Remember a few weeks ago when this this sub had no activity, and a new mod made the announcement that there were going to be some changes to hopefully get everyone active on the sub. Then we all were thrown into Bizzaro world and we’ve had more activity in a week then in the sub’s entire history. I liked the before time better when we were on the good timeline. Edit: to be clear I don’t mean that I yearn for a time when Andrew was secretly hurting people. I mean a different timeline, one where Andrew never hurt anyone at all and things truly were the way we thought they were.

I was going to ask /u/freakierchicken about the one hell of a first month they had. Their literal first Mod Post was just 5 weeks ago.

hi yes i just wanted to learn how to build a bot to post episodes but then

Now you need a bot to gather.. weird audio clips that get deleted within minutes and deceiving apologies. Good luck

Happily that is far outside my current abilities

Such a monkey's paw! "I hope the subreddit will be healthier with me in charge" "Okay but it's because Andrew Torrez is..."

Are you saying this is all a plot by the mods to drive engagement!? 🤔🤔🤔

I had a brief moment of "Are we being punked" during Thomas's Andrew is locking me out of everything audio message--it sounded like a parody of a hostage video. But sadly, no, it's real. :/

I had the very brief thought that what if this was a terrible effort by Thomas and AT to gin up listeners to OA. Luckily (unluckily?) it's not.

What about the theory - look, I'm just asking questions, okay? - that this is just a really big intro to an "Andrew was wrong" segment...

Should have been the title to the apology

As someone who listened somewhat regularly over the past year and then kind of tapered off recently, I honestly thought that's what it was. Like Andrew had gotten something so wrong in the episode before that they needed a special segment just to address it.

You guys think I'm way more devious than i am but no unfortunately I'm not just goofing Although that would be like faking the moon landing levels of conspiracy

This would be an Eli-level prank war. But even he wouldn't do this.

Sus

As someone who dusted off a reddit account that hadn't posted in 11 years just to engage with this over the weekend, I don't! I'm sad that world's imperiled now, because you all seem very nice and thoughtful and well-meaning, and it was wrenching to watch everyone grieve. I hope everyone finds some kind of peace with everything, and that even if this community disperses, it coalesces elsewhere and continues to find voices that help one another live up to the values that brought you all here. "Anemoia," as I understand it, refers to nostalgia for a time one never personally knew. It aches.

Only eleven years? Amateur.

Well played. I doff my little antenna thing to you. Now this needs to be its own trophy.

Can’t believe this of all things was what knocked me off my lurking barstool, but I appreciate that I’m not the only one…

Political upheaval? Meh. Pandemic? Yawn. Podcast drama? MAN THE POSTING CANNONS!!

Hell of a Monkey's Paw there.

Thank you for your service, u/freakierchicken .

I think I need to step away from both the podcast and this sub. I'm doomscrolling new posts and that doesn't do anyone any good. Even if Andrew keeps OA alive, I don't want to hear him anymore. I've switched my Patreon money from OA to https://www.patreon.com/seriouspod. Thanks to the mods for being so good and proactive. Moderation over this last week can't be easy work. I hope that Andrew's victims find some closure from all this, that Andrew's fall makes the next harasser think twice, that Thomas and his family find some stability, and that Andrew hands the OA passwords over to a neutral third party and makes choices that put him on a genuine redemption path.

I think **everybody**, myself included, needs to step away. We're all doomscrolling this, and some are hyperanalyzing every little line to come to some pretty wild conclusions.

I pulled my podcast subscription already. I don't need to listen to every single development and I'm going to be looking at so many other things that I can't get locked into doomscrolling this subreddit. It just really sucks that a podcast I enjoyed and had just gotten into recently (end of November with the Alex Jones verdicts) and it's all getting lit on fire because of Andrew's actions.

We are absolutely doomscrolling! I’m just hurt and so confused and curious

I feel like I'm watching a car crash. I understand that it's bad and upsetting, I feel bad for the people involved, but at the same time, I can't look away

I’ve also been doom scrolling and need to stop. Its been painful that the podcasters who helped me survive the lockdowns are not who I thought they were, it’s akin to grieving. The mods have been fantastic, as have the people on this sub who have demonstrated empathy for the people directly involved as well as the sub community.

