Timestamps are in the description but chapters not working yet, feel free to jump around to less commonly discussed things like possible defense strategies if interested.
Please do not rush to apply. I am not going to look at any submitted applications for at least 24 hrs. So if interested in applying then please take your time to read this entirely and give your application some consideration, rather than a rushed halfway thought-out submittal.
Hello, our group of four players is looking for one more as we are about to start running the Myth-Speaker Adventure Path (AP). Our group consists of myself as GM and four other players. Two of the players are IRL friends of mine, the other two are players that we met on this sub in a group that's been going for about 3 years. We are looking for one more to round out the group again for this 1-10 campaign that is about to begin. I am also about to be GM this campaign for a separate group on Mondays as well. Following this campaign and depending on group interest, we may bridge the gap to the level 14-20 AP “Revenge of the Runelords.”
The Myth-Speaker AP is in a setting that closely resembles stereotypical ancient Greece. You will find many similarities and parallels in the campaign reminiscent of classic Greek characters and stories such as those of Hercules, Odysseus, and Orpheus. The start of the campaign will use mostly default character creation rules, but rather early in the adventure your characters’ mythic potential will unlock and the characters will start their way down their “Mythic Paths.” This means they will be able to (and required to) accomplish ‘Herculean’ tasks. Literally, the obstacles you will face and ways of overcoming them will sometimes feel like the type of things Hercules would need to do.
Myth-Speaker is set in the isles of Iblydos, which are a group of city state ruled islands that serve as an ancient Greece analogue found within Pathfinder’s world of Golarion. The lore of Iblydos is very localized and I have resources that can quickly bring new players up to speed, so it’s actually a great place to get started in the world’s lore and setting if you’ve never played in the official Pathfinder campaign settings before. The region is best known for two things. First is its variety of monstrous creatures such as minotaurs, medusae (sthenos), centaurs, satyrs, hydras, sphinx, pegasi, and more. And the second is for the people who obtain demigod like powers known as “hero-gods.” The path to becoming a hero-god normally starts with a “myth-speaking,” where a cyclops seer would prophecy the bonds a creature has to the lands of Iblydos and give a divination on some great, mythic obstacle for the creature to overcome. If the creature is successful at conquering this formidable challenge, then they unlock their hero-god potential and gain great power that strangely fades away should they leave Iblydos. Although hero-gods existed for roughly 10,000 years, nobody quite knows what it is about the lands of Iblydos that makes this process possible or why the power fades away if a hero-god leaves Iblydos.
However, just over a hundred years prior to this campaign, some complicated events happened in the Golarion setting. Ever since then any forms of prophecy, fortune telling, or reading of omens has become so unreliable they are all functionally useless. This began the Golarion’s “Age of Lost Omens,” and unfortunately means that the process of myth-speaking to create hero-gods has also functionally come to an end. The people of Iblydos are worried that the hero-gods of today may be the last generation of hero-gods, and then the nation may be defenseless to outside powers. But near the beginning of this campaign Gorum (the God of War and one of the setting’s core 20 deities) will die. And when that happens strange magics will surge throughout Golarion, including Iblydos. These grand events will disrupt the state of things in Iblydos since the last century, and set your characters on a path to become hero-gods. But these same circumstances will also create massive challenges where such mythic power is the only chance at saving Iblydos from a massive threat.
A free Player’s Guide with additional non-spoiler details on the setting and recommended character options can be found here. I will provide a supplemented version of this document to the player with more setting info and recommended character options.
If you are interested in joining this campaign, please shoot me a reddit message with the following info:
My name is Nathan and I am in my early 30’s living on the U.S. East Coast. I have had great success with r/LFG, finding players that have completed multiple campaigns across D&D 5e, CosmereRPG, and now PF2e including two 1-20 campaigns. All with previous strangers from this sub. I am really interested in the commercial maritime industry (container ships, tankers, etc.), the U.S. criminal and civil justice systems, 80's hair metal, and RPGs.
Consider that PF2e is a collaborative and group effort. If hogging loot, murder-hoboing, attacking other player characters, etc. are "something your character would do" then a piano filled with anvils may fall from the sky and land on your character, presenting an opportunity to make a more team friendly character. The group is also LGBTQ+ friendly.
If your character wants to engage in consensual romantic relationships with other characters or NPCs, then any romantic scenes will be allowed and a fade to black. Attempting non-consensual acts or joking about them will result in instant removal, no questions asked or appeal.
I plan to update one subreddit rule, and add another one. Community input is requested.
#Proposed Updated Rule 6
Image posts must depend on the image.
The current Rule 6 is "No low effort image posts." That still allows people to unnecessarily make an image post with an image that is funny or stands out for some reason; and then put a bit of effort into the post body like just giving a build level split, starting ability scores, and feats; but no major revelations or quality input. Yet, due to the attention grabbing image, the post will get a lot of upvotes and comments that perhaps the post does not warrant, and takes away attention from other posts on the sub.
