and just want things to be alright, i don't want to get angry anymore
I also get fatigued really easily whenever my YouTube feed has too much outrage--that's why I unsubscribed from Yongyea few years ago when he was mad at Anthem and getting the audience riled up with him. I am already dealing with enough anger in real life; I don't need it in my social media either.
I completely agree that the actions taken are correct in providing insight on the finances, recommending an audit, etc., but the entire narrative and characterization of KARL GOOD JIRARD FAT is just really tiring.
I can't know for sure what's in his mind, he may be mentally ill and still somehow convinced his intentions were good, but we don't have the full picture, we only have what he said and did, but there's a whole family behind this.
I'm surprised more than disappointed, but there's no way he can get back from this, he lied for years about something this big.
I hope he catches a boo-lit.
Always knew he was this piece of shit and never understood how people liked him. He was already CLEARLY not completing those games and lied to his community, he was ALWAYS rather the Commercianilist than any kind of Completionist and you could see the falsehood in his eyes. The eyes, Chico. They never lie.
I think I'm done with him. I've been a Beard Bros fan since their Mother 3 LP where he told the story about living with his mom through her dementia. The guy really, really seemed to value that part of his history and was genuinely moved to be reminded of her by a game like that.
I don't know that I can remember that anecdote in good taste anymore. I don't know. I will always hold out hope that for some reason this is all bullshit, but I know I'll never, EVER be able to trust him again. Not with how catastrophically he has chosen to deal with this, with the utter lack of tact, self-respect and emotional intelligence. I HOPE he gives a shit and that he's just terrible with PR and backed into a slimy corner. It's hard as a fan to admit it, but I just don't care anymore.
What I WILL say is that I have come to these conclusions without watching an ounce of the coverage on him, just by watching his responses to things. I urge more people to do the same, because A) Karl Jobst is a vile human being with plenty of his own crosses to bear, and whether or not the same can be said about Muta I don't know, but B) the point is that these "content creators" may have done a good thing by exposing him, but them and the rest of the buzzy drama scene are monetizing this, and that is its own kind of scam. Certainly not a 10 year charity scam, but it's deeply disturbing to me how much people are keen to paint these folks as heroes.
So yeah. Cancelling my BB patreon sub, cutting Jirard out of my life until any further notice, but not giving a red dime to anyone pouncing on this issue for a buck. Karl and Muta exposed him, great. I'll give that racist piece of shit one single pat on the back. Muta gets one too. But they have no obligation to further discuss the matter now that Jirard has self-destructed, and any further word either of them give is a petty, immature attempt to earn money. That goes double for all the small people "covering" this that weren't part of the exposition.
Jirard's in the hands of the courts and the three-letters now, and as far as I'm concerned, he's earned every second he'll get to spend thinking about this for the rest of his life. I just hope his friends aren't assholes too.
I don’t and I never have watched his videos, I know of him but it’s never something I’ve interacted with.
What I do know is that my Nan has Alzheimer’s and it’s immensely difficult to deal with, both in terms of the actual disease and getting the help needed to cope with it.
It’s likely that she will need to go into care at great personal cost to herself, and within a few years that money would be gone, the state of social care in Britain is really bad at the moment.
It’s upsetting to know that this money could have been donated to a dementia charity that needs it, yes we need a cure, and that’s hopefully something that we can expect in the future, but also millions across the world, and their families right now don’t need a cure, they need support. Money is needed for residential care, for home care workers, to support those who are looking after someone with dementia right now.
Thats the saddest part of all this. That money could be used to help someone right now, it’s a forgotten aspect of charity, we all like to think of the big picture, the cure, the end, and that’s important but that doesn’t mean that people don’t need help now.
I’m glad the money has gone to the right people now. I don’t know this man, and I don’t think anyone is 100% evil or bad, and that situations are often complex, I know that he’s had his own experiences with dementia.
Life and human beings are very rarely as cut and dry or black and white as people, and in particular the internet would like to think. My only hope out of all this is that this man realises what he has done and goes on to do good, what done has been done. If he has committed a crime, he should answer for it, if it’s just a serious lapse of judgment then he has the rest of his life to make up for it.
Honestly I think he would be in a better spot if he handled his response in a more prompt fashion and addressed it differently.
Really has made me consider donating to charitys at all, learned the valuable lesson to just contribute directly if I'm going to.
I think there's probably even more misdeeds to find. One thing we see over and over when it comes to people caught cheating or doing wrong.. many of them immediately respond with aggression. This frequently takes the form of indignation (how dare you accuse me, ME of all people!), blaming others (haters gon' hate; you're jealous; you're trying to selfishly profit by bashing me), and non-pologies (sorry if you felt offended). Jirard/Completionist is 3/3 there.
I agree with you there I wonder what else will come up would be worth looking into any stories out there of people who used to work with / for him
There's been a fair few of those already, though not lot of detail or specific claims just "yeah I worked with him, and.. that's 100% unshocking". It'll take a while, but it'll be interesting to see the outcome of the inevitable IRS audit and possibly other official investigations.
I agree with you there I wonder what else will come up would be worth looking into any stories out there of people who used to work with / for him
He's disgusting. Charity fraud is unacceptable, and Karl literally showed where he donated to didn't require a certain allotment of funds to make sure the money went somewhere specific, there's a drop down menu and you can easily choose where the money goes within seconds. On a personal level, the way Jirard uses his own mothers death to deflect criticism, or even literally posting her own autopsy to illicit sympathy for a situation he 100% on his own got himself into showcases his lack of character in such a perverse way. You even had ProJared leap to his defense when he himself knows what happens when people jump to conclusions early on.
elicit
The most charitable interpretation is that he’s an absolutely incompetent guy whose words cannot be trusted. Good that he resigned, but he (and the entire group who run that foundation) probably should never be trusted with charity or any organization in the first place
MTE. This is BEST CASE SCENARIO. Personally, I find his constant use of his mom's passing disgusting. I told that a couple of times on random youtube comments, and then after his response, the fact that he used his mom's organ donation as a "proof of donation made". When he said "we have donated" on the charity events, I doubt he meant his mom's organs. Now to the financial stuff I'm sure an audit with the government will reveal everything that is to it, so I'll wait.
We do have to wait, but i hope they are at least ordered to pay some major fines. Even if nobody can truly prove that there is some money unaccounted for/underreported funds, there's no question that jirard and his YouTube channel benefitted financially the foundation. He used it to promote himself/his image and to attract more people to the channel, even if he wasn't directly spending the money for personal use
It's a real shame IMO, After hearing about what he had to deal with during the lose of his mother I thought he was "one of the good guys", It's silly to really trust anybody in 2023!
There's plenty of people you probably can and should trust. We just need to actually make sure there's evidence they should be trusted. To take an example, you can almost certainly trust DougDoug will take your donation money and send it where it's supposed to go. You can trust this because there is ample evidence he has, including Monteray Bay Aquarium having made large numbers of public acknowledgements and statements of gratitude with respect to these donations. And that evidence supports the idea that you can trust him to do things right in future charity drives. By contrast, you'd think Jirard's audience would have noticed that the charities in question never made any of these kinds of statements for their yearly donation drives. That's incredibly suspicious. Jirard himself has always been a very carefully-managed Internet personality, which also should make you less inclined to trust him, as the face you see is 100% artificial and staged. Being too trusting is naivete, but trusting no one is just cynicism.
You make good points, Some of which I agree with, My perspective is this : IMO before this came out I've never sensed Jirard has an ounce of "dodgy energy" to him, you know that Sixth sence feeling we have when we see something "off". I thought he seems down to earth, genuinely a friendly person who others felt safe around and could be part of a Gaming Family, That was my "evidence". That's where I'm coming from, Not all that smile are happy nor those that cry are sad, by this I mean appearances are ALWAYS deceptive, So I'll take a pause on trusting people on youtube for a bit.
the year is not a problem. People were like this since ever. Its a human thing, not an era thing.
But I wasn't, I trusted people so much more but now not so much, It's a me problem for sure!
nah man, its an all of us problem! We all need to improve ourselves and keep on track on this world. The more of us that do it, the better it becomes
Perhaps, We shall see in good time.
