itch.io

I'm sorry this just feels like you are completely disregarding what actually happened. Would you have preferred they made a random burner account instead? What, so those accountable could just not address it or say they're lying? The whole reason we even found out about it was because some of the kcbv team crossed over with pjeg, and I think it was... Pretty important! PJEG's rep was ruined as soon as Faza was exposed, why are you blaming kcbv for it?

Hi Maokou, 

I'm the director of KC and wanted to take some time to respond to your comment and points here. I understand that whenever a project calls out another it can leave a bad impression to those unrelated to the situation. However I want to use this as an opportunity to explain why we acted as we did. With we, I am speaking for myself, Rebus, Imleeham and Livewire and no one else in the KC team. (As nobody else was involved in the creation of that document)

1- Why did we call out Eden's Garden?

I want to emphasize that what happened wasn't us calling out another project, but a crime. We would have committed a crime ourselves in hiding evidence of a person protecting a groomer. As a director I could not let that happen, especially because I believe information like this is always bound to come out at some point. The moment we found out about the evidence it was our responsibility that it was shared and not swept under the rug. If we had not shared it, someone else would have. Wether that be a week or years later, since one of KC's staff was aware of the information we would have rightfully been held accountable should we have stayed quiet about it in the future.

2- Did we want to take down an adversary?

Wether you believe it or not, we approved of P:EG's standing in the fangan sphere. With P:EG's popularity and work on DREditor (The engine both KC and P:EG use) both KC and other projects benefited actively from its development. We had more tools on our hands to bring KC further itself. It also fostered an active community that was interested in supporting other projects in the sphere. Since KC had blown up in the past we were also aware of the negative consequences massive popularity could bring to a dev team and were relieved that less eyes were on us. So we did not see P:EG as an adversary, but a different project from a sphere we were part of that brought the fandom along.

3- Why did we specifically use the official acount?

Out of everyone involved (Me, Rebus, Imleeham, Livewire), nobody of us had a big reach on any of our social media. I want to emphasize that what happened was a crime and we could not take the risk of it being overseen/ seen less because of a reach issue.
This point is also answered once more on page 1 in the doc itself:
"This statement will be posted on the Kill/Cure Twitter page and Discord server." [...] "There are a handful of Kill/Cure staff members who also work on Project: Eden's Garden, and hiding this evidence from them would undermine whatever accountability measures they are engaging in. We agreed that, due to the nature of the evidence, it would be irresponsible to post it on an anonymous account on Twitter. We genuinely try not to involve ourselves with other projects in a negative manner unless we feel we have no choice, and we believe we would be sheltering a perpetrator if we stayed silent."
As well as page 36:
"A lot of people might question the fact that we chose to post this document on a highly visible channel, rather than just sharing it with the PJEG staff team. But the truth is, I'm afraid that simply sending this document to the PJEG staff team, and nowhere else, will make it easier for the perpetrators to find ways to discount the evidence in this document. And unlike Sozzay, Tako has admin control over the Discord and YouTube. I'm sorry if posting this document publicly is chaotic, but we already have evidence that people are willing to lie about their involvement in the Faza grooming allegations. I will not entrust accountability to an opaque process."

4- Did we want to lower P:EG's reputation?

No we did not want to lower P:EG's reputation. We wanted the people who committed a crime to be held accountable. Like I explained in the 2nd point, we actively benefited from P:EG's existence and popularity.

5- Are we aware that this action will lead to our long-term supporters stop holding us in a high regard?

As a director I am aware that releasing a document as serious as this can be seen as petty, intentional and malicious. However I am willing to take this consequence, as staying quiet would have been a crime and lead to the end of KC as well. Personally it was simply also the right thing to do.

I've also decided to add some additional answers as I feel they might be relevant to the situation, even if not asked.

6- Why did we not create a new account for it to be shared on anonymously?

We wanted this issue to be taken seriously and using a burner account/ not putting our names behind it would have led to more people underestimating the severity of the situation or simply would have not taken it seriously.

7- Did we use this situation to advertise KC?

I am aware that when sharing a document as serious as this on a project account it can seem as if we use that publicity to our advantage. I understand that this opinion also comes from a place of hurt, but I can assure anyone this was not the case as we made sure to only mention KC in the document by mentioning our intentions of releasing it on the public accounts. If we wanted a bigger reach and to misuse our platform we would have had our Discord server open for discussion to all new members and not locked it down during the publication of this document, as we knew a lot of people would try and join to discuss matters/ turn to KC due to the severity of the situation.

8- Did we want Peg to end?

No we did not want the project to end. We were aware that releasing this evidence would have a big effect on the team. We believed it was both possible to end but also to continue, but it would be the responsibility of the Peg staff to decide how.

9- Why did we not share the evidence with the Peg team?

I want you to be aware that the evidence we found involved the director Tako, the person that was in charge over the entire project. While KC shares some staff with Peg, ultimately we are 2 completely different teams. Unfortunately there was a risk of this evidence being brought to Tako's attention and then either undermined or destroyed before it could reach any other staff members/ the public and we could not take that risk.

Thank you for your attention! You are free to think whatever you please, but I ask you not to conspire and respect these responses as our true intentions.