This will hopefully change that. People can still post pretty much any safe for work image they want to within the body of a text post. People will still be able to make image posts of confusing combat log screenshots, "taste the rainbow" tooltips (i.e. adding a bunch of damage riders to their attacks, but they need to explain the build in the post body per rule 7), character inspiration posts (e.g. "How would you make [insert character]?" if they also provide details on the character's abilities and combat style), tier lists (if the tier list is not low effort or pointless per Rule 9), or an image of a modded piece of equipment with the OP asking what builds would you make using that item, and more. This rule is to stop people from making an image post on something that doesn't need the image.
I plan to be somewhat loose with what is meant by "depending" on the image, as in an example like a tier list an image can be very useful for summarizing a lengthy text post. Or in a "taste the rainbow" post with a bunch of damage riders of different damage types, the tooltip and seeing all these different effects is the appeal and the point of the post.
I know some want me to ban all image type posts, and make people put any images into the body of a text post. I am still not persuaded by that, but people can argue it in the comments if they want and try to change my mind. But I think I would like to take this more moderate step and see if it resolves the concerns about image posts unnecessarily hogging attention.
#Proposed New Rule 11
No low effort posts.
This will only apply towards two very specific criteria. First are stream of consciousness posts. For example, a post titled "Wow, paladins are strong!" and a post body that simply says, "I just love divine smiting everything, it's such a blast to play."
And second are questions that are easily searched, and easily answered. For example a post asking "What animal companions can a Beastmaster Ranger have?" would be removed. But a post titled "What do you think is the best animal companion for a Beastmaster Ranger?" would not be removed.
This rule will not be used to remove the 29,726th post asking "What are your favorite fun and unique builds?" As the game and this community sees people come and go, and as more is learned about the game, and as long term players get more experience with the game and different builds, the answers to this question will change. And that's a big part of Reddit. This rule will not be used for topics covered in the Commonly Confused Mechanics Post. I like to use those posts as an advertisement for the Commonly Confused Mechanics post to hopefully bring more attention to it, and stop future questions discussed in the Commonly Confused Mechanics post from being asked.
This rule is only intended for stream of consciousness posts, and easily searched and answered posts.
Please do not rush to apply. I am not going to look at any submitted applications for at least 24 hrs. So if interested in applying then please take your time to read this entirely and give your application some consideration, rather than a rushed halfway thought-out submittal.
Hello, our group of four players is looking for one more as we are about to start running the Myth-Speaker Adventure Path (AP). Our group consists of myself as GM and four other players who all met following a similar post on this sub two years ago, and we recently finished the level 1-20 AP “Blood Lords.” We had a 5th player, but they will not be able to continue playing in this next campaign due to personal life adjustments, so we are looking for one more to round out the group again for this 1-10 campaign that is about to begin. Following this campaign and depending on group interest, we may bridge the gap to the level 14-20 AP “Revenge of the Runelords.”
The Myth-Speaker AP is in a setting that closely resembles stereotypical ancient Greece. You will find many similarities and parallels in the campaign reminiscent of classic Greek characters and stories such as those of Hercules, Odysseus, and Orpheus. The start of the campaign will use mostly default character creation rules, but rather early in the adventure your characters’ mythic potential will unlock and the characters will start their way down their “Mythic Paths.” This means they will be able to (and required to) accomplish ‘Herculean’ tasks. Literally, the obstacles you will face and ways of overcoming them will sometimes feel like the type of things Hercules would need to do.
Myth-Speaker is set in the isles of Iblydos, which are a group of city state ruled islands that serve as an ancient Greece analogue found within Pathfinder’s world of Golarion. The lore of Iblydos is very localized and I have resources that can quickly bring new players up to speed, so it’s actually a great place to get started in the world’s lore and setting if you’ve never played in the official Pathfinder campaign settings before. The region is best known for two things. First is its variety of monstrous creatures such as minotaurs, medusae (sthenos), centaurs, satyrs, hydras, sphinx, pegasi, and more. And the second is for the people who obtain demigod like powers known as “hero-gods.” The path to becoming a hero-god normally starts with a “myth-speaking,” where a cyclops seer would prophecy the bonds a creature has to the lands of Iblydos and give a divination on some great, mythic obstacle for the creature to overcome. If the creature is successful at conquering this formidable challenge, then they unlock their hero-god potential and gain great power that strangely fades away should they leave Iblydos. Although hero-gods existed for roughly 4,000 years, nobody quite knows what it is about the lands of Iblydos that makes this process possible or why the power fades away if a hero-god leaves Iblydos.