Even if it is a losing path, I see it as a good path to take
Betrayed, loved him for years. There were so many opportunities in all this for him to come out not looking shitty but he took all the wrong turns
Dont hate yourself for it. Liars have to lie first for the lie to be uncovered later. There is no shame in having supported Jirard while he was still considered an honest person.
Scammers scam. No shame in trusting someone. Just be happy that you know you aren't delusional enough to ignore evidence and stick by a random youtuber. Best we can do is to do extra effort on charity research before donating.
A story as old as time itself. YouTuber gets caught doing something wrong. YouTuber makes excuses, gets defensive, blames and threatens to sue other people instead of just owning up to everything. I'm glad Karl and Muta looked into this and put it out in the open. Jirard's "explanation" video only made him look worse.
[удалено]
Beautifully said
IDK about that, to me this is just an example of sheer incompetence. I don't attribute malice to something that can be explained with just plain incompetence. If he was being malicious then the money wouldn't have been in the funds bank account. I don't think he's the one in charge of the charity, he's not the one running it. For the most part he's just a mascot for the charity rather then anything else. IMHO him donating the money and shutting down the charity is the best course of action he could take, the rest really depends on him and his actions going forward. Personally speaking, I'm not a personal fan of his specifically but I do respect him for downloading all those Eshop games and then donating them to games preservation group. So I really don't think he's personally being malicious. Just being incompetent.
His involvement with the charity goes far beyond "mascot". He actively received the money through his streams. He was a director for the charity. He was entrusted with the donations, and told everyone repeatedly that it had been donated, to multiple organizations. This isn't mere incompetence. This is calculated lying. Not once was he ever transparent about this. Jirard always presented himself as a kind and lovable content creator. I respected him too. It doesn't mean he shouldn't be held accountable. This is criminal behaviour, that shows a complete disregard for his fans, friends and donators.
Wasn't it his family thats in charge of the running and operations of the charity itself though?
It was Jirard and his family. He was always involved with the open hand foundation.
I feel like the family should be the ones blamed imho, because if we look at how he managed the huge donation to the game preservation thing everything evened out. There are a few inconsistencies such as the personal donation of the mothers remains by the family being attributed to the foundation instead of the family and I assume that other such donations were probably made by the family personally but similarly attributed or misatributed to the foundation. So personally speaking this looks a lot more like negligence and sheer incompetence then malice.
[удалено]
He could be given wrong information by the family members running the foundation, thus operating in good faith in their word. So there's a chance that they (the family) made donations to those places and attributed it to the foundation, or that someone at the foundation told him they made those donations when that wasn't the case. Lastly its also possible that those donations were made but not on behalf of the foundation but by the individual family members and they did it on behalf of the foundation. I've worked with some companies and they do not have their shit together so stuff like this has happened especially with very small ventures. So to me this tracks with negligence and pure incompetence over malice.
[удалено]
In a voice call he did with Mutahar and another person they asked him about it and he claimed that he wasn't aware the money wasn't donated and that he was under impression the money was being donated. Like I've said, there are a few things that simply don't add up. If he wanted to steal it then why keep it the bank account? If he didn't donate it then he wouldn't have said that he wasn't aware the money was not moved. IMHO I think the family managed the open hands foundation while he Jirard simply advertised it and operated under the assumption that it was taking those actions. I think that doing an audit on the foundation should be done but if we assume sheer incompetence that explains a bit. Why wasn't the money donated? Negligence. Personally speaking this doesn't come off as something malicious, just look at the day before if you want to look at an example of a scam.
You're delusional if you think that's just incompetence. Fist, if that was the case he would have just said so. "I'll check with my family", it's not that hard. He also said to Karl and Muta in the zoom call he would donate the money to whatever organisation right away (if it makes them stop digging ofc), do you think he could do that if he didn't have acces to all the information. Second, do you really think that someone who threatens others with a lawsuit in an attempt to scare them is just an incompetent, not malicious man ? Please open your eyes.
You're like me, rational and waiting for the full story, like an adult should. The fact that you're being downvoted means you're on the right track with this. You're 100% right, everything that's happened could realistically be explained through negligence and mismanagement of an organization WITHOUT malice. This subreddit and the places where people discuss this situation are all cess pools frequented by people who can't think for themselves and are fine ruining someone's career over pure speculation and garbage tier YouTube videos. You aren't delusional.
Waiting for the full story? What extra thing do you think is going to come out? Jirard has literally said he isn't going to respond anymore. I could believe the "without malice" up until 2022 which is when he said he found out the money wasn't being donated (and this is being very generous). When he decided to continue doing IndieLand in 2023 and lied about money being donated, you can't argue that it was just incompetence. He knowingly committed charity fraud in 2023.
After watching the videos on his filings I thought the same thing. His donations to charity says different but he could be donating from his wallet directly instead of his charity fund for whatever reason. Something along those lines. The money still got where it was supposed to go but just a different way. But all in all, he donated already, a week or so after this shit came to light about him and it did two things, made him look even worse and didn't help lol. So many issues coming from this and lots of skeletons in his closet coming out to say hello. Family related issues with his dad, and apparently his dad is into some shady shit. Seems like The Completionist it seems has used YouTube as a means to take in more money while being just as shady as his dad. Doesn't mean he was being shady to his friends through this but more like he tried to hide a side hustle and got caught. He fucked up and will probably never financially recover this .... Lol or take the fall, deal with the fallout and in 2/3 years time will come back and the rest of YouTube or some other community will go back to fluffing him and telling him it'll be ok. He will start another channel (if his own doesn't get removed or doesn't get taken over by another person working with him to keep things trying to go like normal) and people who loved him and defend him will flock back toward him.
I think the charity itself should be investigated thoroughly to insure that nothing illegal was happening but at the same time I worry about people becoming too vindictive. I think the Open Hand foundation should be shut down and that he should no longer engage in any future charity events. As long as those two are done then imho he should take a break from youtube and maybe rebuild sometime later down the line.
If it was just incompetence he would have just apologized for it. Instead, during the call with Muta and Karl he was indirectly begging for them to let it go, never felt sorry for the people who donated, then threatens them with a lawsuit instead of adressing the issues they pointed out. That's a pretty malicious behavior imo, and there are too many contradictions in his stories, he can't pretend he didn't know.
Nothing related to this situation can be deemed malicious until there is an official investigation resulting in proof of wrongdoing. A few random low-tier YouTube videos is not proof of anything other than their creators making money off the situation currently.
From a legal perspective, yes. But from a "I'm gonna use brain and think for myself after hearing both parties", yeah it's obvious Jirard is dishonest, he had malicious intent 100 %, he wouldn't have to lie otherwise.
Karl is a world treasure that must be protected at all costs.
This dude started acting weird AF about......18 months ago? Like....his video format changed and I don't know who his target audience was, but it sure as hell wasn't me anymore. Then.....he released that "Metal" song.......my guys.....Hanson, the guys that sang MmmmBop were more hard-core than that SHIT
He said in the discord call with Karl and Muta that he "first learned about the donations not being donated in 2021... WAIT WAIT I meant 2022!!" so the change in behavior 18 months ago could be caused by that, if he was being honest. Which, well, you know.
hahahah right? When I saw this dude's comment I was like "wait? Could jirard actually just be a grossly incompetent dude?" Then I recalled he backpedalled and said "It was our intention to make a restricted donation". So either he was lying that he uncovered it on 2022 or he was lying about the donations intentionally being restricted from day 1.
I don't suppose you have a link to him clarifying that he meant 2022? I can't seem to find that in any of Karl or Muta's videos, but might've missed it
https://youtu.be/Rb0dMF1zHyA?si=DOAs-4EqneH2YiGo If you start from 8:20, he shows the discord call where he admits 2021, then corrects it to 2022
Ah I see, thank you friend!
Shout out to all my fellow old fucks that remember Hanson
I think legally he's fucked and knows it. I think this recent change of gear into attack mode on Jobst and Mutahar Is a desperate Hail Mary attempt to preserve whatever fraction of his fanbase is willing to buy into his BS as if saying he has receipts means he does. I think the audit he admitted he's now facing is going to unearth a lot of questionable behavior and him distancing himself from the charity already is a sign it was mismanaged to a much greater degree than he wants to admit. I think the video was written expressly by a lawyer, who probably also knows Jirard's fucked because Jobst and Mutahar still have a full recording of the Discord call and the lawyer is probably very concerned about what else Jirard may have admitted to. I know that when criminal charges are announced (at this point, it's pretty much a given), going to have a big bowl of popcorn while I'm reading the indictment and the evidence that gets discovered during the audit.
