this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
130 points (88.7% liked)
Games
16961 readers
487 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He cannot claim and keep a straight face that he's looking for charities when he speaks about a specific charity for years, be it 10 or 2.
My point is that he could have just been evaluating charities for the past two years, and before that his siblings were supposed to take care of that. We don't know what the internal agreements were, or the communication between him and the rest of the people in the foundation. All we know is that he claims he knew the money wasn't donated in 2021, and that pushing on him last month got the money donated.
None of this is particularly relevant to those who have donated, but it's pretty important when looking at legal consequences and culpability. I think there's enough here to say Jirard is a scumbag, but not enough to necessarily claim that he is a criminal, though there's a good chance someone at the foundation has committed a crime.
Even if he only he knew in 2021 he then continued to claim the money was being donated as recent as 2022. Which means he is either complicit or lying.
I don't think you can draw either conclusion confidently. Here's an alternate explanation: his sister acknowledged that the money wasn't donated, and told him that it would once they pick a charity, and he didn't press on it until it got publicity. I haven't reviewed every time he boosted his charity, but in the ones I did see, he said he "worked with charities X, Y, and Z," not that they've actually donated money to them (i.e. they've been in talks about the donation process). I don't know how likely that is, but it's plausible enough for me to hold back on personal accusations, especially if I had a public platform like a popular YouTube channel (e.g. Mutahar @ someordinarygamers YT channel)
The way I see it, he's either complicit, lying, or negligent. I'm not going to guess which one until I see more evidence.