However, just over a hundred years prior to this campaign, some complicated events happened in the Golarion setting. Ever since then any forms of prophecy, fortune telling, or reading of omens has become so unreliable they are all functionally useless. This began the Golarion’s “Age of Lost Omens,” and unfortunately means that the process of myth-speaking to create hero-gods has also functionally come to an end. The people of Iblydos are worried that the hero-gods of today may be the last generation of hero-gods, and then the nation may be defenseless to outside powers. But near the beginning of this campaign Gorum (the God of War and one of the setting’s core 20 deities) will die. And when that happens strange magics will surge throughout Golarion, including Iblydos. These grand events will disrupt the state of things in Iblydos since the last century, and set your characters on a path to become hero-gods. But these same circumstances will also create massive challenges where such mythic power is the only chance at saving Iblydos from a massive threat.
A free Player’s Guide with additional non-spoiler details on the setting and recommended character options can be found here. I will provide a supplemented version of this document to the player with more setting info and recommended character options.
If you are interested in joining this campaign, please shoot me a reddit message with the following info:
My name is Nathan and I am in my early 30’s living on the U.S. East Coast. I have had great success with r/LFG, finding players that have completed multiple campaigns across D&D 5e, CosmereRPG, and now PF2e including two 1-20 campaigns. All with previous strangers from this sub. I am really interested in the commercial maritime industry (container ships, tankers, etc.), the U.S. criminal and civil justice systems, 80's hair metal, and RPGs.
Consider that PF2e is a collaborative and group effort. If hogging loot, murder-hoboing, attacking other player characters, etc. are "something your character would do" then a piano filled with anvils may fall from the sky and land on your character, presenting an opportunity to make a more team friendly character. The group is also LGBTQ+ friendly.
If your character wants to engage in consensual romantic relationships with other characters or NPCs, then any romantic scenes will be allowed and a fade to black. Attempting non-consensual acts or joking about them will result in instant removal, no questions asked or appeal.
In Logan Paul's original complaint, he alleged Coffeezilla defamed him with a June 29th, 2023 tweet that read "Logan Paul really is the type of dude to thank you when you expose his scam, then block you when you remind him to pay up."
The following day Coffee released a video titled "Logan Paul's Scam Isn't Over."
And on January 5th, 2024, Coffeezilla released a video titled "Logan Paul's 'Refund.'"
This is where the alleged defamatory statements against Logan Paul came from according to Paul's lawsuit. As you will see if you click any of the above links, these Coffeezilla postings are now gone. I actually can't get a link to the June 30th video right now, may be able to from PC but that is why I linked to the reddit post instead. However I think the tweet especially may have been recently deleted. Because just googling "Coffeezilla tweets Logan Paul really is the type of dude" will still produce results linking to the tweet in question.
Have these all been deleted for a while? Or is this a recent development right around the time the two sides announce the case is settling? Wayback machine shows the tweet and the second video being up as late as May 2025, but they haven't been captured since then so IDK how relevant that is.
Judge Gildea rules that his orders were, "violated either directly, or at the very least, in spirit." From that he stays discovery and deposition of Proctor. He basically took judicial notice of the fact that somebody leaked Proctor's medical info, and stated with certainty it was leaked.
It is pointed out to the judge that the alleged "violation" of his order was not a violation, that the smoking gun tweet was "fired" hours before the information was filed, and therefore it was not leaked by the Read side, the O'Keefe side, or the Waterfall or McCarthy's.
The judge finally acknowledges his error, but says it changes nothing. Why? By stepping on the same rake and indirectly claiming that Proctor's deposition break was leaked to Turtleboy by the Read team.
I would love to see this pointed out to the judge. That he took judicial notice an order was violated, took action because of that, it was proven he was wrong, yet he refused to reverse the action because he took judicial notice of another rule violation which has not been argued. Is he going to double down this afternoon, or is he going to admit maybe he shouldn't be taking these tweets provided by an interested 3rd party, and always using them as though they were gospel?
TLDR; This case is essentially the ravings of an apparent conspiracy theorist named Nicholas Fiorillo, countersuing everyone in the Massachusetts criminal justice system and their mother for something completely unrelated to what Fiorillo was originally sued for. Looking into this case is an embarrassment and absolute waste of time. But not as big of an embarrassment and waste of time as arguing that it implies Judge Gildea is conflicted regarding the O’Keefe/Read matters. For a multitude of reasons, but perhaps most importantly because it is only the original lawsuit against Fiorillo that is still ongoing. The countersuit by Fiorillo that names Judge Gildea and Brian Albert as defendants has already been dismissed. While this is an “active” lawsuit, no “active” part of it has anything to do with Judge Gildea or Brian Albert.