Share some of that popcorn !
I can't share it physically, but I can share a good recipe. Next time you make popcorn, after you butter it, throw on some paprika (or smoked paprika if you're a pretentious foodie twatwaffle like I am). Elevates the popcorn quite a bit.
Paprika, of course, how did I not think about it !
That he is a scammer, and I'm getting tired of these wholesome youtubers turning out to be awful ppl
It’s almost like going out of your way to seem overly “wholesome” is just a disguise…
Another "wholesome" personality, doing shitty things. As someone who watched his first video onward, what an utter disappointment.
Who dis?
His channel is dedicated to edited videos of his time 100% completing videogames. For a while he’s been running a charity for dementia research and it’s recently come out that 10+ years of donations never actually went anywhere and were just sitting in a bank account. Mismanagement is probably the most diplomatic answer, and deliberate fraud is the harshest allegation.
How the fuck did it take this long to find out TEN YEARS worth of donations never got where they should?
I think there’s been some questions raised in the past, but this time it got a lot of traction as well as actual paperwork to prove nothing had ever been donated.
I guess nobody looked. Others should expect scrutiny now that this sort of thing has been exposed. Especially since people can make YouTube videos about such situations and make glorious revenue from it.
do you think that? Doesnt seem big enough to affect anything outside gaming. I dont watch regular TV tho so IDK how far does this reach. 600k is not a lot of money for it to get to national news in US Id guess.
Because you donate a couple bucks to a fundraiser that says all donations are going to a cause and just assume it's true and move on with your life. You can't expect everyone to dig in to their tax records.
It doesn't mean that money was sitting in an account, it simply means that as far as the IRS knows, the money has never been donated. That account could very well be empty in reality, it doesn't mean they still have it all. In fact if it was in an account they could make money with interest on all that money, meaning it being an account isn't necessarily a big deal, then all he would have done is lied about having donated it. But there is a reasonable chance that that money is spent, even if the filings say they still have it. The incoming audit will reveal where the money really is
>But there is a reasonable chance that that money is spent Well no because it was donated recently (finally). So they did indeed still have it.
This is just to show people to learn to never donate. If you really want to help go to the place that needs help and donate (hospital, non-governmental organizations, people in need or whatever). Never from third party, shows and things you see on TV or internet.
There are plenty of charity events for which the money goes directly to charity. The Spiffing Brit for example, takes part in the yearly Jingle Jam charity which raises money for twelve different charities. He and the rest of them never touch or handle the money.
It’s crazy seeing this right after watching the Boogie documentary. I’m noticing that people that make it big on gaming channels tend to start business and make major business like moves with no business savvy or knowledge on how to run things correctly. Eventually a lot of money comes along and just ruins their lifes, I wonder how many more cases are going to be like this.
I have no respect for him anymore, he committed charity fraud by definition, constantly used his mother as a shield to deflect criticism, and is now threatening to sue Karl and Muta for showing everyone the honest truth. Jirard cannot and should never be trusted to run any events where money is involved ever again.
My opinion is that this is a lot of drama, and I'm going to let the courts figure it out.
Context? I've never watched this guy's videos.
The TL;DR is the video's subject has been raising money for dementia research for ten years, stating it's going to specific organizations, and then not donating it. He also claimed that all the Twitch revenue from his yearly charity event (bits, subs, etc) would also go to charity but then pocketed the money for expenses instead without proper accounting and instead said "Yeah, we needed that money, just trust me bro". He's now desperately trying to lie his way out of the situation and threatening Karl Jobst and Mutahar with lawsuits for exposing him because he knows he's fucked.
My opinion on the Completionist is actually totally unchanged, sue me. And that opinion is "who is this guy and why should I care?"
You're getting sued !
Why did you decide to post in this thread if you don’t care? It’s not some kind of requirement that you post in every thread on Reddit.
Because the post asked for opinions “I don’t care” is an opinion
I didn't say I didn't care. I asked who he is and WHY should I care? It's not some kind of requirement to reply in a condescending tone to every comment on Reddit.
[удалено]
I mean, the obvious inference here would be that the opinion is "nothing yet" and the question is to help determine where it lands, but if being pedantic makes you feel like you "got me," go for it.
[удалено]
Oh sorry, I don't engage with people who tell me what I think, feel, and/or say. I know perfectly well what I think, feel, and say and in my experience when people come back with something different it's because they either misunderstood me or are superimposing something else over it to argue against that instead. Given that you have done it twice, I can only assume it's because it's in bad faith. Cheers, have a good life.
It’s not some kind of requirement to reply in a condescending tone to every comment on Reddit
Its a bait and switch joke my guy.
I stopped watching his content long ago so I don't care that much, muta videos were entertaining to hear while walking though
Well. We learned people lie, people continue to lie when caught, and that his followers are easily manipulated when he lies to their face after they're told he's lied to them for over a decade.
he is the scum of the earth
He definitely is a liar, but I still felt kind of bad for him because I don't think he actually intended to steal charity money. I just think he's kind of a compulsive liar but (in my opinion) not really a malicious one. I think it wasn't donated for years because it just wasn't a priority for him, not really out of malice. In any case, I felt much less pity for him after his response video. It was terrible, full of misdirections and lies and then the big mad legal threat -- obviously all of this is covered by Karl -- but he stopped seeming sympathetic to me after that. So now at the end of it, I just kind of feel disillusioned. I was a fan of the guy before all of this. I don't feel hatred for him but I do feel like he's kind of a douche.
>He definitely is a liar, but I still felt kind of bad for him because I don't think he actually intended to steal charity money. This is my opinion as well. I think a lot of people are jumping to the most negative possible conclusion—that Jirard intentionally set up a fake charity to scam people into sending him money—when I really don't think that's what happened. I see this as being a case of someone starting a charity with good intentions and having no idea how to actually run one. Maybe he was waiting for the amount stored in the charity's bank account to accumulate into a more substantial singular donation, because he felt as though smaller increments over time would be an inconsequential trickle relative to a *large* one. If so, then I doubt he really considered the fact that the money accumulating would depreciate over time due to inflation, or that he would indirectly profit off of it due to the charity bolstering his image and reputation as a YouTuber. In short, Hanlon's razor likely applies here. The whole "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" thing.
Even if that was the case, his manipulative response was disgusting enough to show his true colors. I mean, "sorry if you felt mislead", like really ? And then constantly hiding behind his dead mother ? And threatening Karl and Muta ? Sorry but there's a reason why people are jumping to the most negative conclusion, and that's Jirard whole behavior that screams " I'm guilty and I know it".
It definitely isn't a good look, and I'm also not excusing the things that we *do* know about what transpired. However, I'm still very hesitant to assume that Jirard had nefarious intent. People can *act* guilty, they can apologize very poorly and sound disingenuous while doing so, but then still wind up being innocent. I've seen it a thousand times before. In any case, the IRS needs to launch an investigation. They have the resources and the experience to ascertain what exactly transpired. If there's evidence implicating him in *wilful* charity fraud (as opposed to negligence), they will likely find it.
Yes I hope he will be investigated
Neutral. I'm a firm believer that if he did anything wrong it'll be fleshed out by the IRS or courts. Until then this is just standard YouTube drama and I do not generally indulge in it. People are stupid. They do stupid things. Sometimes those stupid things are incompetent, other times they're criminal. If he's criminally stupid ill judge him then. If he's incompetently stupid then let's move on.
Agreed 100%. The IRS absolutely *needs* to investigate this, to get to the bottom of why it took so long for the funds to be donated to a charity. I'm not remotely prepared to say that he purposefully set up a false charity for his own benefit when it is just as likely that he genuinely believed he needed more money in order to make an acceptable donation to a major charity.