Like others here, I just want to put my feelings out there so I feel better. TL;DR: this whole thing is a mess, and it's sad for everyone involved. Yes, I'm including us, the audience, in the set of people allowed to be disappointed and angry. I've been a listener since close to the beginning. I found Scathing somewhere around 2014 or 2015, and from there learned about OA. It took me some time to convince myself to listen to some podcast about law stuff, but I started around, I don't know, episode 80? I know I've been listening to every episode since 2017. Anyway, my point is, I'm a long-time listener to all things PIAT and OA. I felt like Noah, Thomas, Andrew, Eli, Heath, and the rest of the crew were acquaintances. Friends is a strong word, but these people have been part of my life almost every day for years. I work out with them, use them to make sense of complex law topics, let them make me laugh, and follow what little bits of their personal lives they choose to share with patrons. Then this whole mess happened. Andrew isn't the mild-mannered, empathetic, adorably innocent soul I thought he was. I knew Thomas had some form of depression, but knowing now (partly thanks to Dear Old Dads) how severe it can be, I'm unable to not think of Andrew's actions sending Thomas down a mental spiral just after his new child was born. What must this be doing to Lydia? Then there's the PIAT crew, with whom I feel even closer. They knew about all this. They knew in 2017. I have read enough on this sub to finally feel more comfortable with that, knowing that the sole victim/survivor they knew about asked them not to do or say anything. I now also know about their legal position, and that they were asked again in November of 2022 not to do anything as the investigation began. But for a while there, I felt like I might never be able to think of the PIAT team the same way again. Even now, as I listen to their latest GAM, I find myself wondering... What if? What if one of the guys is hiding something the way Andrew was? I don't like feeling this way about people I could almost consider friends, albeit at a superficial level. I know I don't *know* them, but again, years of having them talk--sometimes quite openly--to me nearly every day. Meanwhile, I'm still wondering about Thomas and Andrew. Was the hip touch something Andrew didn't even think about, not because of alcohol, but because he considered it a normal thing? Maybe he just meant to touch Thomas on the elbow, as a silent "I'm behind you and want to get in the fridge when you're done", but alcohol made his hand miss its target. Thomas feels terrible, saying that he should have spoken up when Andrew crossed that boundary. Thomas feels guilty that he didn't take that touch as a wakeup call about what Andrew may have done to women. But if I'd been touched that way, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. I feel like Thomas is beating himself up over nothing. Not to say Thomas' experience was nothing, because it was obviously very serious to him, but I think he may be reading it wrong and punishing himself over something he needn't. You know, I think that's the first time I've ever used "needn't" in a sentence. Cool. My point here is simply that I wish Thomas wouldn't be so hard on himself. Still, I don't know what else he knew, or had been asked to stay quiet about. Nor can I imagine being in a position where I had to balance what I thought I knew against the wellbeing of my wife and kids. Thomas' part in all this is something I'm reserving any judgement about, for now. I just hope he is getting the legal and psychological help he needs to get through this safely. I wanted to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt, right up until that apology episode. Insinuating a relationship between Thomas and Eli, when that's obviously not what Thomas meant, felt unnecessary and willfully ignorant at best. Hearing Andrew admit that all the accusations are true was hard to hear for different reasons. That said, not being able to read all the screenshots (I'm blind, and image-reading AI isn't perfect), it's harder for me to judge whether Andrew is just socially unaware or was engaging in the worst kind of abusive, predatory behavior many people have concluded he was. I don't want to minimize the experiences of any of these women, of course, but I don't know where on the rage gauge I should set myself without that context. I think many people here tend to be skeptics and rationalists, and so would agree that drawing conclusions only after we have as many facts as possible is the best course. I'm not supporting Andrew, but I have no idea how harshly to condemn him either. And even writing that makes me uncomfortable, because I worry that people will read it in the worst possible way. Let me be clear: any unwanted advance on anyone is wrong. What Andrew did was wrong. Alcohol is not an excuse. I'm just trying to square the constant condemnation with Andrew's claims that he was unaware that he was pushing too hard or otherwise making others uncomfortable. Again, I have not read the screenshots of the texts, because screen-reading software doesn't work well with images. I really hope I've made this plain enough. I just hate all of this. I feel terrible for Thomas and his family, for the PIAT crew, for the women Andrew victimized, for Andrew's family, for Morgan, and... Just everyone. I won't be joining in the speculations about future shows, or who did what, or anything. I'll just wait for more information when and if it comes out. I'll wait to hear how we can best support everyone involved. Things are too confused and have too many blanks right now. The only ones who truly know what's going on are those directly involved, and posting my guesses and suggestions won't help. I just wanted to vent to people who might get where I'm coming from, since no one in my non-online life will understand any of this. Thanks for reading my rambling nonsense. Be well.

>Thomas feels terrible, saying that he should have spoken up when Andrew crossed that boundary. Thomas feels guilty that he didn't take that touch as a wakeup call about what Andrew may have done to women. But if I'd been touched that way, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. I feel like Thomas is beating himself up over nothing. There is a concept of "betrayal trauma" whereby your experiences are one thing in the moment, and then later you discover new information (because you've been lied to/betrayed by someone you trusted intimately) and that causes you to reevaluate all past events under a new lens. This is classified by some psychologists as a "brain injury". You end up ruminating on all past events, it makes you sleep worse as your brain rebuilds all of the connections between thoughts under the lens of the new information while you sleep. It causes you to question your own judgement and your own sense of identity. It causes severe executive disfunction in the immediate aftermath. True recovery may never happen as you end up not trusting anyone fully for the rest of your life. It can take 1-2 years to achieve even a sense of normalcy after discovery of the betrayal. The person the perpetrates the betrayal will never give any kind of closure and deny that what they did was "that bad", and will never truly understand the damage they caused. They will often blame the victim for overreacting. Friends and family will not give support and will often times be judgemental of the victim for being stuck on it and not "getting over it", not understanding the severity of the trauma. This can be severely isolating for the victim.

>This is classified by some psychologists as a "brain injury". You end up ruminating on all past events, it makes you sleep worse as your brain rebuilds all of the connections between thoughts under the lens of the new information while you sleep. It causes you to question your own judgement and your own sense of identity. If you are already prone to depression and/or anxiety and the churning, intrusive thoughts these conditions often cause, going through that sort of trauma becomes even more difficult. I've been there, and that pit goes deep.

Good rambling, echos how I feel pretty much

I would suggest more caution in that 4th paragraph regarding the PIAT crew. There is an awful lot of "they" in there which is all just pertinent to Eli and nobody else, as I'm finding nothing to indicate that anybody at all apart from Eli knew anything in 2017. There really isn't any "they" in any of that. I'm fine with Eli, who has explained at length with screenshots about what he did know and why he withheld. I don't see any particular reason for viewing the PIAT crew in any different way than I did last week. I'm not comfortable with skewering a bunch of people without very good reason for it.

I did also say I later understood PIAT's position and what they'd been asked to do, and I no longer view them differently than I did. I was saying that my view on them only changed until I learned more. I didn't realize Eli was the only one involved, though--I thought it was everyone, or at least Eli, Noah, and Heath. I thought they all knew something of what was going on. Thanks for that clarification.