Judge Gildea has made many questionable rulings and decisions recently in the O’Keefe/Read cases, at least in the opinion of many on this sub including myself. For example he recently got mad at the attorneys for stating argument as fact, yet Judge Gildea stated his argument (perhaps the “leak” of Proctor’s medical info came from an attorney sharing impounded material) as fact. And essentially sanctioned Karen Read’s team without actually sanctioning them. He demands additional info from Read’s attorneys on their motion to compel Tully’s deposition, yet frequently levies serious accusations against Read’s team without giving them an opportunity to clarify the record. Most recently he ran off the bench after making attorneys come in from across the country for a hearing that could have been an email. My opinion on Judge Gildea turned pretty sour very quickly with this hearing, and I recently made a post on this sub wondering if Read’s team (and maybe even other parties, given how judgmental and retaliatory he is being) should move to recuse Judge Gildea. Right now I am certainly not a Judge Gildea fan.
But in that post and in response to other posts and discussions online, many are pointing out that Brian Albert and Judge Gildea are co-defendants in a civil case. They are implying or confidently stating that this creates a conflict of interest for Judge Gildea, who will want Brian Albert to appear credible in this Karen Read case to support Judge Gildea’s defense in the other civil suit in which he is a defendant. So I looked into this case and can confirm that it is absolute horseshit. The person filing the countersuit has been restricted from moving cases to the federal court because his suits are numerous, vexatious, and meritless. And even after that he still kept trying to move cases to federal court, contrary to that previous order. It essentially comes down to a pro-se, vexatious litigant as a defendant countersuing everyone in the Massachusetts criminal justice system. And, most importantly, the countersuit by this vexatious litigant against Judge Gildea and Brian Albert has been dismissed. It is only the original lawsuit against Fiorillo that remains active, NOT the countersuit including Gildea and Albert as defendants.
Imagine if some lunatic suing every prosecutor, police officer, and judge they can get a name for would automatically disqualify those civil defendants from prosecuting the plaintiff until the civil dispute is resolved, and then the criminal defendant just files another lawsuit. Imagine that “one neat trick” all prosecutors hate was a way to stay out of jail forever, you just sue everybody involved in your investigation, detention, and prosecution for some meritless crap; and now they can’t investigate, detain, or prosecute you. Sounds pretty crazy, right? Now realize that people claiming this countersuit against Gildea and Albert is a conflict of interest are going a step beyond that level of crazy. Because what they are arguing is that if some other lunatic files a lawsuit against everybody involved in law enforcement that they can find, all because they don’t want to get prosecuted for shoplifting; well now that means these judges, police officers, and prosecutors are all prohibited from prosecuting an alleged murderer as well. Because the judge and the prosecutor are over here being sued for some B.S. harassment related charges by an alleged shoplifter two towns over, now they can’t try to prosecute an alleged murderer; due to a B.S. conflict of interest. It is an insane argument. Anyone still making that argument is either unaware of the details of this case (which I hope to clarify here) or is just being dishonest.
Raymond C. Green loaned $1.2 mil to Nicholas and Tracy Fiorillo and their realty company “Ocean Trust” in June of 2020, so the couple could buy a home to use as a vacation rental property. The Fiorillo’s bought the property, but according to Green they never paid back a penny of the loan, and it was defaulted on.
For what it’s worth, Nicholas Fiorillo denies this accusation.
The Fiorillos then allegedly continued to live out of the home and rented it out on Airbnb and similar platforms. Eventually the Fiorillos were evicted, and this lawsuit was filed by Green in May 2024 to recover the money the Fiorillos earned for renting out a property they did not own. Green was also seeking the money that the Fiorillos should have paid on real estate taxes and utility bills which the Fiorillos did not pay during their time owning the house.
Nicholas Fiorillo seeing this seemed to take objection to renting the property “without authorization.” Fiorillo seems to think this is about some part of the loan deal prohbitting them from renting the property when the Fiorillo’s owned it; when in fact what Green is arguing about is that the Fiorillos no longer own the home so they didn’t have “authorization” to rent out a property they don’t own. Fiorillo misses the mark here, and also starts to show some of his…’unique’ perspectives in a rambling paragraph replete with grammatical errors and eyebrow raising claims like a million dollar loan apparently not requiring any monthly payments (note: it actually did require monthly interest payments which Green is alleging were not being made).
After reading the above paragraph, I believe you should heavily, heavily doubt anything and everything Nicholas Fiorillo has to say.
I think the above gives some quick highlights of what Green alleged against the Fiorillos, as well as the Fiorillos answer to those important claims. But what is this countersuit the Fiorillos filed? I believe it is against 59 new defendants (it’s honestly kind of hard to tell) seeking damages of $400,000,000. Fiorillo alleges that the company NE Edge is a George Soros backed shell company that exists to defraud people like himself in shady deals. It would seem that Nicholas Fiorillo runs a company called “Gotspace Data” that competes with NE Edge when it comes to acquiring land for data centers, and is saying that this whole rental house foreclosure thing is tied to the RICO acts of George Soros working with NE Edge.
