transcribing--Crooked tooth 12:42, 6 August 2011 (PDT) Sorry i cant transcribe my computer is fucking up--Crooked tooth 15:24, 6 August 2011 (PDT) The Calling Out "Tito" - Don video says it's unavailable =/ --Elliebytes 12:53, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- At the moment there is a problem with the video (probably Chris being a dumbass). It's viewable on his YouTube channel page, and I'm about to upload a backup until we can get it on the CWCVilleLibrary. --Anonymax 12:54, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
Do we really want to be talking about the pix on here? Someone might read it. -BrianBash 15:35, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- We won't know the true authenticity of the photos until Chris surrenders them. Until such a time, please refrain from theories as to who might be depicted in the photos. --Anonymax 16:34, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
I cannot believe that stalking him actually lured him out of his "retirement."
This video hiatus from November 22, 2010 to August 6, 2011 was 257 days long.
- I used the date calculator on timeanddate.com to compile this and I did not include the end date. I don't know if this belong on the actual Calling Out page or somewhere else. So I'm just writing it here for reference. Feel free to add the info to this or another article. -- Crow 18:28, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
I find it funny how his self-introduction is still word for word from one of his earliest videos to the fandom- shows how little he's changed. Signfiicant enough to add to the video's description? --Xavier orona 01:46, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
Billboard, events, and Heather
Chris mentions being on a billboard in New York. Do we have any pictures of that? Do we have any information at all about the previous events to lead up to this?? And is the Heather he spoke of "Wallflower". If so, I think it's note-worthy that we mention that he still says they were dating at one point when she has said before (multiple times) that they weren't. If it isn't Wallflower...we need to find out who the heck she is. --4Macie 22:15, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- Yes, yes, and yes. And yes: Chris is delusional.--Henry Bemis 22:29, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- To answer your questions, Vans shoes had some promotion at the end of 2009 where people could submit photos that would go up on a billboard in Times Square. There were over 4 submitted of Chris by various trolls. The pics are probably somewhere, but I can't find them... Also, for the record, the Wallflower has a standing agreement with the CWCki not to be publicly identified. she shall be referred to only as the Wallflower, as we are true and honest, unlike Chris. --SargentPickles 22:45, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- I haven't gotten a chance to closely watch the videos, but how to handle the mention of the Wallflower is addressed here. Her name stays in the transcript but there's to be no linking and such. Also, the billboard images are here.--Champthom 23:23, 6 August 2011 (PDT)
- Ah, I apologize for my naivety on this matter. I feel that to keep the agreement with her, if it is necessary, this part of the talk (that violates the agreement) should be deleted. --4Macie 10:37, 7 August 2011 (PDT)
- Speaking of that, he's saying that they had dated (calling her his "ex-girlfriend" in the video). Would it be safer to go ahead and change her name to "The Wallflower"?--Blazer 18:41, 7 August 2011 (PDT)
- So is linking from a Wallflower page (or from a Wallflower section of another page) to this page also verboten? --BrianBash 20:26, 7 August 2011 (PDT)
- If you mean linking The Wallflower's real name or reference to her to The Wallflower page, then yes, that is forbidden. I'd say same goes with any modifier, like if we were to link "ex-girlfriend" to The Wallflower, pretty much anything that connects that person's name with the status of the Wallflower. Now personally, it's getting kinda silly because Chris keeps dropping her name BUT nonetheless we have an agreement to keep and we're not total jackasses. Her name should definitely remain in the transcript though, accurate transcription is crucial. --Champthom 04:57, 8 August 2011 (PDT)
Spoiling the Fun
After seeing him demand money, I just had to respond to him directly. I sent him the following PM.
On the threshold of legal trouble.
>"But anyway, moving on with my demands, I would like- also like you to set to-send me via U.S. Mail, ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS CASH. American. Unmarked billssss,"
You do realize that Extortion is a crime. Doing so through the United States Postal Service crossing state lines makes it a federally prosecutable offense. You'd be wise to remove your "Calling Out" videos before they get mirrored and used against you in a court of law.
