• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

amnesties

Member
Nov 17, 2017
835
User Banned: (3 Days): Downplaying animal abuse
none of this is ban worthy. especially so because this bandwagon is being pushed by the "i hate women" gamers

"spitting vodka in cat's mouth" is a massive reach too. she literally just lets the cat lick it off her mouth. does that absolve her? no of course not but the former sounds like some heinous crime

is it stupid? yes. probably also needs a telling off from the SPCA
 
Last edited:

lvl 99 Pixel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,706
none of this is ban worthy. especially so because this bandwagon is being pushed by the "i hate women" gamers

"spitting vodka in cat's mouth" is a massive reach too. she literally just lets the cat lick it off her mouth. does that absolve her? no of course not but the former sounds like some heinous crime

is it stupid? yes. probably also needs a telling off from the SPCA

People have been using a peta hashtag which is so insane to me. We're not trying to get her (and her cat) killed, guys.
Are they not as notorious of a group as I thought?
 

Deleted member 3758

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,858
The streamer is fucked up in the worst way and it's horrifying to see people abuse animals as props for what they perceive as entertainment.

There's moral and legal repercussions that go way beyond "bumping the partnered status" or "banned" from Twitch. Their policies are thinly veiled threats to people that make them money.
 

Vilam

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,055
Anyone expressing doubt that tossing a cat is a bad thing to do could benefit from a short ban themselves to think over just how wrong they are.
 

Kayla

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,316
how could anyone treat such a precious kitty like that...? she doesn't deserve to own any cats period fuck this person
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,696
Cats have fragile digestive systems (as I've known many times to my cost cleaning up after my own) - so yes, the Vodka is worthy of reporting.

Having lost one to poisoning, you shouldn't muck about with them like that.

Also, please don't quote that extremist organisation, they're not on the side of animals, and more likely to euthanise the pet than help it.
 

Deleted member 15476

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,268
Twitch always gives second (and third, forth ,... ) passes to streamers that bring revenue. She'll be back more likely than not.
 

Deleted member 4413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,238
User banned (3 days): downplaying animal abuse
Apparently cats are sensitive to alcohol, never knew that. Maybe she didn't know either. Pitchforks seem a bit extreme here.

Throwing her cat on the other hand...
 

PlzUninstall

Member
Oct 30, 2017
563
Makes me sick. Might need to add a trigger warning in the title for animal abuse, honestly. I couldn't even fully watch the vodka clip.

Fuck her.
 

panda-zebra

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,737
"I shouldnt have gotten frustrated with Milo, but I dropped him on the floor behind my chair. I'm not that strong :P"

Imagine having such a temper that you could harm a companion animal like that, almost as shocking as this piss-poor attempt to downplay animal abuse.

EDIT: Oh, she's been seen kicking her dog when it was annoying one of here cats, too. This isn't some isolated incident, what a vile human being.

 
Last edited:

Dyna

Member
Nov 1, 2017
339
Finland
Twitch won't do shit about this either, they don't care. A lesser-known streamer would be kicked off of the platform completely if they had those three incidents under their belt (throwing your cat, giving your cat alcohol, saying the N word), but since it's Alinity she'll get special treatment for sure. They need to seriously look into their own policies and actually stick to them, hire completely new non-biased staff if that's what it takes. It is completely baffling to me how they are willing to spit out temporary bans for honest mistakes like a streamer clicking a link with NSFW material in it and closing the window immediately, but are totally unwilling to stick to their guts with these actual violations and overall terrible, terrible behavior. Weird how many people are subtly trying to downplay this, wonder how many cat-throwers there are in this community.
 

Carl2291

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,782
Alinity is a repeat offender who consistently gets let off by the Twitch admins.

Her still being on the platform after this comes as no real surprise. There's a bunch of these streamers who the TOS don't apply to. For some reason.
 

Deleted member 1849

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,986
Taking and euthanising otherwise healthy family pets isn't terrible enough?
This is not the place for it, but as I understand it those stories are mostly all from a website called petakillsanimals.com, which is a website run by Richard Berman (or more accurately Berman & Co). Someone who has made an entire career lobbying aggressively against basically everything good. Including running hitpieces against workers unions, environmentalists, and a lot more.

Are there any sources of that old claim which do not come from a site he runs? Because he is not a trustworthy source.

Attempting to fact check, there seems to be a couple of incidents of stolen pets (which I fucking hate) but nothing of the level most people parrot on the internet

 
Last edited:

Theef

Alt Account
Banned
Nov 3, 2017
755
I don't know what's worse. This animal abusing demon or the fans supporting her.
 

rochellepaws

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,452
Ireland
What a disgusting person. Twitch should ban her immediately but they seem to constantly embrace toxic and problematic people so I doubt it.
 

PlzUninstall

Member
Oct 30, 2017
563
I don't know what's worse. This animal abusing demon or the fans supporting her.
It's as puzzling as some of the posters defending her in this thread!

To all the people saying that she may not have known it was harmful. Ignorance is not a defense. Alcohol isn't exactly great for humans nevermind a small animal.