Among the defendants in this seemingly complex RICO scheme against Nicholas Fiorillo and his Gotspace Data related countersuit are 12 attorneys, 9 law enforcement officers, and 5 judges. He also sues 6 persons who stayed at the Airbnb alleged to be Soros plants to try and inculpate the Fiorillos.
I’ll just throw this in there because it gave me a kick. It would seem Nicholas Fiorillo believes Rachel Rollins resigned when it was discovered she maliciously prosecuted Fiorillo. Talk about an ego.
Where does Brian Albert fall into all this? Well you see…
Nicholas Fiorillo seems very afraid to go to the courthouse, for fear of the police arresting him for “bogus” charges and then awful things happening to him while in the custody of these Sorors-backed officers.
And now where does Judge Gildea fit into all of this?
Crazy that he aided and abetted Thomas O’Neil and Thomas O’Neill. In reality Judge Gildea was the judge overseeing a previous dispute against Raymond Green and Nicholas Fiorillo in civil case 2272CV00194 in which the parties settled.
These countersuits by Nicholas Fiorillo were dismissed. For multiple reasons. First on February 28, 2025, because they had already been voluntarily dismissed by Fiorini before. See below pulled from the docket:
And the claims were dismissed again on June 5, 2025, because Fiorini hadn’t actually served anyone with the countersuit.
This countersuit is dead. D-E-A-D dead. Even if that were not the case, these kinds of insane filings cannot be a limitation on the civil and criminal justice systems working as they should in other cases completely unrelated to these lunatic-like ramblings. This countersuit is not a legitimate reason to be worried about Gildea’s impartiality, and it weakens legitimate arguments about his recent inappropriate behavior to keep bringing these issues up.
​
Judgemental Gildea's behavior is starting to go beyond the pale if you ask me. He complains about arguments stated as facts. He demands that Read's attorneys supplement their motion to compel Tully for his deposition, and in the process leaves out important language disclaiming that Read's team knew they were making some presumptions. Yet Judgemental Gildea affirmatively states an attorney is behind whatever "leak" happened. Seemingly ignoring the possibility he has a Becky Hill in the court staff, or that the "leaker" got the medical info from elsewhere. For example, perhaps from an acquaintance of Proctor or somebody who perhaps saw Proctor going to or from whatever it is he is going to or from. Say Proctor did check in to a mental health facility in Florida. Maybe the leak is Proctor's Uber driver or something? Kearney tweeted 5 hrs ago that if it was his tweet then he did not get it from anyone in Read's or the O'Keefe's "camp."
Judgemental Gildea puts Proctor's deposition and related discovery on indefinite suspension unless the attorneys essentially send him a 'voluntary' gag order. A sanction which definitely, definitely, definitely hurts one side more than the other. But without actually finding that any violation occurred or that anyone should be sanctioned. And he warns everyone that the discovery deadline is looming, implying both sides (cough cough Karen Read's team cough) need to send this 'voluntary' gag order to him quickly or else lose the opportunity to continue their deposition of Proctor.
Oh, Judgemental Gildea is not sanctioning Read's attorneys or anything. But he is making Alan Jackson get a last minute plane ticket from Los Angeles to Boston which probably cost an amount similar to a personal sanction, as well as probably wasting a day or more of his time. And then has the gall to wish them all a happy 4th of July weekend. All for a hearing that could have been an email, and essentially was an email once everyone filed their affidavits.
Judgemental Gildea never clearly stated Read's team is behind the supposed leak of impounded information. And, I mean, I am being more cautious than the judge with my language here. Because the judge says info was disclosed from the impounded filings, while I am saying info was perhaps disclosed from the impounded filings. But Gildea is clearly holding it against Read's team without making a finding of such or anything at all really. Although Judgemental Gildea never says one side or the other is behind this, all of his behavior is primarily punishing Read's team and he's made up his mind that Read's team is behind this "leak," without actually determining an attorney was responsible for the "leak" at all.
Edit: this is probably the 5th+ time that Judgemental Gildea has levied serious accusations against Read's team, but not allowed them to respond. Even Cannone didn't do that. She let them make their record, just ignored it. And I am not sure which is worse: ignoring well pled arguments, or not letting them be plead. I'm leaning towards the latter.
TL;DR Most of the YouTubers' complaints will almost certainly get past the "motion to dismiss" stage. And that means PayPal will have to start turning over a lot of records about Honey to the plaintiff YouTubers. In my opinion PayPal probably really does not want to turn over their records; especially about "stand down." At the same time PayPal seems to have some big bargaining chips themselves when it comes to determining what the "class" is for this progressing "class action" suit.
I am not a lawyer, this post is only the opinion of a layperson with an interest in the U.S. civil and criminal justice systems.