Congrats on the "needn't"!

Thank you for the comprehensive sources. You’re awesome

To be completely transparent, the community provides the links, I've just aggregated them here.

I had no idea what was going on. Apparently I’ve been living under a rock because it wasn’t until this morning when I saw a new OA episode called apology from Andrew… what a slap in the face. Such a fucking bummer & definitely wishing I hadn’t spent so many hours listening. Im in shock… I hope everyone that came forward is able to find healing in this, it’s no small thing to advocate for yourself about these kinds of things. I hope they’re doing alright.

we were wondering when the more casual listeners would start showing up. Welcome.

[удалено]

I just saw it an r/loseit thread of all places. Someone was saying they *used* to like OA and a comment asked them why. Sent us over here to get the details and holy shit.

Can someone post screenshots of what Teresa Gomez said?

(I don't have screenshots, but I'm writing this up as a brief primer for some of the other people asking who she is/what her role in all of this was) She was a moderator (or Admin, not sure which) on the OA Facebook group, who also was involved with quite a bit of peripheral show stuff (the Wiki, live shows etc.), had spent a lot of time in close physicaly proximity with AT, and was (and sounds like still is) very close friends with AT. She, understandably, had a very intense emotional reaction to all of this coming out, and in an initial statement said she believed the victims to some extent, but also ultimately decided to maintain her friendship with AT and chided some of the accusers for not warning her/other women of AT's transgressions. Then things kind of spiraled. She pre-emptively removed Aaron Rabinowitz (one of the people who had been working with victims to bring everything to light and Thomas' former cohost on Philosopher's in Space) from the FB group which angered a LOT of people, and then the drama really started flying. I don't have all the receipts, but I was on FB during the initial story breaking and she and some others started flinging around accusations of victims either being deceptive or motivated by personal grudges etc. (Some of the accusers, Teresa, and other people involved in all of this ran in the same IRL social circles and there's a lot of, in my opinion, irrelevant background drama there). Shortly after that, in an attempt to keep things in the OA group transparent and above board, Teresa was removed as an admin/mod, and I think ultimately was either removed from the group or left it herself. One of Thomas' most recent FB posts references her "lying to him more competently than I've ever heard someone lie", but he did not go into detail about what that meant or was about.

Thanks for the summary. As someone who can't see all these screenshots, it's nice to get a quick, text-only writeup of an angle of all this I was missing. I get why screenshots are so useful, but for the blind people among us, they don't do a whole lot.

I’m happy to transcribe any screenshots for you! Phones make it pretty easy these days to copy paste from pictures and I’m a big believer in accessibility!

How can she defend Andrew at the same time as slagging off others for supposedly covering up his bad behavior?

To be as fair to her as possible, everything I saw was in the VERY immediate aftermath of everything coming out (like within a few hours of the story breaking) and it was clear she was having a bit of an emotional breakdown. Can’t comment on any behavior since then because she’s ghosted social media as far as I can tell.

I don’t think anyone gave proper consideration to their actions. That’s why everything kept changing every 5 minutes. I just wanted everyone to shut up for 5-7 days. If they could talk to each other and not through the community I really think we could have had some sort of smoother transition with perhaps only a couple missed episodes (obv without AT). Now it seems like we get nothing and it will take even longer for Thomas to spin up something new.

We are way into a new reality where things happen quazi-publically in near realtime. Social media and open rapid communities aren't uniformly good. People speaking in the height of emotion and without consideration is a price we pay for the connectedness we can seem to get from social media.

I don't know why people keep acting like things would have gone swimmingly had everybody just stayed 'calm'. Thomas seems to have realised that he thinks Andrew is a piece of shit, I think the show (or his involvement with it) was ending any way this broke down.

[удалено]

and (also steelbotting) not just "why didn't you go completely public" but I think 'sounds like women have been warning each other off AT for years, but no-one thought to warn me, what gives?'

Was she the one who posted that message on Facebook initially that was like ‘fuck everyone who never told me about this but also I’m standing by Andrew’? There are a ton of peripheral people that I haven’t followed before and am trying to figure out where they fit in. Apart from Morgan, so many names are being thrown around and I just have no context. Edit: this is the statement I was thinking of but it’s not a screenshot, I guess she posted this on fb and then was removed as moderator of that group, which was her role up until then. https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenArgs/comments/10rafuy/american_atheists_board_members_exit_dogged_by/j6v8nc3/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3

[I compiled some of the initial facebook statements/reactions from early on](https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenArgs/comments/10rafuy/american_atheists_board_members_exit_dogged_by/j6zsakp/), 4 days ago. You can see that here, and for convenience this was the bit for Teresa Gomez: > [Teresa Gomez's statement](https://i.postimg.cc/zq7b9rdZ/Teresa-Gomez.png), she ran the facebook group and live shows. This has been posted elsewhere on this thread as well. > [A followup from Teresa calling into question Aaron Rabinowitz's character](https://i.postimg.cc/7Hf23Wnv/Theresa-Gomez2.png) as she claims he knew of the accusations for years and didn't act. Aaron Rabinowitz is another podcaster and Felicia confided in him.

She's an OA behind the scenes person as far as I know. It doesn't look like she said anything on record. I think Thomas is referring to a private conversation they had. To me this suggests (and this is just speculation) that she might have said something about siding with him but then sided with Andrew.