The defeatist attitude of "oh Twitch doesn't care" doesn't help either. Twitch can't ignore it forever. It's definitely grounds for animal abuse in the UK and I'm sure it's the same where she's from.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,427
Silicon Valley
I love how tons of posts with this exact sentiment have been banned for downplaying animal abuse but this one slides through. Wonder why............
Other people have phrased it as a question as well, and not been banned. Obviously throwing a cat like that is not okay, but the vodka thing is even worse as it is like poison. The folks being banned are outright trying to defend how she threw the cat.

Regardless, it is animal abuse and this streamer is a repeat ToS offender, but like many larger streamers Twitch seems to not take any action (or not for long) as they are a source of money for the company.

It sucks.
 
Oct 25, 2017
41,368
Miami, FL
Pretty gross, and very unexpected since she generally seems to take very good care of her pets.

People will surprise you with their behavior when they're upset or drunk. If this is how she is or can become, I agree she should have her pets taken away. Even if she's great with them most of the time (I'm guessing she is 99% of the time), the fact that she can take it to this level — even for an instant — means she poses a threat to her pets at all times. A momentary lapse in judgment like this is all that is required to kill or injure a pet, and she is known to love her bottles of alcohol.

She is a repeat offender who has a very long history of doing or saying REALLY stupid shit. Shit that makes you question someone's intelligence, despite appearing to be a fairly nice person. But I suppose if most of us were talking to hundreds of people for 40 hours a week maybe we'd end up saying some really dumb shit along the way too, so most of that can slide. I'd like to think, however, that most of us wouldn't throw out racial epithets or attack animals at all, ever. Am I crazy?
 
Jun 17, 2018
3,244
I love how tons of posts with this exact sentiment have been banned for downplaying animal abuse but this one slides through. Wonder why............

Yeah, I have to agree with you there. Not sure if the mods missed that one or they're playing favourites.

Videos aren't good, the vodka video is just a pure wtf moment. Fair enough if she isn't clued up that it's poison to animals (and humans to an extent). It's obvious that the cat wouldn't have liked it though.
 

Deleted member 1849

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,986

In my previous post, I have a fact checking article. The Maya incident is in there:

The facts appear be that PETA was asked to help when an adjacent landowner reported that they should see how his cow with her udders ripped up from abandoned and stray dogs in the trailer park area amounted to a menace not to be tolerated. He complained to PETA that the abandoned and stray dogs attacked his livestock, injured his milking cow, killed his goat and terrorized his rabbits. Abandoned and/or stray dogs and cats have appeared to have been considerable in what is known as Dreamland 2. PETA responded and the trailer park management encouraged their efforts in an attempt to gather stray/abandoned cats and dogs. Additionally the leases provided that no dogs were allowed to run free in the trailer park.
Approximately three weeks before Mr. Cerate's dog [Maya] was taken by the women associated with PETA, Mr. Cerate asked if they would put traps under his trailer to catch some of the wild cats that were in the trailer park, and traps were provided to him as requested. Additionally, parties associated with PETA provided Mr. Cerate with a dog house for two other dogs that were tethered outside of Mr. Cerate's home.
On or about October 18 a van that was operated by the ladies associated with PETA arrived the at the trailer park. The van was clearly marked PETA and in broad daylight arrived gathering up what abandoned stray dogs and cats could be gathered. Among the animals gathered was the Chihuahua of Mr. Cerate. Unfortunately the Chihuahua wore no collar, no license, no rabies tag, nothing whatsoever to indicate the dog was other than a stray or abandoned dog. It was not tethered nor was it contained. Other animals were also gathered. Individuals living in the trailer park were present and the entire episode was without confrontation. Mr. Cerate was not at home and the dog was loose, sometimes entering the shed/porch or other times outside in the trailer park before he was put in the van and carried from the park. The dogs owned by Mr. Cerate that were tethered were not taken.
Whether one favors or disfavors PETA has little to do with the decision of criminality. The issue is whether there is evidence that the two people when taking the dog believed they were taking the dog of another or whether they were taking an abandoned and/or stray animal. There have been no complaints on the other animals taken on that same day, and, like the Chihuahua, [they] had no collar or tag. From the request of the neighboring livestock owner and the endorsement by the trailer park owner/manager the decision as to the existence of criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt must be made by the prosecutor. More clearly stated, with the evidence that is available to the Commonwealth, it is just as likely that the two women believed they were gathering abandoned and/or stray animals rather than stealing the property of another. Indeed, it is more probable under this evidence that the two women associated with PETA that day believed they were gathering animals that posed health and/or livestock threat in the trailer park and adjacent community. Without evidence supporting the requisite criminal intent, no criminal prosecution can occur.

The guardian article seems to have been published after the fact check, and as far as I can tell seems to be legit, so I guess the case was re-opened at some point and they eventually agreed on an out of court settlement.

The case definitely could have been handled better, and those PETA members definitely were in the wrong and that payout is fucking pathetic, but it seems a bit disingenuous to use that as an example of how they are rounding up and killing pets.
 

Gloomz

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,412
Twitch lets certain streamers get away with tons of shit. Likely due to Twitch not wanting their cashcows to use another streaming platform.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.