#Background
I made a post in February sharing PayPal's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint in the Honey scandal. The "Background" section of that post includes a 6 paragraph recap on the situation up to that point, including discussion on MegaLag's original video on Honey, the ensuing lawsuit, the first dismissal of that lawsuit without prejudice, MegaLag's Part 2 and 2.5 videos on Honey, and the second amended lawsuit which incorporated the "stand down" issues with Honey that MegaLag addressed in his part 2.5 video.
That above February post is about the arguments that PayPal was trying to make to get the suit thrown out again and hopefully--from their point of view--for good. I also provided my opinion on how strong I thought some of those arguments were. I'm pretty proud to say I think I was pretty close to the mark.
Since then the plaintiffs filed a "response" attempting to defend their complaints and explain why the lawsuit should go forward. And PayPal filed a "reply" to attempt to answer any points the YouTubers brought up. I didn't think these were important enough to make a post on.
This process of motion->response->reply is a fundamental part of the U.S. criminal and civil justice systems. From there (or at other stages in this process) the judge could have just ruled their decision. But for something like this the judge will typically have "oral arguments," allowing both sides to try and respond to any problems the judge may have. And the oral arguments for the motion to dismiss occurred this morning.
The hearing started with the judge pointing out her sticking points so that both sides actually argue about the important things she is undecided or skeptical of. Just like with motion filing, oral arguments also go in the order of moving party's motion -> response -> reply. So PayPal moving to have the case dismissed presented their arguments first, the YouTubers' attorneys went second, and then PayPal got the final word. The hearing was about 90 minutes long.
As a reminder a "motion to dismiss" is a relatively low bar, where all the plaintiffs must do is show that--if everything in their complaint is assumed to be true and accurate, whether that is actually the case or not--the plaintiff at the least has a tangible injury that could go forward. There is basically no critical analysis of the evidence at this stage of proceedings. But it is also an important stage because typically "discovery" does not start til you get past this stage (and/or a response to the complaint). "Discovery" is where both sides have to turn over documents to one another relevant to the issues being disputed, and sit for sworn depositions. I guarantee PayPal does not want to get into discovery, so if the YouTuber plaintiffs can get past this stage then it probably starts looking tempting for PayPal to offer a big sum of money to make the case go away. Possibly bigger than this case is worth (in my opinion), given how limited I think the class may end up being in this case. More on that later.
#Judge's Initial Impressions
Before I get started here, I want to applaud the judge. I was really impressed. As the judge expressed her concerns at the start of the hearing it was very clear she did her research, looked at a lot of case law, and was very familiar with the filings and their attachments, and pointed out nuanced disputes or gripes with both sides' filings. She was so well prepared, well spoken, and reasonable; that even if I feel the case has merit and should proceed; if the judge ends up ruling that no part should proceed then I would be surprised, but trust the decision and be curious how she reached it.
I trust her. I mostly follow criminal cases, and there have been some cases where trust in the judge was quickly lost. Examples include cases like Karen Read, Richard Allen, and Aaron Spencer's first judge. But this judge today built trust with me.
As mentioned in the "Background" section of this post, the judge let both sides know her lingering concerns. And I would say the judge's overall theme was (paraphrase) "The plaintiffs argument should succeed past this phase, but I have concerns worth discussion."
From the start the judge was basically letting PayPal know they near certainly weren't going to succeed at getting all of the case dismissed. The judge made it pretty clear at the start that she was inclined to allow the claims under California's "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act" (CFAA) and some Contractual Interference claims against PayPal go forward. But the biggest issue the judge had was the YouTuber's Unjust Enrichment claim. That was the one the judge thought from the onset of this hearing may not go forward. And this is complicated.
One thing that stuck out to me is that the judge closed these opening remarks by saying she was not inclined toward another complaint and motion to dismiss, and that she would need to be "convince[d]" to require another complaint. We didn't have video of this hearing, but I think this was directed at counsel for PayPal given the context and subsequent discussion.
By the end of the hearing, my vibe was that the judge was more confident on letting the Fraud and Contractual Interference claims proceed, but still seemed uncertain on the Unjust Enrichment claim. A lot of what they were arguing on Unjust Enrichment went over my head, but that was my personal vibe. As the hearing proceeds, the judge's most commonly used word when addressing PayPal was probably "but," and when addressing the Plaintiffs it was probably "uh-huh." When the judge finished her remarks and invited PayPal's lawyer to start their argument, the lawyer thanked the judge for outlining her concerns, to which the judge kinda joked that PayPal likely is not "winning" this motion to dismiss.
But withall of that said, the YouTubers will still have some difficult battles ahead, even if the judge rules in alignment with what I believe she will rule. I think PayPal will still hold some cards.