LordCustos3 09:36, 8 August 2011 (PDT)
- User was banned for this post. --Anonymax 10:28, 8 August 2011 (PDT)
Congratulations. You're one of many people being made fun of on /cwc/ at this precise moment. --Old meme 09:37, 8 August 2011 (PDT)
Thorg = Thorgnzorrg
I'm pretty sure that Thorg is actually User:Thorgnzorrg. Can we mention it, for the sake of being good, clear and trustworthy source of informations of Chris' lifetime? Hasharin 13:31, 8 August 2011 (PDT)
- Nah don't bother linking that, just make me a small page or something. --Thorgnzorrg
Calling Out Alex
Uh, I know this is silly to ask, but should we leave that he's used [censored] for this?--Blazer 16:12, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
- You need to read Anonymax's 16:34, 6 August 2011 reply to the thread at the top of the page. Basically, don't go posting shit about alleged identities of trolls. As for the link to the pic, Imma cuttin it down. --BrianBash 16:28, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
Amazingly, he seems to be correct about the owner of the Game Place. I was expecting that Chris was likely to have fucked up and mixed him up with someone of a similar name and more or less committed slander in front of the world, but: http://sex-offender.vsp.virginia.gov/sor/offenderDetails.html?regId=13957 and here's the information for the Game Place LLC in Virginia:
Unless there's another Robert C Lightburn in the area, Chris was right. Except that the guy was busted for porn possession, not molesting anyone.Robobobo 21:04, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
SurfShackTito (Don) Response?
There supposedly a response (well...a few actually) from Tito. The one I'm actually interested in (because the others really suck and pretty much scream fake) can be found here . Do we have any way to confirm or deny ANY of these supposed responses? --4Macie 21:29, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
- That one's on the CWCVille Library. I'd be 99.99% sure that it's official.--Blazer 21:30, 9 August 2011 (PDT)
On the subject of the response video, should it be placed on this page? Certainly it seems like that would be beneficial in making the events covered by the article easier to follow for future readers. On the other hand, I feel a little apprehensive about putting a non-Chris video in the middle of this article. Perhaps the video could have its own separate page? Granted, I feel even more apprehension towards that idea, as I don't think we should get into the habit of making pages for videos other than Chris's. Of course, it's already posted on Surfshack Tito (troll), but if events led him to make several more videos then that page will quickly turn into a mess. Plus, in the future it might be difficult for readers to discern were in the timeline Tito's response video fits. --ThatMan 20:41, 10 August 2011 (PDT)
The photograph of Thorg is quite recognisable as being half of the face of Thunderf00t, a prominent figure on youtube who gained fame for his radical defense of-wait for it- atheism; making whole video series debunking creationist claims and even debating Richard Dawkins. Moreover, Thunderf00t DOES have a lot of acne scars. I don't know how it could have happened, but it seems clear to me that Chris has managed to confuse Thorg with a minor internet celebrity. Qeex
swing and a miss. Eamoo 12:26, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
- Read the note from Anonymax at the top of this page; the one dated 16:34, 6 August 2011 (PDT). Srsly, this is the third time someone has had the same amazing revelation. This constant speculation compromises the CWCki and does not contribute towards the improvement of the article. ~ BrianBash 13:40, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
Bob Not Mentioned Specifically--Significant?
Chris doesn't really reference his father in any of these videos; despite having mentioned the family several times. When previous talking about his family, Chris almost always referred to Barb and Bob individually as "my mother and my father" (or some facsimile thereof). Could this possibly indicate Bob's demise? And in any case, would this note be worth adding anywhere? --IwegalBadnik 11:20, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
- Well, the thing is is that Chris isn't too fond of his father and he's shown that in the past. More than likely, he's either ignoring him or he's forgetting him. And as bad as his train of thought it, I'd go more with the latter.--Blazer 12:21, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
- Given the fact that Bob recently pulled the "Fag" card on Chris over his Tomgirl adventures, I will grant you that Bob probably isn't too popular with Chris. However, given that it is also known that Bob has malignant cancer, Chris may be being more than just forgetful or ignorant. --IwegalBadnik 12:55, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
- He pulled the same thing in some Ivy related video. Also he mentions his 'family' to be left alone which I would expect implies more than one personNullity 14:28, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
Seriously? Does there need to be that many fucking links to retarded shit in the transcripts?? You people act like just because Chris finally made a new video you have to pipe EVERY SINGLE word that can be relayed to a different page.. Its fucking ridiculous... Smtp 12:18, 11 August 2011 (PDT)
- It's been a few months. Forgive us. Edit it out if you like.Nullity