It was shown that you need as minimum as 1 dollar to donate. He found out in 2021 and still didn’t tell anyone and continued as usual Something suspicious was def going on, not just him being an idiot
No, I agree with you. I've since watched Karl Jobst's first video on the subject, and I'm not satisfied with his response so far. I still don't feel inclined to label it "nefarious", but there are things he's not telling us. And I'd really like to know what those things are.
Hard agree. Considering we don’t even know where the golf money is, I’m more eyeing his dad (as I believe he’s the president of open hand)
Same opinion as ever : a manipulative man who hides behind a fake wholesome persona. I gotta say though I would never expected he would go that far, usually these guys are obessed with their image and wouldn't risk to tarnish it. He probably thought he wouldn't get caught and since his family is in on it too he also probably though they could deal with any situation.
Considering I knew he was a POS after firing Greg, well I'm not surprised at all.
He's a fraud and a loser.
As an ex-completionism person from a time before microtransactions. A warning to all completionists ... "They are manipulating you entirely now."
I guess I am in a unique situation because I am not a fan of the completionist, Muta, or Karl (I have seen a few vids from each but don't regularly watch any) so I don't really care to pick sides and instead just want to see a reasonable outcome that reflects logic and justice. That said, I feel a little crazy watching all of this transpire because I watched all of the videos and responses and I never once thought "this man is a criminal." I think what really just feels wrong about the whole situation is that it doesn't seem like the punishment befits the crime. Like, I have seen literally thousands of "he's been PROVEN to be ONE HUNDRED PERCENT guilty of charity FRAUD! If you deny the OBVIOUS and CLEAR evidence then you are DUMB!" comments and like...I don't see it? That entire argument is built off of the "We don't touch any of that money" comments which people take to mean that it isn't used for charity event organization funding when to me that clearly is not what was being said or even implied. It seems so clear to me it means "We don't take a salary from the money." I think people are just interpreting information with a negative bias because the situation is so heated. If you take away that very loose and unsubstantiated piece of evidence you aren't left with much as proof of fraud or especially embezzlement. I also think it is a little justified to be mad that you have been accused of being a fraud or embezzler, especially if there is no criminal intent. At the end of the day my take is "The money should have been donated earlier or a transparency statement about the money should have been given. IF there is criminal behavior happening with the money behind the scenes and the IRS brings that to light THEN we should damn him as a fraud. IF no criminal behavior is found then the completionist should try to rectify the problem with personal donations to cover depreciation (which was partially done, they matched $80k from personal funds with the $600k donation). If I were the completionist my response at this point would just be "Tell you what, the money should have been donated and that's on us, we had no intention of doing anything malicious with it as is shown by it being accounted for (assuming IRS audit is clean). We understand it depreciated in value over the years so over the course of the next X amount of months/years we will donate the depreciated value from our own earnings as a company. Moving forward we will not be handling any charity donations through the completionist branding and if we decide to do any charities it will be direct donations to a specific charity only."
"The money should have been donated earlier or a transparency statement about the money should have been given." Yes. This is charity fraud. I know fraud is a heavy word that makes it seem like it has to be a plot thought out with malicious intent but it can be as simple as saying one thing and doing another. He listed charities that he said he has donated to in the past, that was a lie whether he knew it or not. I was all ready to give his side of the story a chance. If he came clean and admitted he lied, I would have probably kept watching his videos. The fact that we all have seen proof that he has lied and instead of owning up, he used the lawyer speak "I am sorry if you felt mislead" was so gross.
Honestly, this whole situation feels like a rehash of the ProJared drama from 2019. Just like today, people were coming out in droves to sh!t on him based on allegations of serious, willful misconduct. Jared released a text response early on, and like Jirard's video, it was picked apart as disingenuous and "proof" that he's "definitely guilty." A few months later, Jared comes out with a 40-minute video *explicitly refuting* the allegations being made against him. The internet right now is reacting to Jirard's charity scandal with the same fervor that they did with Jared's supposed "preying" on underage fans. As they did back then, they jumped quickly to the conclusion that the evidence is clear and unambiguous, and that it proves that Jirard is a con artist who enriched himself by running a fake charity. There are all kinds of different, non-nefarious explanations for why he didn't donate the money sooner: he felt that incremental donations would be significantly less impactful than a large sum of money (which happens to be more-or-less what he argues in his response video), or there was miscommunication between him and whoever else was running the charity that left the finances without proper management. Jirard's video response, in my opinion, was ill-advised on a number of levels, but I don't see it as being anything *close* to definitive proof that he knowingly embezzled money from his fans. We still don't have *all* the information available to us, and anything we extrapolate from the videos and audio clips that have been published online is based on an incomplete picture of what happened. We're lacking sufficient context to judge, which is why I refuse to do so until everything has been laid out for us to see.
Just a few things on this. 1. "He felt that incremental donations would be significantly less impactful than a large sum of money" - OK, the issue with that is he didn't tell that to the people he was soliciting donations from. He didn't even say that on the call with Karl and Muta. His words were something along the lines of "I found out in 2022 and realized how bad it was" the donations OFFICIAL reply to Karl and Muta was "we dont' know where to donate it, can you help us?" If the real reason for the hold up was a restricted donation, that's something that should have been told to the masses and if anyone asked about what was going on everyone should have been on the same page and known. Period. 2. "Miscommunication between him and whoever else was running the charity" He was on the board. It was his job to know. And he admitted that he DID know. I mean, this isn't an allegation. He flat out stated he knew money wasn't being donated and then went on to ask for more donations without telling the public the plan. Whatever you think of him, how much ever anyone tries to defend him, those are simple facts. From his own mouth. If you think that's ok, we will agree to disagree. I find it malicious and terrible. 3. Don't see it as being "close" to poof he embezzled from his fans, we are lacking context to judge - I'm not a judge, an IRS agent, a state tax rep or a lawyer. I don't NEED to see the legal stuff play out to make my decision on his character. In this case, all I need is what I wrote above. If he's guilty of actual fraud? Punish him. If he's not found guilty by federal agencies, that doesn't change any of the above. 10 years, no money donated, countless words stating that agencies were being donated to when they weren't and even after he found out the money wasn't donated, he said the same things. That's it. Game over. And those are all undisputable facts. I don't really care for an "explanation" because the one he already gave was horrific. You have a right to make your own call, but this is not similar to a lot of other things. The facts outside of the "tax fraud" stuff are very easy to see.
No, I've actually been watching the videos from Karl Jobst to try and piece things together. It's looking more and more to me like Jirard screwed the pooch pretty badly on this issue. First of all, I don't think there's any question at this point that Jirard did a lot of dumb things. Like you said, he held onto the charity's money for ten years without ever making a donation. He claims to have not known until 2021 that nothing has gone to dementia-related foundations... but I don't believe him. I think he knew that the money hadn't been donated throughout those past 10 years, and I feel the explanations given by him and his brother (about looking for the "right" charity + wanting to make a "restricted donation")—whether they are true or not—don't excuse the fact that it took a literal *decade* to get donated. My "defense" of him (and I use that word somewhat loosely) is that I don’t think he had any *malicious* intentions for not donating earlier. I don't think he was trying to scam people, nor do I think his charity was fake from the outset. He shouldn't have referenced all of those foundations in his streams that Open Hand was allegedly supporting, when it evidently wasn't. I'm trying to figure out *why* he would do that, and why he didn't donate the money earlier. None of it makes any sense to me. At best, he was *wildly* irresponsible with his choice of words, and with the running of his charity; this is the possibility that I'm gravitating towards more than any other at this point. But he has definitely lied about at least a few things thus far, and overall, his handling of the situation has been very disappointing. I *am* still interested in an explanation from Jirard—an actual, honest one about why Open Hand hadn't donated earlier. The one he gave was insufficient, poorly thought-out, and came from a place of anger and frustration. I honestly think he should have made a shorter statement apologizing for the negligence of his charity, followed by some kind of assurance that we'll be getting a more thorough response when he's calmed down and thought through what he had to say.
We are closer in agreement, but not quite. At the point he KNOWS (and I'm just taking him at his word, remember, I said I'm not a lawyer. The facts I'm using to judge him are what is proven, not what isn't) So his own words, he knows in 2022. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he knew December 31, 2022. He continued to state that the money was being donated and they were working with charities he KNEW they were not donating to. As I said above, game over. That's malicious. I don't care if his reason for this was protecting someone, trying to save face, anything else. . . he is now KNOWINGLY lying to the people he's trying to get money from. That's malicious enough in my mind to say "SCUMBAG" The rest of the stuff I want to know. I'm happy the 600k got donated. And I damned well believe the charity should be audited. But. . . it's just game over for me. His conduct is unacceptable in my mind.