#Topic 1: Standing
I'll try to go through the topics I viewed as of most importance, and how both sides argued them and what the judge hinted may be her thoughts.
The main reason the first complaint was dismissed was because of the lack of "standing." Basically the YouTubers did not definitively show in the initial complaint that they were owed any commission, let alone one PayPal allegedly stole. They needed to show contract language. In the second amended complaint they did provide some explicit contract language, focusing mostly on an agreement between Justin Tech Tips and Dell. And from this they also demonstrated how Honey would "steal" the commission when buying a DisplayPort cable. Since this was the main reason the last complaint was dismissed, I think it is the most important one to address first.
PayPal repeatedly pointed out that of the nearly dozen plaintiffs, only one of them had a contract with Dell. So PayPal was throwing some shade at these other plaintiffs that may not have much of a claim if the only contract language the YouTubers are basing their argument on comes from Dell, and that only applies to just one of the plaintiffs.
And the judge agreed with PayPal here. She was not thrilled by the lack of contract specifics in the lawsuit as they may apply to more plaintiffs. But the judge also hinted that based on similar Capital One and RetailMeNot cases, that this one detailed example of Dell contract language and sale where Honey "stole" the commission was likely enough to get over the line of plaintiff standing for the motion to dismiss stage. However the judge expressed concerns that the plaintiffs are going to have big problems when they try to establish an injured class or get past a judgement of acquittal stage, unless they get more relevant details here.
Basically the judge seems to be leaning towards acknowledging standing for now at the Motion to Dismiss stage and its lack of critical review of any claims, but that serious problems could arise for plaintiffs on this point going forward.
#Topic 2: Honey's Behavior Pre-complaint
In my February post, I brought this topic up as a footnote basically. It was something the plaintiffs alluded to once or twice, and PayPal never even acknowledged, so I thought it might be a nothingburger in the court's eyes too. But to me it was important. However much to my surprise, I would say this is the topic the judge brought up the most in these oral arguments.
Basically prior to the first amended complaint, the plaintiffs claim that if somebody closed out of Honey without activating it to search for coupons or cash back (basically the Consumer sees the Honey pop-up and immediately closed out), then Honey would still stuff their cookie. After the lawsuit was filed (or shortly before), Honey changed its behavior so it would no longer do that.
PayPal/Honey's biggest defense in this entire case has been that they are "legitimate" competition to the YouTuber affiliate marketers. The judge kept bringing this issue of cookie stuffing when the consumer simply closes out of the pop-up again and again as she confronted both PayPal and the YouTubers. To PayPal she would ask if cookie stuffing in this instant closing of the pop-up scenario was "legitimate" competition. And to the YouTubers she would ask if Honey is not simply a legitimate competitor in the affiliate marketing industry...when they actually provide a benefit, rather than the Consumer closing out of Honey without activating it yet Honey still cookie stuffs anyways.
I think this is an issue that cuts both ways. Because for PayPal trying to shut this lawsuit down at the motion to dismiss stage, this kind of scummy behavior cripples their arguments. But if the judge keeps with this line of thought that Honey is only liable when they basically commit illegitimately competitive behavior (like cookie stuffing after somebody tried to ignore Honey), then that probably greatly reduces the amount of damages the YouTubers can argue for.
#Topic 3: "Last Click" Definition
The YouTubers keep arguing that "last click" can only means external links that bring you to the Merchant's website. Honey/PayPal keeps arguing "last click" can mean any affiliate program that helps drive the sale, and that includes Honey with its cash back rewards program and potential coupons.
The judge basically discarded both of these arguments and said "last click" means whatever is in the contract. And I think that makes sense, and can definitely be a double edged sword that can but both PayPal and the YouTubers depending on the contract language.
But in the context of the Dell contract language that is the current focus of this case, the judge sees this as predominantly cutting against PayPal. And this is the one point in the entire hearing where I disagree with the judge. I really think the Dell contract language supports PayPal's arguments and not the YouTuber's. The Dell language says it "permits qualifying links to originate from any media channel, including software." From the judge's oral discussion it was pretty clear she looked at this more than me, and is a judge with--you know--legal experience and qualifications. Unlike me. So I defer to her analysis that this in context of other parts of the contract, that this cuts against PayPal more than the YouTubers. But I hope to see this thought process explained in her upcoming order.
#Topic 4: CAFF (Computer Fraud) Claims
It feels kinda bad to put this all the way down at #4, but I am doing so because the judge started off the hearing indicating she was already inclined to side with the YouTubers. However I also think this was the biggest shift in stance by the judge, because by the end of the hearing it sounded like she was absolutely convinced to let this important claim proceed.