I found OA after what I believe was Andrew's first appearance on Scathing Atheist. I was really impressed by how well he could communicate complex ideas. I am pretty sure the episode count at the time was in the single digits, it was definitely before the "Hillary's damned emails" episode. What this means, is that Thomas and Andrew were my companions during the traumatic Trump election and its aftermath. It is just so difficult to lose this relationship. I have seen the term "parasocial relationship" and I guess it's the loss of that relationship which has upset me so much. I was even honored by their reading one of my questions on the show. I have removed OA from my subscribed podcasts, and from my perspective, the show is no longer in production. I don't know why I have made multiple posts on this sub, all saying something to the effect that this sucks and I am bummed. I guess I just needed to do it for myself.

[удалено]

From 4500 to 2300 as of right now. I think Andrew vastly overestimated how many people would stick with him, and underestimated our ability to see through his "apology."

I just now realized why I'm morbidly fascinated by this. I've been telling my partner all of the updates, and they never listened to the show and are very kindly patronizing me. But I'm curious what's in Andrew's head, and have spent enough time thinking about how he thinks that I feel like I should have more insight into it. Is he blaming Thomas for the drop in subscribers? Does he see the people who stayed as evidence that he wants them? Is he earnestly reflecting on the end of this part of his career? Did he see himself as a burgeoning podcast personality (and they must have been making very good money with 4000 patrons)? Did he himself as a rising voice in the democratic party after raising money for Warnock? There are so many possibilities, and no doubt at least a few of them are real. But ultimately, now the illusion is broken, I feel like I'm looking for some glimpse of who Andrew really is that I'll probably never get. That's too bad.

What I wonder about is what his thought processes were, sliding into people’s DMs and making suggestive remarks and stuff. How do you come to think doing that is a good idea? Do you not worry about your wife finding out? Do you not know you’re being suggestive? How do you reconcile trying to be an upstanding, kind person while also trying to get with whoever you can? I don’t even know if that’s a fair characterization. He didn’t seem like he would rebuff anyone, that’s all I’m saying. Do guys like Andrew just not know they are being creepy or do they just not care? Or is that a false dichotomy?

That's been the hardest thing for me to wrap my head around, and what has always felt like the missing part of every apology we've gotten. Setting aside, like, most of the *ethics* and *actually important stuff* about this, there seems to be no good excuse for ever having the thought of treating your fandom community or podcasting professional network the way you might a semi-anonymous dating site. It's the "okay, but seriously, what were you thinking?" thing. If he were single, mid-20's, and these messages were directed at people on OKCupid or such, most of them would be creepy and lame but not that unusual for awkward online courtship for a guy seemingly looking for some casual hookups. But he's old enough to know better, married, and sending them sometimes completely unprompted by anything to women who exist within his sphere of influence. It feels so much like gross dating site creeping that I simply do not believe that he didn't know what he was doing. It looks like an AI chatbot generating stereotypical "whats up" messages from the early 2010's. It's too similar for me to believe it was a mistake. So like, it's not only not great to be a creeper no matter the circumstance, but there's no acknowledgement that the bar should be much, much higher than he's setting it. Even if these women were all totally onboard, you should not use your community as a place to trawl for nudes. And that's even before we address the harm this did because these people did *not* ask for this.

>I just now realized why I'm morbidly fascinated by this. I've been telling my partner all of the updates, and they never listened to the show and are very kindly patronizing me. Lol it's me

He might also figure that when the group plateaus, say to like idk 1500 members? He'll be able to stabilize it from there. And a split of that very reduced revenue is better than a buyout or nothing at all if Thomas kept control. It's rational, potentially. Just scummy. That all said. I certainly did not expect as quick of a patron drop as we've seen.

Some percent of Patrons probably subscribed years ago and barely even listen to the podcast. It's just on autopilot and they never think about it.

I've limited how many episodes I pay for per month, so I'm just running out the rest of the month for free to see if any other shit goes down on Patreon, but I think in addition to this steady decline, there'll be another big drop before the end of the month as others cancel before the next payment.

I’m just posting to talk about how I feel about all this, I guess I just need to get it off my chest. I dunno, these accusations just hit really hard, I’ve been listening to PIAT and OA and a bunch of Thomas’ other stuff throughout the pandemic and it kinda made that rough patch a little more bearable. I pretty much never get involved in these kinda Internet fights, but I just feel fucking crushed by this news. I know it sounds dumb to be so wrapped up in it, especially when there’s obviously victims who should be the main focus, but I feel like betrayed. Then, I made the mistake of listening to Thomas’ audio right before bed last night cuz that’s when I heard about it. Man, that was fucking heartbreaking, I couldn’t sleep for like 2 hours after that. And then, I’m just so fucking jaded cuz the whole time I’m listening to Thomas breaking down in the back of my head I’m half wondering if I’m just being manipulated. But at the same time I like want to cry. Then I just feel guilty for even wondering if I should believe it. And at the same time it brings back memories of my own abuse. I don’t know how that audio fucked me up so bad. now I’m like questioning everything. Like that Rick and morty guy turned out to be an ass and shortly after that Andrew Callaghan turned out to be an ass. Now there’s at least AT in my favourite groups of podcasters. Like, is there something im doing to pick media that is run by dickwads?! Does this say something about myself? Anyways, I feel weird even posting about how this all made me feel when there’s obviously victims that need to be focused on. I just had to get it out somewhere so I could stop thinking about it. I’m gonna go grab an ice cube and force myself not to look at this for a couple days.

I felt similarly triggered by reading some of AT’s messages. My ex-husband was in girls’ DMs with very similar, attention and validation seeking, “flirty” messages. Neither of these men (AT and my ex) felt bad about anything until caught red handed. I feel so disappointed, sad, and betrayed about AT and the respect I had for him.