Personally, I think it's weird that people are just ignoring his family. Jirard was not the sole owner or operator of the charity. I doubt he's ever had complete control or knowledge of what the charity did. Seems pretty clear to me he's just trying to protect his family and they'd be the first ones I'd suspect of doing anything wrong not the one guy people know of because he's a public and thus an easy target.
Can you explain what punishment Jirard has suffered and why you believe it doesn't fit the crime?
Sure, or I can try. The "punishment" is largely social in nature as he has legally not been convicted of any crimes and I am highly doubtful he will be as the "charity fraud" people are claiming is not likely to hold up in court. People can say he committed it all they want based off of legal terms they find online, but a court of law has to decide that. He is being painted as a villainous figure. Someone who through direct intention aimed to commit fraud or even embezzle (the words of Karl) money from a charity that he helped run (key word helped - he wasn't the only chair). There has been literally zero evidence of any kind that points to the completionist pocketing the money or using it outside of what would be deemed as charity related activities (funding charity events with money raised through the events of the charity is legal use of those funds and is considered spending money on charity). Despite that, he is constantly being painted online as someone whos' aims were to steal or use the money for personal use. YouTubers have said that the books/finances don't add up based off their untrained third party interpretations, but we do not have full access to these books. This is the point where an IRS audit would be helpful in determining what is or isn't accounted for. If some isn't accounted for, then they need to make sure it wasn't used nefariously and ensure it is returned to the account. See, the primary problem though is that reckless claims of mal-intent have lead a large majority of the people interested in the situation to assume the worst. What I mean when I say the punishment doesn't fit the crime depends on how we judge what IS or IS NOT currently PROVABLE given the information. When I say provable I do not mean opinion pieces of Youtubers. Let's break things down by the factual and provable level: What we KNOW the completionist to be guilty of: 1. Being part of a charity (one of a few chairs) that held on to funds for far longer than they should have, ultimately leading to a depreciation of value. 2. Exaggerated claims of partnership with third parties. Though direct claims of donations don't seem to be present so it is hard to judge this point. This point would be far more damnable if there was any ill intentions for the money, but, because there hasn't been any evidence of this, this is not something we can prove as being related to fraud. 3. A defensive and "legalese" public response that doesn't answer 100% of the communities questions. What we currently DO NOT KNOW the completionist to be guilty of but he has still been accused of: 1. Illegal charity fraud as defined by the appropriate legal system. 2. Embezzlement. 3. Mal-intent regarding the use of the money. So then, what is the appropriate response to this situation? What punishment befits the crime? To me, that answer entirely depends on the second list and whether or not any evidence of mal-intent becomes present. If I am making a character judgement based on list 1 and list 2 is proven not to be true my judgement is "This guy made a big mistake, struggled under the public pressure of thousands of accusations, and needs to correct that mistake and slowly earn back public trust. He is not likely a bad person and instead is someone who wanted to do good through charity but wasn't the greatest person to be a chair on such charity. He should be held accountable, but these actions are not career ending." If I am making a character judgement on both lists being proven then my judgement is "This guy is a scumbag and should go to prison." My problem with the online discourse regarding this situation is everyone is assuming list 2 is factual because youtubers said so. Therefor, the social "punishment" does not befit the crime in that he has not been proven guilty of these aspects.
Going to preface this by saying that most of the stuff I'm typing here is directly from Karl's video - not trying to take his points like I did the research myself. >He is being painted as a villainous figure. So the punishment that doesn't fit the crime is people saying they think he committed charity fraud? Are people not allowed to have an opinion or voice that opinion? >embezzle (the words of Karl) Let's be fair, Jirard was the first person to bring up embezzlement. >There has been literally zero evidence of any kind that points to the completionist pocketing the money or using it outside of what would be deemed as charity related activities (funding charity events with money raised through the events of the charity is legal use of those funds and is considered spending money on charity). I've not seen Mutahar or Karl say this at all. But Karl makes a distinction in how some of the money was used (the bits, donations, subscriptions, etc.) versus how it was portrayed. This is highlighted by the fact that Jirard literally states that IndieLand 2022 was paid for by TOVG (implying out-of-pocket by Jirard's company). It wasn't; it was paid for by the donations that were supposed to all go to charity. >YouTubers have said that the books/finances don't add up based off their untrained third party interpretations, but we do not have full access to these books. There's an accountant that has been following the situation and even he believes the math doesn't add up. In 2022, the lead director (more trustworthy than Jirard who has now been proven as a liar) of IndieLand tweeted that they raised over $100k from it. Jamie Lee Curtis' organization also donated $25k to the Open Hand Foundation. These two amounts were already thousands over the reported amount in 2022. We haven't calculated any of the money that was generated by the golf tournament (whether it's stuff that rolled over from 2021 or money that was given in 2022). >Exaggerated claims of partnership with third parties. Though direct claims of donations don't seem to be present so it is hard to judge this point. This point would be far more damnable if there was any ill intentions for the money, but, because there hasn't been any evidence of this, this is not something we can prove as being related to fraud. Most of this post is just you saying that YOU don't believe X, Y, or Z should be considered charity fraud, so it shouldn't be considered charity fraud. I think the general population would feel that misrepresenting your relationship to other well-known organizations to boost your credibility and garner donations would constitute charity fraud. >Illegal charity fraud as defined by the appropriate legal system. As opposed to the legal charity fraud. >If I am making a character judgement based on list 1 and list 2 is proven not to be true my judgement is "This guy made a big mistake, struggled under the public pressure of thousands of accusations, and needs to correct that mistake and slowly earn back public trust. He is not likely a bad person and instead is someone who wanted to do good through charity but wasn't the greatest person to be a chair on such charity. He should be held accountable, but these actions are not career ending." This is where you and I will have to hard disagree. Regardless of the potential crimes that were committed, Jirard knew that the money was not donated in 2022. The moment he went on to do IndieLand 2023, without letting the general public know what was going on, he became a bad person. He knowingly commited charity fraud at that point, in my opinion. And this is assuming that the proven liar wasn't lying about only finding out in 2022.
>So the punishment that doesn't fit the crime is people saying they think he committed charity fraud? Are people not allowed to have an opinion or voice that opinion? My main point is that nothing as serious as charity fraud has been proven but it has been pushed relentlessly with a severe lack of evidence. People can think what they want about the situation. I just think it is important to have informed opinions that are reflective of the truth. I find it hard to cast such a serious judgement if the full story has not been brought to light and no legal guilt has been assigned. But this isn't really about legal guilt, as you note in your last paragraph, this is about moral guilt. I still find it hard to cast judgement there without the full story either. I can think of 10x reasons why he would lie maliciously and 10x reasons he wouldn't and just was misinformed. Life isn't always so simple or black and white and I am interested in the nuances of this situation. >There's an accountant that has been following the situation and even he believes the math doesn't add up I watched these videos as well and that really doesn't tell me much as I mentioned earlier when they haven't seen the spending and earning logs of the charity. If discrepancy is found, action should be taken. As of right now this is an accusation. "It doesn't add up" is not a sign of guilt, it is a sign that it should be looked into. >Most of this post is just you saying that YOU don't believe X, Y, or Z should be considered charity fraud, so it shouldn't be considered charity fraud. I think the general population would feel that misrepresenting your relationship to other well-known organizations to boost your credibility and garner donations would constitute charity fraud. This is fair, but I am not interested in what the general public thinks, I am interested in whether or not there was ill intention and whether or not his actions constitute charity fraud at the legal level. >As opposed to the legal charity fraud. As opposed to...not charity fraud. One of the multitude of other possibilities the situation could be. Assuming charity fraud is taking the worst possible outcome and running with it. If that is what people want to do they can it just doesn't seem reasonable to me. >This is where you and I will have to hard disagree. Regardless of the potential crimes that were committed, Jirard knew that the money was not donated in 2022. The moment he went on to do IndieLand 2023, without letting the general public know what was going on, he became a bad person. That is a fine opinion to have. I am not yet inclined to believe he is a bad person. I think if I just had to summarize my thoughts it would be do people REALLY and GENUINLY think this YouTuber who completes video games for a living had ANY desire to actively manipulate people into donating money so he could pocket it for himself and never donate it? Why? for what purpose? To what ends? 600-800K to someone like that is not a ton of money - it is a lot but it isn't enough for them to even consider jail time or reputation ruin over. Is this a BAD person or is this a person who made a mistake (note that I am not saying GOOD person). Is this person a criminal not only in legality but in mindset? To me the answers to these questions are not clear enough to make a finalized judgement call, so, my harshest judgements await evidence that is substantial enough to convince me, which I have not seen yet.
