Talk:Carpetbaggers

Revival

Maybe this article concept should be revived. There should be a space for describing the monetization of Christory by people besides Chris, especially since Chris has commented or otherwise gotten involved with it.

• Should we keep the "Carpetbaggers" name, or call it something else?

• How should it be defined? The prior version of Carpetbaggers defined it as "more successful people in the Chris Chan bubble who attempt to take advantage of Chris' infamy, or the events that surround him, for their own personal gain, typically for selfish, dishonest, or immoral purposes."

• Depending on the definition, topics to cover in a revived article could include Dillin Thomas, Geno Samuel, Kiwi Farms silver coin, Praetor, and Winfield Winfield.

Any thoughts on this? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 15:17, 26 April 2024 (EDT)

This sounds like a good idea, and I'm wondering if this new category should also include clout-chasers who are motivated primarily by Internet fame? This could include anyone who inserts themself into Christory, and possibly Christubers such as Gibi, CCDN News, Sonichu Psychology, etc. I think "Carpetbaggers" is a good all-encompassing term. JinkiesJanke (talk) 06:01, 27 April 2024 (EDT)

How would clout-chasing be defined? Like, if someone makes YouTube videos about Chris does that qualify them, or is there another standard for it? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 14:26, 28 April 2024 (EDT)

I've been trying to come up with a good definition for clout-chasing, but the best I've got is "I'll know it when I see it" which is obviously inadequate. Maybe someone can put it into words better if I give some examples:

Gibi used to make other videos before he did one on Chris. It got a ton of hits, so he switched to exclusively being a Christuber. His motivation seems to be getting the views, and he's using Chris's notoriety to do it. So I would count him as a clout-chaser.

Sonichu Psychology also seems to be doing it for attention. Despite claiming to be a certified mental health professional, he's apparently fine with diagnosing someone based on their Internet behavior and using that to build an audience. He also claims to have interviewed trolls (Bluespike, Idea Guys) but refuses to provide any proof, billing himself as a source of inside information you can't get anywhere else.

On the other hand, Smokey McC started out as a Chris-centric channel but later expanded into other lolcows. He comes across as someone who just enjoys talking about these strange individuals. This isn't really any different than a CWCki editor or someone who posts about Chris in a forum, he's just using YouTube as his platform. So I would not count him as a clout-chaser... even though he recently landed sponsors.

I guess the main factor to consider is how the YouTuber comes across. Are they merely interested in reporting on Chris's activities, or do they seem to want to be a part of Christory itself, to the point where they seek out attention in some way beyond the simple act of making Chris-related content?

My thoughts, no one else has to agree. This is just a jumping off point for discussion.

JinkiesJanke (talk) 14:30, 4 May 2024 (EDT)

Other

This should probably be included as well. Trollsta's Paradise: A True and Honest Tribute to Christian & The Hedgehog Boys Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 10:00, 4 May 2024 (EDT)

Also https://x.com/BitchAssBowie/status/1799594576405282826 (archive) and Luke from Pennsylvania Trip. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 10:59, 10 June 2024 (EDT)

Keffals

I don't know about you, but after reading the stuff about Keffals' whole "Christory Tax", where people have to pay over a hundred thousand dollars for an unedited interview with Chris, I can't help but think she should have some degree of mentioning on here. Psycho (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2025 (EST)

I think Keffals was joking with that. It's an over-the-top amount that doesn't make sense ($100k per month), and it's a reference to the controversial $100k that Keffals got from an old fundraiser. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 11:42, 9 February 2025 (EST)

Other Carpetbaggers Page?

I think that this page should primarily cover the practice of carpetbagging itself, and give reasons against it, much like the other quintet pages. The people listed in this page can probably go in a "other carpetbaggers" page in the same vein enablers have an "Other enablers" page. Psycho (talk) 13:38, 9 February 2025 (EST)

I'm not sure there are enough misc carpetbaggers, those without a dedicated article, for splitting this article. Maybe the reasons stuff can be added first, and we can see how much page space that takes up. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Expanding Upon the Definition of the Term

After thinking a bit about my proposal, I figured it would be a better idea to merge that idea into this, basically to expand upon the definition of the term "Carpetbagger". One way that people can profit off of Chris's infamy unscrupulously, outside of doing so monetarily, is by intentionally stirring up drama for the sake of garnering clout.