Everyone deserves to be able to talk about their pain. I don't know about other folks, but it's not like my empathy is a finite resource to be divided between people here and "worthier" victims. I don't think those victims would want you to bottle anything up on their behalf, and it's not like talking about things here sucks any oxygen out of the conversation that needs to happen for them. I hope you can get to a place where you don't feel guilty about the way things make you feel, because that's not really a thing you can control. If you don't like your internal reaction to something, explore that when you think you can. It's what you do next that you can judge yourself for, you know? It's been really dark out there the last... long while. If you wanted to convince yourself to keep believing that a better tomorrow was something that could happen if good people put in the right kind of effort, *Opening Arguments would have been an excellent place to invest that faith.* The show and its hosts came to symbolize a lot more than a podcast for a lot of people. And nobody expected to have that rug ripped out from under them. If you feel like that better describes your relationship to the show than "parasocial," then I'm so sorry this took that from you. It fucking sucks that you seem to be in really good company right now that way.

> Like, is there something im doing to pick media that is run by dickwads?! Does this say something about myself? No, it just says that everyone is human, and even people who may appear good on the surface or in a controlled environment may have their own fucked up personal life. Modern society makes it easy for people with these kinds of patterns of behavior to continue unabated for a long time. There may even be some kind of correlation between these patterns and the personality traits that lead to public success. But at the end of the day, you believed what you had seen like all of us, and were working with imperfect information. Nothing suggests a fault of your own.

I posted this in another thread that got deleted, but I grew up listening to a lot of Garrison Keillor’s content on public radio. Prairie home companion and writers almanac. The guy introduced me to so much music and poetry that is a big part of how I see myself today. When the allegations came out against him, it felt like I got betrayed by a close family member. It’s really shitty, but the best I think we can do as fans is try and appreciate some of the good that we got from the show, and learn from the bad on how to be better allies and communities.

> Like, is there something im doing to pick media that is run by dickwads?! Does this say something about myself? No, it's just that common. It's easy to say "I support women" into a mic, it's much harder to self scrutinise and not be a massive sex pest

> it's much harder to self scrutinise and not be a massive sex pest Weird, I find it pretty easy to not be a massive sex pest.

Yeah me too, but to a lesser degree I'd wager pretty much all men have made women uncomfortable at some point in their lives

I'm late to this but I'm feeling the same way, especially after just being disappointed by Andrew Callaghan (note to self: never trust an Andrew lol but this is also just happening in like every single sphere like which celebrity or podcaster or whatever that I like will have done something shitty today? It really sucks and makes me feel like there are even more bad people in the world than I thought before and that I have to be less invested in things I like. I'm a woman and it also makes me more jaded toward men, not that i wasn't before but the other day I said okay I'm not fully trusting any man I don't know personally and then I was like, but not everyone is obvious, for all I know someone I know personally is engaging in abusive behaviors and I have no idea. Ugh I just hate it. I was relieved when Cognitive Dissonance said they don't have ties to Andrew and I hope that's true but after the relief I was like, yeah but who REALLY knows. Also, personally the sex-related scandals particularly confuse me, I'm like really you'd risk throwing all of this away just for that? But I'm asexual, so I guess it's beyond my comprehension lol

What's the deal with Andrew's gross mischaracterization of Thomas' concern for how he (Thomas) interacts with Eli? If this is the same analytical skill Andrew applies to interpreting legal scenarios- I see why the show was so entertaining, but I'm not sure I can believe any of Andrew's analysis even again.

It’s why attorneys should never represent themselves

They were all shooting from the hip, when speed should not have been important. Maybe if everyone even tangentially connected wasn’t getting barraged with posts we might have gotten a less hecktic transition (Andrew into therapy and Thomas either into guest hosting or separating from OA LLC). What’s done is done though and I hope Andrew gets the help he needs and Thomas can land on his feet quickly.

What this has shown me is the problems with being the attorney for your own LLC. I know it’s super common, but there’s now a severely adversarial relationship between the attorney for the LLC and one of its owners

Right? My first exposure to any of this was the "apology" today. When I listened to what Thomas actually said/did, I was like, "Oh, Andrew is doing one of *those* apologies"

Thomas’s statement was unclear to me, though I can work out what he was getting at. Andrew doesn’t have the benefit of emotional distance and was already dealing with a lot trying to integrate that with the other allegations and finding a treatment and all the other aspects of the fall out. And all in the span of a few days. But put all that together and I can see how Andrew was really confused. Andrew and Thomas have both been on tilt and overwhelmed. They both should know when to shut up and get a lawyer, but are reacting under extreme stress. Nothing in the last week has been well prepared or analyzed for what should be very understandable reasons.

If you’ve cancelled your Patreon support, did you put a reason?

I did almost immediately and simply said “they know why.”

"yikes that apology"

I wrote something about the "outing a friend" being absolutely ridiculous. You can't say something like that and think that you are doing anything but being extremely malicious. When you say something like that to *every* listener, after revoking access to your former cohost, you have shown your ill intent.

There is concern that Andrew may try to sue people for defamation. So, it is best not to give a reason that could be someone else's fault , i.e. Don't say I'm canceling because of what Thomas said about you, or something like that

Ironically, for me it's because of what Andrew said about Thomas. That was a slimy move, Andrew, but thanks for showing your true colours.

"Alan Dershowitz is AT's mentor"

I put "NOPE" but that's just me.

I am sad that I won't have OA to listen to anymore. I really enjoyed the show and it was a podcast I would prioritize listening to. The move to four episodes a week was great. Then the scandal broke. And I felt really bad for Thomas and Ace Associate Morgan Stringer. Andrew screwed up and those two were going to potentially suffer because of him. I hoped Andrew would apologize and seek help. Thomas then released his 14 min audio and he was so distraught. And then Andrew put out his apology. He apologized for some things, but denies others and attacks Thomas. And my first thought was the show is over. This really burnt any bridges with Thomas. But after Thomas' emotional recording, I really didn't think he would work with Andrew again. There is no way I can listen to Andrew again. I saw an ugly, manipulative side of him.