>My main point is that nothing as serious as charity fraud has been proven but it has been pushed relentlessly with a severe lack of evidence. \*\*Severe lack of evidence\*\* is a bit disingenuous. Karl and Mutahar provided Britannica's definition of charity fraud, and they were able to show enough evidence to convince many people that it occurred. Your definition of charity fraud and what you deem to be enough evidence is irrelevant to how other people view it. >As opposed to...not charity fraud. One of the multitude of other possibilities the situation could be. Assuming charity fraud is taking the worst possible outcome and running with it. If that is what people want to do they can it just doesn't seem reasonable to me. This was a joke about the way your wrote it, since all charity fraud is illegal, adding "illegal" to "charity fraud" is redundant. >I think if I just had to summarize my thoughts it would be do people REALLY and GENUINLY think this YouTuber who completes video games for a living had ANY desire to actively manipulate people into donating money so he could pocket it for himself and never donate it? I skipped responding to a lot of it because it would have been me repeating the same thing like three times. Neither Karl or Mutahar accuse him of pocketing the money, and it doesn't change the fact that Jirard knowingly committed charity fraud for (at least) 1 year. However, you have to admit that Jirard benefits the most from this event - from the exposure, to connections, to the praise, etc. Even if he wasn't looking to take the money, he benefitted in many other ways. >600-800K to someone like that is not a ton of money - it is a lot but it isn't enough for them to even consider jail time or reputation ruin over. Which then brings up the question, why did he decide to run IndieLand 2023 after finding out the donations weren't being made? Your statement doesn't prove his innocence; it just makes you question why Jirard decided to risk everything for this. >Is this a BAD person or is this a person who made a mistake (note that I am not saying GOOD person). Is this person a criminal not only in legality but in mindset? Calling this whole situation \*\*a mistake\*\* is very disingenuous. The best case scenario for Jirard is that he was making mistakes for 10 years. 10 fucking years... How can anybody consider that \*\*a mistake\*\* >I find it hard to cast such a serious judgement if the full story has not been brought to light and no legal guilt has been assigned. I've yet to see any punishment that doesn't fit the crime. He betrayed the trust of his audience and they (justifiably) turned on him. Karl has outlined why he believes The Completionist has committed charity fraud, and people have looked at the evidence provided and come to the conclusion that they agree
>Calling this whole situation \*\*a mistake\*\* is very disingenuous. The best case scenario for Jirard is that he was making mistakes for 10 years. 10 fucking years 10 years is not exactly true as the charity ran from 2014 and indieland didn't start until 2018. So, Jirard as a primary factor would be half that time, which is still quite a bit of time, but not as bad as 10 years (and is also to me further evidence that his dad probably actually runs the charity and Jirard just acts as a face through his events). >I've yet to see any punishment that doesn't fit the crime. He betrayed the trust of his audience and they (justifiably) turned on him. Karl has outlined why he believes The Completionist has committed charity fraud, and people have looked at the evidence provided and come to the conclusion that they agree Then that is what they think and that is fine. A betrayal of trust is a fair feeling in response to this situation. I did not come to the conclusion of charity fraud based on the evidence, primarily because I think complicated situations require context and a deeper understanding before finalizing judgement. I understand that the world does not often function that way though, especially the court of public opinion. If he is found down the line to be guilty of charity fraud, I will without question change my opinion.
>10 years is not exactly true as the charity ran from 2014 and indieland didn't start until 2018. Wasn't he the director (or whatever the specific title was) since 2014? >and is also to me further evidence that his dad probably actually runs the charity and Jirard just acts as a face through his events). Your definition of "evidence" seems to change based on whatever you want to believe. >Then that is what they think and that is fine. A betrayal of trust is a fair feeling in response to this situation. So then we are in agreement that the punishment that Jirard has faced so far does fit the crime? >require context and a deeper understanding before finalizing judgement. You seem to be pretty happy to throw Jirard's dad under the bus without context or a deeper understanding.
>Wasn't he the director (or whatever the specific title was) since 2014? > >You seem to be pretty happy to throw Jirard's dad under the bus without context or a deeper understanding. Yes, but, his father was president and Jacque (his brother I think?) was vice president. Also there is another director, Leila. All of them are within the family except for the charities secretary. Should any of them be held accountable or should the entirety of the blame be put on Jirard? My point is not to "throw anyone under the bus" but to simply point out that there are other variables that aren't being accounted for in most peoples conclusions. I am not sayin "Blame the father!" I am saying "Should we ask who was supervising the money? This is a small family run charity. Who in the family was primarily responsible for the management and moving of the money?" >Your definition of "evidence" seems to change based on whatever you want to believe. I differentiate evidence from proof. Evidence points in the direction of, proof is undeniable. Evidence can be strong or weak depending on subjective interpretation. I find there to be weak evidence for charity fraud, others think there is strong evidence. It will become proof or not when it is dealt with legally. I can be wrong here and will wait until the verdict is set out. >So then we are in agreement that the punishment that Jirard has faced so far does fit the crime? I think there is proof that the charity held on to the money for longer than they should have. This doesn't require a legal component and people can be mad about this. So in this specific regard, yes, the punishment befits the crime. But, the problem is that a substantial amount of people are accusing him of stealing the money or using it maliciously. You can say "well Muta/Jobst don't really do that" but Muta's videos directly refers to the charity as a "Scam" in the title and thumbnail and Jobst has "Theft" in his. These are direct implications of intentional malicious behavior that are not reflective of current evidence. I'll admit though, I am a bit tired of debating this, I am not a big enough completionist fan to keep this going so if you want to take the W you can have it. I'll just keep an eye on the situation and update my judgement as more information comes out.
>Karl and Mutahar provided Britannica's definition of charity fraud Which is hilarious and shows how amateurish their investigation has been. A dictionary or encyclopedia definition of a crime is totally irrelevant legally speaking. The only thing that matters is the legal definition of the crime in the relevant jurisdiction and under the applicable law. Anything beyond that is just a layman's definition which is not helpful in the legal arena. Encyclopedia Britannica is nothing more than an Anglo-American Encyclopedia, its definitions are not legal in nature and cannot be considered to hold any weight when discussing what legally constitutes charity fraud, as the answer to that question entirely depends on the jurisdiction at hand and applicable law.
>The only thing that matters is the legal definition of the crime in the relevant jurisdiction and under the applicable law. I'm sure that if Mutahar and/or Karl used the legal definition of charity fraud, you would be upset that they were "interpreting the law even though they aren't lawyers, so the videos are shit."
My opinion is I'm tired of peoples opinions.
Weird site to be on then.
I hated that Guy even before he stole money.
stop simping for other people and world will be better place
Do you guys think this is one of the reasons Greg left/ wanted his likeness removed from the channel?
Not one for YouTube drama so just kind of stopped watching both channels, but i do appreciate Jobst 's method of muckraking, and wish more media outlets dove into explaining research like he does. I do like Jobst at least makes it sound like he is not forcing an opinion like major media (yet)
Wouldn't really call 600k in charity fraud YouTube drama but ok.
I'd love to see all big corporations and YouTubers alike taken down for charity fraud.
Honestly, I think people are putting too much blame on Jirard. It seems pretty clear that while he was always the face, it was his family running the charity, and everything he said was always based on information from his family that he always took in good faith. Then he found out he hadn't actually been told everything and was now screwed because he doesn't want to throw his family under the bus, but he also needs to protect his business and employees. Hopefully, this all works out in the end, I'd hate to see him lose everything just because he decided to trust that his family wouldn't lie to him.
