Talk:Auli

I Know

I know it very well could be fake, but I made the redirect because I just figured people would be calling her that. That's why I didn't make any other edits and just this one. However, maybe it is too soon even for that. Master (talk) 12:19, 12 June 2025 (EDT)

If anything, I just ran a snippet of the audio through an AI voice detector and it spat out fake. I do not really trust those programs to be correct. But it is important to point out at least. Master (talk) 12:22, 12 June 2025 (EDT)

I think making a redirect at thie point would appear to legitimize the name, when consensus so far is that the call is faked. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2025 (EDT)

Proof of Call's Validity

I'm not saying this is 100% water-tight proof of anything, but the person who made the call tried as best they could to prove that their call with Chris was authentic and not done by AI. As that person pointed out, a number of people on Kiwi Farms had also ran the call through AI detecting tools, and most of them couldn't find any AI. With all that said, what should we do with this redirect now? Psycho 🐧 (talk) 00:29, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

I guess one option is to see if Chris acknowledges it. I'm still seeing a lot of opinions that the call is faked in some way. The ween doesn't help his case by saying he deleted the original file. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 02:39, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

I am kind of on the fence about this. I'm unsure if it is real or fake. I was thinking of contacting the guy in order to see if the call could be proven, but I have no idea how it could be proven. So I wouldn't know what to ask. The person's story seems consistent at least. Master (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

There is more proof on the call's validity. Chris recorded the Cwclight reviews for C-C 82 (Autobot) Chris-Chan Origin Form to Sparky in late June to early July. This was shortly after the call was released. And Chris started raging while filming the Punicrackder-V review. Although this could be due to the subject of what the autobot is based on. So it is still not definitive. Master (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2025 (EST)

Article Should At Least Be Made

I think the article on the call should at least be made. And we could put disclaimers at the top of the article that the call might be fake. Any details outside of the call like her name being Auli though, I think we should wait until Flutter is essentially fully doxed. (because I feel she may be soon) Master (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

The call can go here CWCki:Gossip#Flutter BaboonRancher23 (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

Speculation about her name could go there, but the call should be a separate article. Master (talk) 20:34, 13 June 2025 (EDT)

There's not enough confirmation that the call is real. There was this issue before with the jail visit hoax which had a page on here for a while until it was deleted. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 02:57, 14 June 2025 (EDT)

But if it were real, I think it should have a page. Like I said there should be a disclaimer saying the call may or may not be real. Kind of like how history textbooks have the Xia Dynasty in them even when it is a highly debated historical period. Things do not have to be definitive to be mentioned, especially if they have gained notable attention. I understand not wanting to open the floodgates to just about any possible future hoaxes. However, I feel this case stands out enough. Master (talk) 03:28, 14 June 2025 (EDT)