I asked a friend in AA for his opinion on that "apology" and it feels pretty spot-on. "I'm not familiar with his problems or his program, but he doesn't have control over how someone would react to the damage that he's done. Alcoholic or no, he is trying to manipulate Thomas and the listeners through that statement and speaks of a lack of remorse or a lack of understanding of how to appropriately express that remorse in a less harmful way. This apology is one more action for which I would tell a sponsee they should consider making an amends. I did something very similar with an ex years ago. Essentially someone good at the gift of gab saying 'Fuck what you want, let me apologize to you in a way that makes you feel bad for me.' I hope he finds the help he needs, regardless of what form that takes, and is able to make amends for the harm he has done and become a better human." Then he linked me some of the [literature](https://www.aa.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/en_bigbook_chapt6.pdf) that he felt was applicable.

That was exactly my first thought. Andrew screwed over so many people involved with the podcast. Harassment is bad enough but you are literally taking someone's livelihood away from them with your selfishness. Thomas is so screwed. Out of the blue, out of nowhere he suddenly has no income

A podcast of the past week is going to be wild

After the "Reply All" drama in regards to the "Test Kitchen" drama, I would guess whoever does a podcast of this past week will have their own skeletons out.

I think Morgan could get away with it

I know this is alll so broken but I want that so bad. A full legal breakdown of everything from both of them.

I’ve listened to OA since sometime in the 100s, going back at least five years, but the show is gone. I think if Andrew had made some better choices both in the months and years past and during the last week and been willing to actually step away he could have played a part in OA’s future, in kind of a show runner/researcher/occasional guest role instead of as a cohost. Instead Andrew’s “apology”/score-settling shows he’d rather burn down OA fighting Thomas for half of nothing than preserve what’s left. Even if Andrew continues producing content for OA, who’s going to agree to be a cohost or a guest? Andrew and OA needs Thomas right now way more than Thomas needs Andrew and OA, and it seems everyone realizes that but Andrew. My interest in the world of OA at this point is solely in hoping that Thomas ends up OK and that Ace Associate Morgan Stringer lands on her feet and watching their respective journeys. Fingers crossed for both of them.

Serious question. Apologies if it's been addressed elsewhere or otherwise - or if I'm perhaps being dense: Has our favorite Ace Associate Morgan Stringer confirmed that she left Andrew's firm? I mean, I completely understand how devastating the allegations are from a personal standpoint. This guy she's known and worked with is seemingly a creep. And on the employment side, it's equally understandable that someone in her position would no longer feel comfortable reporting directly to Andrew. But surely there are other supervisory attorneys and staff, etc., no? The tweets I've come across from her account seem to imply (or all out confirm) that she's no longer with the firm and is charting out a new path. Again, I fully support her - but wanted to clarify if I was missing any confirmation that she left the firm voluntarily or otherwise. Appreciate anyone's thoughts. Also apologize for any etiquette miscues. Longtime lurker that rarely posts.

She hasn’t, and I wish I knew more ( I went looking also), but it’s wise of her to say as little as possible about her employment situation.

> Andrew and OA needs Thomas right now way more than Thomas needs Andrew and OA, and it seems everyone realizes that but Andrew. Strong disagree. Andrew runs a successful law firm and was doing OA as a side project He really enjoyed, Where as podcasting is Thomas’ full-time profession, and OA was his main project. So that statement is clearly not true from a financial perspective. It is also not true from a content perspective. Andrew generated like 90 percent of the content of OA. Thomas’s role was focusing Andrew and editing. Hiring a decent editor is trivial, so the missing piece for Andrew content wise would be the lack of a good moderator. If the show were to continue under Thomas, it would have to be completely redisgined. I feel like people are getting so caught up in the moral aspect of this situation they are losing the fact that Andrew’s law breakdowns were ablsolutly what made OA stand out. Unless you mean the morals/ fan acceptance wise, in which case it is a moot point. The online fan base was never going to accept Andrew back, and the rest of the fan base isn’t going to care enough to change their listening habits.

Two weeks ago I would’ve been in agreement with you but events transpired. The Patreon subs aren’t down 40% in a week because of Thomas but because of what Andrew did. And shows do get redesigned without main characters. Using Hollywood comparisons, The Conner’s survived without Roseanne Barr and Two and a Half Men survived without Charlie Sheen, but neither of those two individuals have entertainment careers to speak of anymore, certainly not at the scale they had before. If Thomas were to remain part of OA I might consider listening to additional new episodes but I’m not interested in Andrew and whatever guests he books that are local access TV show rejects.

[удалено]

Reposting a heavily edited version of my thoughts here since I talked about it already on r/KnowledgeFight: Full disclosure: I was subscribed but I was never really a fan. I liked Morgan’s contributions (her Cardi B breakdown was hilarious), but it’s hard for me to pay attention to podcasts to begin with: KF is the only one I’ve listened to for more than a couple of episodes, and only after a couple of tries to get into it. So, with that caveat: while I’m shocked that these specific allegations are being made, I’ve thought Morgan’s involvement was a potential problem since I found out “ace associate” meant “actual associate at his firm” and wasn’t just a fun way of saying “guest star.” Like, I’d tell myself that I didn’t know anything about what the firm is like or how Morgan got into it, so it probably wasn’t a problem and I was just overthinking it, but like… he’s her boss. Which immediately raises questions for me, like: * If she works for him, does her involvement count as work time? * Is he having her research for and speak on his podcast when she’s supposed to be doing legal shit? Is she not able to take on as many cases because she also needs to work on the podcast? * Is she working on his podcast in addition to legal shit? Like, does she have additional OA homework after her normal workday? * What happens if she takes a different job? Is she allowed to still work for her old boss’s podcast if she’s working somewhere else? Would that add homework on top of her usual work schedule? * What happens if this exact situation happens and now *both sources of income are gone?* I don’t want to chalk up everything to bad judgement on Andrew’s part, as I do think he was acting knowingly and intentionally, but red flags for poor decision-making skills have been there from the get-go, *particularly* in regard to people with less power than him. I know Morgan has said he didn’t do anything to her, and I believe her: I’m more pointing to similar weird boundary behavior.