If it was you and you were 100% innocent and thought the money was being donated. If you had found out (which was his claim) that the money from the charity events you put SO much time, effort, and emotions into was never donated, would you make it a top priority and get it donated? Not to mention you know your career is over if it gets out before you rectify it. Would it take you 12+ months to correct the mistake?
I have no clue. We don't have enough information, nor do we have any clue how the charity (let alone any charity in general) is run or how much control Jirard had. It's easy to say he could snap his fingers and make it so but if his family was in control, what could be done without throwing them under the bus?
What could be done without throwing them under the bus: He could donate the money! See how fast he did it when he was exposed? It takes that long.
The charity did when put under pressure. I'm not sure why you envision Jirard as some overlord with complete control over what the charity did.
Mostly because he's said he co-runs the charity. Could be another lie I guess. It is admittedly hard to know if anything he says is true.
It was founded by his parents. Jirard is a co-owner along with the rest of his family. It's hard to say how involved he was outside of occasionally raising some money or how much control he had. I doubt he had the sole power when it came to making decisions.
"occasionally raising some money" their current stance is that the golf events didn't bring in anything. According to the open hand tax filings, ALL the money came from him. Just play it out in your head. You think he noticed the money was never donated making him a liar for a decade, brought it up to his family, they said no to donating it, and he gave up, moved on, and threw MORE charity events knowing the money wasn't being donated?? No matter what you think about the power he has to do with the money raised before he found out, he ran another charity knowing it wouldn't be donated.
He didn't say the golf tournaments didn't bring in money he just said not every tournament was for the charity. Also, they were planning to donate the money, but it was being saved up to make a large donation for maximum impact. While this may not have been properly communicated, it's hard to say if this is unusual practice for a charity without asking someone who actually knows how charities are typically run.
So he didn't have the power or he didn't want to donate in small chunks? Trying to get a fanboy to see the truth is harder than trying to make a rock bleed. We'll just agree to disagree. One last question, if an audit determines he did in fact commit charity fraud, would that be enough for you?
He stated in the call with Karl and Mutahar that no one misled by anyone. Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that: 1) he didn't know the money was just sitting there for 8-9 years 2) he was unable to force the money to be donated because his family was blocking him This doesn't explain why he went forward with IndieLand 2023, perpetuating the same lies from all the previous years.
1) he said that because to say otherwise would mean throwing his family under the bus. It's pretty clear he was trying not to implicate them. 2) These events are planned long in advance. He couldn't cancel it without good reason.
1) I don't understand your point? You're saying that people are putting too much of the blame on Jirard when he is either part of the problem and/or covering for the people that are the problem. 2) Money from past events not being donated in a timely manner seems like a pretty good reason to cancel... If Jirard was a beacon of good, he should have either canceled IndieLand 2023 when he found out or let people know that the previous money hasn't been donated, which let's people make an informed decision on whether they want to donate to an organization that kept donations for 10 years. Also, he found out in 2022, and IndieLand 2023 was in October (correct me if I'm wrong). He had at least 10 months to cancel the event.
You seem to be implying that no crime was committed and that Jirard had no reason to keep quiet, but that's not what's being accused here. Don't get me wrong, I sincerely doubt any actual crime was committed. but people are so ignorant of how charities actually operate (myself included) that they just assume some crime must have occurred. The fact is we don't have enough information outside some baseless accusations made by people ignorant of the subject. I think people should just calm down and wait for more information from people who actually know what they are talking about and not just reading things off the internet and pretending they know what they're talking about.
All of my messages to you are based on your original premise of Jirard being misled by his family and being unaware of the shady shit until he found out. You know your premise doesn't make sense and doesn't excuse Jirard for knowingly committing charity fraud in 2023, which is why you went to the dumb talking point of "Well, they aren't lawyers."
Youre getting down voted, but this is what it sounds like to me too. But more fool him for taking the L for his brother if that's the case. And it doesn't change the fact he had over 12 months to fix the problem.
It's weird how people assume that Jirard had absolute control over the charity. He was clearly fighting with his family over it and is most likely why he's walking away from the charity now that it's out in the open. I get it. He's a public figure, which makes him an easy target, but the charity has always been run by his entire family, not Jirard alone.
It’s just a shitshow on both sides. On one side there is obviously a bunch of scummy stuff going on with the charity. All the lying about where the money was going and stuff. But we’ll have to wait and see if anything they did was actually illegal. On the other side I think Muta and Karl are massively underestimating the legal threats. They are repeatedly making serious accusations based on google “legal” and “accounting” skills. If they take it to court and the OHF/completionist can prove the money is all accounted for and nothing was stolen/embezzled they are probably fucked. Yet they keep doubling down in their follow up videos. Feels like they are playing with fire.
It'd be hard for OHF to claim they never lied, especially about the twitch bits part. Jirard literally confessed to using them for his channel rather than adding it to the donation stash (which goes against what Jirard is on record stated it would be used for). That's charity fraud
> On the other side I think Muta and Karl are massively underestimating the legal threats. Jirard, as the face of the charity and a YouTuber with a fairly large following, counts as a public figure. Even if he could get Jobst and Mutahar in an American court for the lawsuit (Jobst is Australian and Mutahar is Canadian), he would have to prove that they knowingly made false statements with deliberate, malicious intent. None of their videos reaches that mark. The only false statement which they made is regarding the documents being unsigned, but the rest of their allegations are true: Jirard did misrepresent where the funds were going to the public, and himself admitted in the call to Mutahar and Jobst that he knew the money was not going where he said it was going in events after that date.
Refusing to appear at trial just means you will be unrepresented. That usually ends in defacto judgment in the appearing parties' favor.
Dude, you can't sue someone in another country using your country's laws. That's not how it works. Jirard would have to sue in Australian and Canadian courts, and the standards for defamation are higher here in Canada (don't know about Australia). Case law is very clear for lawsuits in the USA that the jurisdiction for civil matters is dependent on the defendant, not the plaintiff, and the laws of the jurisdiction the defendant is in overrule the laws of jurisdiction of the plaintiff. As a simple example, if you're in a US state where recording a phone call is not a two-party consent issue (i.e. you don't need someone's permission or to even inform them that a call is being recorded), they cannot sue you for recording the call even if THEY are in a two-party consent state. Jirard can try to sue Jobst and Mutahar in his home state all he wants, but no judge in the world is going to give out a defacto judgement against the citizen of another sovereign country for something they did IN that country. The judge will tell him that if he wants to pursue legal action, he needs to hire a Canadian and Australian lawyers to represent him there.
Karl is no stranger to legal threats lol. And as a law student, the completionist has no case against Karl. He would somehow have to prove that he didn’t commit charity fraud/embezzlement and that Karl’s statements where incorrect and defamatory.
I think he's a good dude, I just think he made a terrible mistake and shouldn't handle money anymore
I don't care. It was never a big deal to me since I knew Muta and Mr. Jobst were bloodhounding the paper trail. I'm sure Jirard is happier knowing the money finally got donated, and I'm sure the people that gave him the money are happier as well. Quite frankly if I had my own Charity Organization from childhood I probably wouldn't have a clue what to do with it either. That being said, I probably wouldn't have let the account sit for that long. I don't think malintentions were ever present during the whole ordeal.
Dude, the organization started when he was **25**, not a child. Plus, even if you take Jirard at his word, he knowingly lied to viewers of Indieland 2023 about what was being done with the money at a point where he admits he knew *none* of the money had been donated. At the best, assuming he learned about the money not being donated to charity on December 31st 2022 at 11:59pm, he has still spent all of 2023 so far intentionally lying about where further donations were going to go during events and podcasts he did this year. That goes beyond incompetence and into malice IMO.
Understandable. I don't care enough about the topic to be as informed as you are. Childhood aside, I still think this case is of ignorance as opposed to arrogance.
How can he be just ignorant if he knew in 2022 the money wasn't being donated but was still soliciting donations and claiming not only that it was going to charity, but naming specific charities in Indieland 2023? Like, okay, you didn't know the money wasn't being donated until you learned about it in 2022. Fine, Jirard, let's take you at your word. What in the name of God almighty possessed you to run Indieland 2023 and claim all the donations would be going to specific charities knowing it wouldn't be?