Perhaps we could do what we had done with the other Quintet entries and create subcategories of Carpetbaggers, one being those that create a business off of him, and another who purposefully spreads rumors.Psycho 🐧 (talk) 09:44, 19 February 2025 (EST)

It makes the definition of carpetbagger way too broad. Just call clout chasers Drama-Whores. BaboonRancher23 (talk) 13:01, 20 February 2025 (EST)

It doesn't make the definition too broad at all. The definition is already "people who exploit Chris's own infamy for personal gain," regardless of whether or not that's for money or attention. The article so far may have focused mainly on the former, but we can definitely add the latter, it still works fine as is. There's no need to make an entirely different category that has essentially the same definition but with different outcomes. Plus, there's definitely existing overlap between those who exploit Chris in both ways. Wouldn't it be more efficient to put people like that under the same banner rather than unnecessarily duplicate them? Anaxis (talk) 01:57, 21 February 2025 (EST)

I think that splitting people who want to cause drama vs people who want money would be a good change. Money and fame are of a very different nature and usually people seeking just money (Praetor, Geno) have better outcomes than people who just want to cause drama (Bella, Naught, Xela). BaboonRancher23 (talk) 09:17, 21 February 2025 (EST)

The way I'd propose going about this would be to take the examples from the Drama Whores page, moving them here, and then adding a section about "Types of Carpetbaggers", which would include "Grifters" (Geno, Praetor), and the aforementioned "Drama Whores" (Bella, Naught, Xela, etc.) Psycho 🐧 (talk) 10:44, 21 February 2025 (EST)

I think migrating the existing content from the new page to here and combining them together under the Carpetbagger name is a good idea. Differentiating the types of carpetbaggers that exist is fine too. However, on a personal note, I don't really like the term "Drama Whores." It's unnecessarily crass and juvenile, and sounds like something Chris would say as an insult. I think it's fine to just call them Clout Chasers. Or maybe Attention-Seekers? I'm open to more suggestions. Anaxis (talk) 03:44, 22 February 2025 (EST)

I like Clout Chasers. Also, maybe we should keep this discussion open for a few days before committing in case other editors want to comment. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 05:07, 22 February 2025 (EST)

My vote is to combine them on the same page, with separate lists for each, and use "Clout Chasers" for the second group. JinkiesJanke (talk) 08:50, 22 February 2025 (EST)

Grifters

I dunno, is Grifters an accurate term? I think that usually means people who swindle others. That fits Luke well, not sure about the rest. Someone suggested Exploiters instead. Anyone have other ideas? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 10:35, 4 March 2025 (EST)

Since this is about monetary exploitation, maybe "Swindler" can work better? I think "exploiters" is a bit too broad for what the term refers to, as that's basically what the term "carpetbagging" as a whole refers to. Psycho 🐧 (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2025 (EST)

I mean, a swindler is someone who deceives others and I think Luke might be the only one who crosses that line. What if we just use "For money"/"For clout" instead of "Grifters"/"Clout Chasers"? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 06:11, 5 March 2025 (EST)

If we do this, how do we approach the other Quintet entries with sub-types? Psycho 🐧 (talk) 22:29, 5 March 2025 (EST)

Proposed New Sub-Type

This is sort of based on Goblin Fairy's idea about Drama Whores, but I propose we create a new sub-type of Carpetbaggers, "Pot Stirrers". These are the types of people that purposefully create and spread rumors about Chris or his orbiters for some ulterior goal. We can keep "Clout Chasers", though I think we'd have to reduce those to just people who try to boost their platform by associating with Chris. The people that could go in this sub-category include Xela, Naught, MKRNightVee, AquaDiamond8, and possibly Spooky Bones. Psycho 🐧 (talk) 10:43, 20 June 2025 (EDT)

Edmund

Do we have enough to split Edmund to a page? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2026 (EST)

I think so. Ayumu Kasuga (talk) 21:00, 30 January 2026 (EST)

Who is and isn't a Carpetbagger

TL;DR I think either some people should be removed from the list or a lot more people need to be added.