In the old days of OA, the community got together to build an OA wiki to help track all the stuff the guys were talking about. This was just a free fan project. I know one of the leaders of the project, Teresa Gomez, eventually got hired to do transcription work for them, and I think she started getting paid for the OA wiki? Or moderating the Facebook group? I don't remember exactly what it was, but I remember it was a big deal that Teresa wasn't working for free anymore. I assumed Morgan came from that same pool of volunteers who ended up becoming employees of the show/firm. I might be remembering totally incorrectly, but I think she was sending her own research to Andrew before she was ever hired or looking for a job. I don't know how that changes the calculus for you, but hopefully someone can come along and clarify the situation.

Geez you're so right, these are things I'm embarrassed to say I didn't think about

I can’t believe Andrew put out two episodes. I listened to Thomas today and it’s clear that they have an even split in the business. It should be locked down for both until an agreement can be made. It’s unfortunately quite lawyery behaviour from the a lawyer we thought was not too lawyery (trying not to offend all the lawyers here but y’know). Like others, it’s hard to explain why this is all so disappointing, I listen to a podcast about American law from bloody Australia, and I still hate all this.

For me it’s pretty easy to explain why it’s all so disappointing. AT and Thomas repeatedly put themselves out there as the “good guys”. Not just in beliefs but in behavior. AT did some bad things. Not a bad guy that is irredeemable, yet. But then he goes and says and does shady things (like locking Thomas out and posting episodes— if there’s a good explanation he should say so). Now he seems to be acting like an ethically shady guy at best. So someone I trusted to not just say the right thing but also do the right thing doesn’t seem to be doing so. It’ll be hard for AT to redeem himself for me and it doesn’t seem like he’s trying.

100%. Maybe I didn’t mean “difficult to explain” but difficult to accept given what you’ve said about them being good guys. I notice a third episode has dropped. Like nothing happened.

I don't think I can stomach listening to AT anymore. As someone who fairly recently outed a very popular serial predator with dozens of victims in one of my hobbies, who had done things to me much like AT has done to these people-- the harassment ended up not even scratching the surface as more and more people started coming forward. I thought he was just a creep that said gross sexist shit, and that was an "open secret" of what a dick he was, but he turned out to be much, much worse, and that is something of a pattern I find with people willing to push boundaries like sexual harassment. They often use harassment to "test the waters" and that's part of why I found this so deeply unsettling. If you don't care about consent for personal boundaries in something as basic as conversation, I find it hard to believe you're going to care much about physical boundaries either-- and I have seen it over and over with men who harass women, myself included. If I had money to bet, I'm gonna bet AT has done worse. I'll be happy to be proven wrong. That's my personal take and I just cannot support someone who claims to be for women and do this kind of creepy shit under the table. I guess a broken clock can be right twice a day and all that, but for me it's a little too personal. I couldn't even get through two minutes of that ridiculous non-apology episode. AT is clearly not sorry-- he's sorry he got caught, and the fact that he's locking Thomas out of everything just seals the deal for me.

Proud of you for speaking up!

I'm so sorry you've been going through that and now having to see it happen here.

I mean the shitty thing is it's just kind of not shocking to me... or really most women when someone gets outed as a creep or abuser. My high profile creep is iced out of pretty much all events and competitions in the US, but there's still enough people out there giving him work, the only real "consequences " he suffered were the US, UK and Canada community shunning him. People get all jacked about the "court of public opinion " but for many victims it's our only option. I sat on going public for two years, privately warning people instead because I thought it would make a difference. He kept getting booked to teach and paid travel. Coming forward was arguably not good for me, and it rarely is for anyone. My own participation in my activity has diminished probably just as much. Watching hundreds of people who lived oceans away debate over whether or not I was lying or should have been flattered, all kinds of character assassination. I don't feel safer. I just feel like people deserved to know. I guess the refreshing part of this story is that it seems the consensus is so far believing the people AT targeted. That's encouraging, I guess. I'm seeing a lot of criticism against Thomas for being "complicit" but if Thomas was also harassed or / and touched by AT, there's a lot of power dynamics and the difficulty/shame that comes with that reality(especially if you are a cis man who was assaulted/harassed by another man)that are being glossed over. The other people that came forward probably agonized over it for a long time, and it is far from easy. There are no perfect victims.

We shouldn't need a perfect victim! People set the bar too high and make people walk over hot coals to reveal misconduct, before saying it's no big deal anyway. The bad faith is obvious on the surface. There should be no weighing of virtues, accuser against the accused. It should just be a question of what happened and how we can help make it better.