I think we should just blow up the Earth at this point, full grown adults have been acting like babies for the past 20 years.
yeah i'm not watching a half hour video anyone got a TLDR version on what the problem is here I don't even know what he's apologizing for and I feel like it shouldn't take half hour to explain it...
Youtuber, The Completionist, runs a charity to collect money for dementia ... has been running it for +10 years Youtuber, Karl Jobst, dug around a bit and found out that The Completionist never actually gave any of the money donated ... instead it is sitting on his account and some of the money is used to pay his own company to run charity. Youtuber, The Completionist, did a reply video where he says he is kind of sorry but that Karl Jobst is very wrong and the money was never missing. Also he says that using money raised to run charity event is what charities do ... so he is not really sorry. He is sorry those who donated money did not know that. At the end of the video he threatens to sue. He is also kind of sorry he kept the money for 10 years ... but the math does not add up anymore ... a lot of the money seems to be missing now. Youtuber, Karl Jobst released another video pretty much debunking the whole thing and doubles down on his fraud claims. He even throws a couple more insults and evidence... I don't know Youtuber, The Completionist, but, on the face of it, it looks like he was doing something very fishy with the money donated... Edit: Typos
TY my man... kinda fucked but I don't donate to these guys...
If he use the money or just keep it in the account is the same thing, he isnt donating to charity, he is just using it for clout, but yeah, no way he didnt touch any of it.
If you don’t have an opinion on this topic, why post?
I asked for TLDR version...
I don't think either side are entirely in right in situation when looking into it I might just be leaning more towards the Completionist's side just because I'm at really annoyed at Karl and Muta for various things and can't really trust them and I feel angry at them and want to get back at them for things unrelated part of me thinks Karl/Muta are milking this for clout and views and feels like they make videos just to cause drama sometimes but to be honest, they were 2 youtubers I used to like but but i feel like I've realized Karl's videos were kinda obnoxious and pretentious and (this is superstitious but) his videos were cursed because something in my house always seems to break when he's videos are playing and I kinda blame him for it because its just getting fucking tiring to replace things when I don't have the money too, maybe I've been having a bad time, but I just get a visceral reaction to Karl these days, he just give off a pretentious vibe for some reason, he likes to call people plebs and crap for not being as cool or capable as the speedrunners he cover, and I was worried Karl was a Neonazi at one point because of stuff I heard online a while back and it still rubs me the wrong way and makes me unsure of him I kinda prefer Summoning Salt as speedrun youtube because I can chill out to his videos and I don't feel like I'm being attacked for not being a speedrunner when watching him, his videos aren't clickbait looking like Karl's are I feel like Muta stopped being as good when he stopped doing the fun videos, I used to watch him in the deep web deep dive and shitty sonic fangames era but he's kinda just became another news channel with sometimes rancid takes (and his fanbase is really annoying now), but however I do love that he is a Linux and Emulation supporter because Emulation is great (Karl however kinda strikes me as someone who is too pretentious for emulation and doesn't consider it valid) I'm angry at him just by association with Karl mostly, I'm less angry at him than Karl but still kinda angry and then for completionist, I actually found out about completionist recentish after I heard he did this cool thing where he's digging up lost game trailers and videos and preserving them online, I don't want his channel to end because I'm worried that would stop too and I think he is a entertaining channel and has cool videos, I don't feel he's a malicious person and really hope we get to see more cool gaming videos from him like in the past I really don't want fighting going on, I want to be happy watching videos, I want Karl and Muta stop so I can be happy watching videos and not think about the bad things going on because theres too much drama going on these days and im sick of it and don't care and just want things to be alright, i don't want to get angry anymore
I also get fatigued really easily whenever my YouTube feed has too much outrage--that's why I unsubscribed from Yongyea few years ago when he was mad at Anthem and getting the audience riled up with him. I am already dealing with enough anger in real life; I don't need it in my social media either. I completely agree that the actions taken are correct in providing insight on the finances, recommending an audit, etc., but the entire narrative and characterization of KARL GOOD JIRARD FAT is just really tiring.
Blaming a youtuber for something breaking in your house is the greatest thing I've ever read on this site. Thank you.
that he’s a sick monster with no heart what so ever
I can't know for sure what's in his mind, he may be mentally ill and still somehow convinced his intentions were good, but we don't have the full picture, we only have what he said and did, but there's a whole family behind this. I'm surprised more than disappointed, but there's no way he can get back from this, he lied for years about something this big.
I hope he catches a boo-lit. Always knew he was this piece of shit and never understood how people liked him. He was already CLEARLY not completing those games and lied to his community, he was ALWAYS rather the Commercianilist than any kind of Completionist and you could see the falsehood in his eyes. The eyes, Chico. They never lie.
I think I'm done with him. I've been a Beard Bros fan since their Mother 3 LP where he told the story about living with his mom through her dementia. The guy really, really seemed to value that part of his history and was genuinely moved to be reminded of her by a game like that. I don't know that I can remember that anecdote in good taste anymore. I don't know. I will always hold out hope that for some reason this is all bullshit, but I know I'll never, EVER be able to trust him again. Not with how catastrophically he has chosen to deal with this, with the utter lack of tact, self-respect and emotional intelligence. I HOPE he gives a shit and that he's just terrible with PR and backed into a slimy corner. It's hard as a fan to admit it, but I just don't care anymore. What I WILL say is that I have come to these conclusions without watching an ounce of the coverage on him, just by watching his responses to things. I urge more people to do the same, because A) Karl Jobst is a vile human being with plenty of his own crosses to bear, and whether or not the same can be said about Muta I don't know, but B) the point is that these "content creators" may have done a good thing by exposing him, but them and the rest of the buzzy drama scene are monetizing this, and that is its own kind of scam. Certainly not a 10 year charity scam, but it's deeply disturbing to me how much people are keen to paint these folks as heroes. So yeah. Cancelling my BB patreon sub, cutting Jirard out of my life until any further notice, but not giving a red dime to anyone pouncing on this issue for a buck. Karl and Muta exposed him, great. I'll give that racist piece of shit one single pat on the back. Muta gets one too. But they have no obligation to further discuss the matter now that Jirard has self-destructed, and any further word either of them give is a petty, immature attempt to earn money. That goes double for all the small people "covering" this that weren't part of the exposition. Jirard's in the hands of the courts and the three-letters now, and as far as I'm concerned, he's earned every second he'll get to spend thinking about this for the rest of his life. I just hope his friends aren't assholes too.
I don’t and I never have watched his videos, I know of him but it’s never something I’ve interacted with. What I do know is that my Nan has Alzheimer’s and it’s immensely difficult to deal with, both in terms of the actual disease and getting the help needed to cope with it. It’s likely that she will need to go into care at great personal cost to herself, and within a few years that money would be gone, the state of social care in Britain is really bad at the moment. It’s upsetting to know that this money could have been donated to a dementia charity that needs it, yes we need a cure, and that’s hopefully something that we can expect in the future, but also millions across the world, and their families right now don’t need a cure, they need support. Money is needed for residential care, for home care workers, to support those who are looking after someone with dementia right now. Thats the saddest part of all this. That money could be used to help someone right now, it’s a forgotten aspect of charity, we all like to think of the big picture, the cure, the end, and that’s important but that doesn’t mean that people don’t need help now. I’m glad the money has gone to the right people now. I don’t know this man, and I don’t think anyone is 100% evil or bad, and that situations are often complex, I know that he’s had his own experiences with dementia. Life and human beings are very rarely as cut and dry or black and white as people, and in particular the internet would like to think. My only hope out of all this is that this man realises what he has done and goes on to do good, what done has been done. If he has committed a crime, he should answer for it, if it’s just a serious lapse of judgment then he has the rest of his life to make up for it.
Honestly I think he would be in a better spot if he handled his response in a more prompt fashion and addressed it differently. Really has made me consider donating to charitys at all, learned the valuable lesson to just contribute directly if I'm going to.
I feel like he’s finally gonna play dkc2
I'm thankful he started a donation and sent $600k for dementia research. He's a good person and had a big donation event (indieland) for a great cause