I don't think ProjectSNT or Rex Rowan Nabors count as carpetbaggers. Courtney's actively tried to avoid drama, and has refused to respond to Chris, so it's hard to say she's intentionally stirring up drama. She's listed for the crime of daring to make Chris videos while having a Patreon, but she does also make a lot of non-Chris content, in fact it's the majority of her channel. The videos she made weren't even drama videos, they were just fanart videos. I honestly don't know why she's called a CBer when Pewdiepie isn't. Pewdiepie made a Chris video, and he makes way more money off of YouTube than SNT does. Honestly, most of the Chris in the media creators also count as CBers by the metrics we count SNT as. Fredrick Knudsen? Opie and Anthony? Tucker Carlson? They all made money off of talking about Chris. Personally, Courtney strikes me as being closer to a DrWolf, a content creator Chris just so happened to get obsessed with, as opposed to being a Gibi or a Dillon Thomas.

As for Guwange, I think that just counts as a fan project, especially since he didn't profit off the album, he donated it to charity. He also didn't attempt to contact Chris, and Chris didn't even find out about it until years later. If Trollsta's Paradise counts as CBing, do all fanart/projects count as CBing, since in theory they're all doing it for attention? The Adult Chronicles fangame? Rosechu's Story? Don't forget we actively encourage fanart. Frankly, I think that Nabors's inclusion is just HTL trying to sully the reputation of what had previously been a well received album. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 8:07, 22 April 2026

Carpetbaggers are described in the article. They are people who exploit Chris's own infamy for personal gain, typically for money. Simply creating content off of him, doesn't make one a carpetbagger. All of these people who are on the list one way or another exploited Chris for their own benefit. People like PewDiePie don't make the list because all he did was make a YouTube video. Geno Samuel wasn't on the list for making his documentary. He is now on the list for exploiting Chris to sell merch. Same way with Courtney, she exploited Chris to gain money through her Patreon. Master (talk) 08:17, 22 April 2026 (EDT)

I think Courtney just made a video on Chris and just happened to have a Patreon for her general channel. Pewdiepie also made money off of his Chris video, why isn't he a carpetbagger? Salt Water Taffy (talk) 11:04, 22 April 2026

Check this out. File:Patreon ProjectSNT mentions Sonichu.png Master (talk) 11:15, 22 April 2026 (EDT)

Again, Pewdiepie also made money off his video too, I don't know what's worse about having a Patreon over YouTube monetization. Fredrik Knudsen also has a Patreon and has a Chris video. I still think "exploit" is too harsh a term to describe what Courtney did. She just made fanart for fun, and never intended Chris to become aware of it. If she "exploited" Chris, so did Pewdiepie, Fredrik Knudsen, Opie and Anthony, Failosophy, and Fox News because they all made money off of talking about him. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2026

I think you are applying the term a bit too broadly. There is a difference between simple commentary on Chris that happens to be monetized through normal platform revenue such as ads. And creators who build monetization mechanisms specifically tied to Chris content such as selling merch, collaborating with Chris, Patreon tiers, etc. Master (talk) 14:40, 22 April 2026 (EDT)

I think you're the one applying the term too broadly. I think ads and a Patreon are functionally identical - they're ways to make money off your content - just Patreon's through an external service. I also think intent should be factored into whether or not someone gets called a CB, and I don't think Courtney was intending to be exploitative in the way that, say, Ethan Ralph was. I think her intentions were closer to someone like Trickie or Maple, just trying to share her fanart, and I think we're unfairly condemning her. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 20:30, 22 April 2026