I could double this post's length talking about the detailed discussion on this particular topic. So please recognize I am leaving out a lot that I as a layperson recognized, and probably a lot more nuance that I do not recognize. But in quick summary the plaintiffs are alleging Honey is a trojan horse. Honey tells consumers that it scours the Internet for coupons, but what it actually does is delete data (i.e. an affiliate YouTuber's commission cookie) to insert its own data (Honey's own affiliate cookie).
PayPal tried to argue this tort should be thrown out, because for users to use Honey they need to give permissions for the extension to access that data. And they argue that deleting a cookie does not "damage" the consumer.
The judge wasn't a fan of the discussion on lack of permissions. She made a metaphor that if she gives somebody permission to go to a San Francisco Giants game, that does not mean they have permission to go to the locker room and interview the players. But she seemed uncertain on the "damages" issue necessary as part of this claim.
The plaintiffs' attorney who argued this point did an amazing job, and I can't do him justice. But his main point was that the deletion of the consumer's data constituted "destruction" or "damage" of the consumer's property. He cited other cases that allegedly support this stance. And the "injury" caused by this "damage" was to the plaintiff YouTubers.
Assuming the YouTuber's attorney's arguments here were substantially supported by the case law they referred to, the judge seemed to be very compelled by the arguments. And PayPal on rebuttal did basically nothing to shut this argument down.
#Topic 5: Unjust Enrichment
I am saving this topic for so late for multiple reasons. First, the judge started off the hearing by saying she did not seem inclined to let this claim proceed. Second, even the YouTubers' counsel seemed to agree it is not a claim that often succeeds.
And third, a lot of this argument went over my head. By a mile. The judge was still saying "uh-huh" here a lot in response to the YouTubers' attorney's arguments, so maybe I am wrong on what I am about to say. But after the head-spinning conversation on this topic, I still don't see why it is that this claim by PayPal (i.e. that the YouTubers should be suing the Merchants for not fulfilling their contracts with the YouTubers, rather than suing PayPal) is incorrect. The Merchants offered commissions to both PayPal and the YouTubers, but would at times only compensate PayPal. Seems to PayPal like the YouTubers should be suing the Merchants for not fulfilling the contract.
If this claim goes forward, I think it will be because PayPal deletes the YouTuber affiliate cookie when they insert their own making it impossible for the Merchant to pay the YouTuber. Since history of the YouTuber referral is deleted by PayPal. Even if these claims proceed, I think it could really depend on the language in each contract and how "last click" attribution works in that specific contract. But I could still certainly see these claims being dismissed, as the judge discussed at the top of the hearing.
#Topic 6: Stand Down
The Stand Down issue brought up by MegaLag in his part 2.5 video was a small part of this hearing. On the one hand, PayPal pointed out that of all the affiliate marketing agencies the only one that enforced stand down behavior prior to the lawsuit was Rakuten. So if PayPal violating stand down is an issue, it should only be for merchants that used Rakuten, and not all the other affiliate marketing agencies that later more strictly codified stand down policy after this scandal blew up.
On the other hand, the YouTubers point out that the millions of people who uninstalled Honey, and all the affiliate marketing agencies that implemented strict stand down procedures, indicates stand down was a well-established industry policy that almost didn't need to be written til PayPal/Honey so blatantly violated it with a "defeat device."
I don't think this is a big part of the case right now, but I think the discovery concerns for PayPal on this topic could be the most important topic going forward.
#Conclusion
It seems to me 99.9% certain that the case is now going to get past the motion to dismiss stage. Meaning more discovery and documents from PayPal to the YouTubers, unless PayPal decides to settle first.
If the judge indeed denies the motion to dismiss, then I think how scared PayPal is of discovery will be the big issue as mentioned in Topic 6. But at the same time, PayPal has made some convincing arguments so far that the class size and amount of damages they may be liable for are severely constrained, as I discussed in topics 1, 2, 3, and 5.
The judge's order is at a minimum a couple weeks out, as she will need to research these additional arguments, contemplate them, make her decision, and express it in an order. Maybe even a month or two. But I hope this helps update you all on what to expect.
TLDR; Please comment what difficulty mods you like. This could be stuff that increases enemy stats, adds more enemies, or more non-conventional things like d20 initiative or loot randomizers.
When it comes to mods in this subreddit, we allow build discussion and recommendations when using specific mechanics focused mods specified by the poster, but--per rule 1--do not allow posts requesting which mods they should use. And we require posts that rely on mods to be flared with the "in-game mods" or "external mods" flair as appropriate. I have allowed three mod showcases for specific mods that I think this community would be very interested in, only after discussion between myself and the mod author who gained approval before posting. But otherwise that is the standard.
There has been an unofficial rule, however. Around half the time, I let a "what difficulty mods should I use" post stay up. However going forward I would like to phase that out, and instead make a post highlighting some favored difficulty mods, and then include that post in the Hall of Fame post.
So with that in mind, what difficulty mods did you enjoy or recommend?