We aren't condemning people here. We are just making a list of verified carpetbaggers, and making points on why not to carpetbag. I view this list as very neutral. Master (talk) 20:55, 22 April 2026 (EDT)

No, it's not neutral. Words like "exploited" are inherently loaded and imply deliberate malice. If it were truly neutral, we wouldn't be telling people not to do it. And I'm telling you that I don't think what Courtney did should be considered carpetbagging. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 21:09, 22 April 2026

Rex took advantage of Chris's infamy by making the album cover, using his name, and then giving people the option to pay for the cover, while avoiding any input from Chris. Money and self-promotion are involved even though he claimed to want to send any profit to a charity of his own choosing. He also suggested he would be open to collaborating with Chris. So I think that altogether goes beyond a simple fan project. As for Courtney, she also went beyond fan projects by making multiple posts on her Patreon promoting the redesigning. It wasn't even a one-off thing, she redesigned Sonichu and Rosechu, it got a reaction from Chris, then a year later she did redesigns of the Chaotic Combo. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 23:25, 22 April 2026 (EDT)

I don't get the damned if you do damned if you don't attitude when it comes to collabing with Chris. Rex is a CB because he didn't ask for Chris's permission. People like Edmund are on the list because they did. And by the logic you include Courtney, Pewdiepie should also be a CB: he mentioned Chris in a video, it got a reaction from Chris, then he made a whole video on him. And neither of you have been able to convince me why having a Patreon is any more scummy than using an ad service. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 4:34, 23 April 2026

I don't have much objection to including PewDiePie, except didn't Chris only react to the 2nd video? As for permission, I think exploitation of his infamy can still happen either with or without his permission. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2026 (EDT)

Now that this discussion has been sparked, I don't know if having a list of contenders on this page is that bright of an idea in the first place, seeing how none of the other Quintet pages have one, and a majority of the people on the list have their own page anyway, making their entries redundant. The Enablers page had at one point also had a list of Chris's enablers, but that list then got split off into Other enablers to talk about random people associated with Chris that otherwise didn't have enough for a page. I think it'd just be enough to say what a Carpetbagger is, and to just argue against the practice, like we do with the other Quintet entries.Psycho 🐧 (talk) 05:49, 23 April 2026 (EDT)

I agree with this idea. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 6:24, 23 April 2026

I actually was thinking the opposite, wondering why we don't have a list of Weens, A-logs, and White Knights like we do with Enablers, Carpetbaggers and Trolls. Master (talk) 06:46, 23 April 2026 (EDT)

I think that the list of CBs, and for that matter, the trolls list, are entirely redundant with their dedicated pages, as would a list of Weens, A-Logs, and White Knights. And anyone not notable enough for their own page warrants a discussion on whether they're notable enough to be mentioned at all. Salt Water Taffy (talk) 6:55, 23 April 2026

I think if anything, the Trolls list at least should be kept. Because most people going to this website would be thinking "who are all the trolls?" and a whole list of them in one place is very helpful. Master (talk) 07:02, 23 April 2026 (EDT)

If we go that route, then there's the question of what to do with Ethan, Winfield, Luke and Sonichu Solutions. Chris has interacted with all but the last one. Also carpetbagging can take on many different forms so it may be useful still to have a list for different examples. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2026 (EDT)

Now that this discussion has been sparked, I don't know if having a list of contenders on this page is that bright of an idea in the first place, seeing how none of the other Quintet pages have one, and a majority of the people on the list have their own page anyway, making their entries redundant.

I think if anything, the Trolls list at least should be kept.

I agree with the above.

And anyone not notable enough for their own page warrants a discussion on whether they're notable enough to be mentioned at all.

I think I disagree with this. Not mentioning or omitting things kind of sounds like censorship. As long as it affects Chris it should be mentioned. I like your Tumblr by the way. Ayumu Kasuga (talk) 10:48, 23 April 2026 (EDT)