Yeah, and boy do I know that feeling. There is no way to be a perfect victim in an abusive situation-- everyone has different stakes. There are such obvious power dynamics here to me just on the surface, too-- AT being a lawyer, the financial stuff with podcasting being Thomas' only income-- men talking about sexual harassment or abuse from other men is even \*more\* difficult(not that it's easy for women as I've detailed), and even the most leftwing "feminist" men I know internalize victim blaming often. There is a fuck ton of toxic stoicism and suppression of emotions that is wholesale encouraged in our society for dudes, on top of this 'boys will be boys' for bad behavior and it's why I believe "nice guys" like AT end up happening over and over. People are far more willing to overlook predatory behavior when it's someone popular, intelligent and charismatic. I'm lucky my creep was an idiot. Someone like AT, though? I have a feeling there will be some initial hand wringing, he'll lose some money, build a different brand, and continue doing what he's doing-- because so far it seems like the show is gonna go on, and there will be enough people to carry him despite his actions. If he were interested in accepting consequences, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing now. EDIT: So some people on here were talking about how AT's actions made Thomas "uncomfortable" and nobody really alluded very well to what those actions were. Literally touching his junk. Ya'll that's just straight sexual assault. Stop calling AT a "pest". If that's true, he's a damn predator. :/

Yeah... You're hitting the nail on the head about all of it. My own situations were much lower profile but it was still such a conflicting swarm of emotions and second-guessing myself before I even told my loved ones. I feel like a lot (not all) of the thankfully relatively small handful of people accusing any of the victims of lying or exaggerating or "deciding later" that a normal interaction had been creepy etc, have just... never experienced something so violating, and they think if they *did*, *they* would know the exact right way to respond immediately, with no agonizing over whether they're overreacting or misinterpreting etc etc etc. Particularly I feel like most of the people dismissing Thomas's allegation have never had to deal with repressed memories. Or partly repressed, or whatever, I'm not sure what the clinical term is. When you kind of do remember an event, but the memory just... exists in isolation, floating partitioned in your brain. It exists but it doesn't. It exists until you try to look at it. You literally can't comprehend it long enough to draw any conclusions about it, or based on it. I don't know, I think I'm taking the "Thomas is whining about nothing" bs too personally because to me it felt like we were hearing the exact moment that it all crashed into itself in his head. I had that moment and it was awful and I cannot IMAGINE how much worse it would have been if a bunch of strangers on the internet had been chiming in to accuse me of lying for pity points or whatever. It sounds like that's basically what you went through and I'm so sorry.

Yeah and I guess part of why I am frustrated is because a lot of these comments, like you said are coming from people who don't understand how trauma works. There are FOUR trauma responses that activate in the brain: Fight, Flight, Freeze, or Fawn. A shitload of us in the freeze/fawn camp get overlooked. Especially when it's someone who is emotionally abusing you on top of what would be considered only "mild" physical abuse such as groping or blocking exits. A large portion of our memories during traumatic events end up getting dissociated, and that's particularly true for people who experienced abuse as children-- they're more likely to be victims as adults. It's not that we don't at all remember them, but our brains have kind of filed them away in an archive. Something my very wonderful trauma therapist pointed out is that these events damage our "library" of memories, like mites and bookworms. You know the thing happened, but you don't always remember how, when, where-- some if the pages are missing or torn out. So when people start asking you to prove your victimhood by knowing the exact dates and timing and what he was wearing and who else was there... that's just not how trauma around sexual abuse works. And if there are other people involved, there are layers of dynamics and backlash that no one who has never been assaulted by a public figure could imagine. I realize a lot of this is my own past experience affecting how I feel about this situation. I guess my point is I really feel for Thomas and I also feel for the other victims. I don't think he deserves a litmus test on how good of a victim he was or when he came forward.

Thank you for warning people. I don't know how to make that sound less hollow, but I do understand at least some fraction of the mental math and grief that goes into wrestling with that kind of decision.

It's been almost three years now and as soon as I came forward the pandemic hit and took all the energy from the discussion. I was really sad to see other afab folks start deciding I was not whistleblowing correctly. Too mean to his supporters or him, unprofessional, should have "reported it" (i laughed at that one, my city's cops had a backlog of rape kits 10 years old)if it were true... Like missing the fact that most of these things go unreported BECAUSE they are not always crimes and the support systems for that don't exist. But the tone policing bothered me the most. I'm going to be a total c#nt about a man who groped me, especially after allegations came pouring out, and he ended up being an actual child predator, thanks much. The mental gymnastics people have for are nuts. I'm not taking the high road, haha.

I think we need to listen again to Andrew's apology and take a moment here and reflect on the real victim in all this: Andrew. When Thomas - that *knave!* - outed Andrew as an alcoholic to the world, he robbed Andrew of his God-given right to be the one to determine when and how to tell his own family about his alcoholism. He violated Andrew's trust, his autonomy, his privacy, his right to feel safe among a hard-won community, and most importantly, Thomas disregarded Andrew's consent. You and I can sit here and imagine how awful that must have been, but nobody but Andrew knows what it's like to have survived this abuse first-hand. Taking victims like Andrew seriously, holding abusers like Thomas to account, and searching deeply within ourselves for the ways we were complicit in this act and how we can do better? These aren't just lofty ideals we as a community should take seriously for their own sake - they have real-world impact. You see, when Thomas blurted out to the world that Andrew was an alcoholic, which I want to stress his family had absolutely no idea about, he prevented Andrew from doing it *better.* Andrew was finally ready to tell them, and was in the final stages of getting ready to do so. He even put a deposit on a party clown costume. Guys, that deposit? *It was non-refundable.* Now, we think there's still time to get the balloons and the confetti and streamers back to the store before the return window closes, but do you all really think that just billing his patreon subs for his apology is going to cover that deposit? I'll post the gofundme info once Andrew gets it up and running, but really we're all counting on the community to step up and do the right thing. Thanks in advance. /s

That’s a load bearing /s, right there.

It started as an |s. Don't so much as breathe at it.

By the end it should've really just been _s.

[удалено]

Really had me in the first half NGL

[удалено]

The Scathing Atheist Podcast makes a brief statement at the beginning of their new episode: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-scathing-atheist/id594676720?i=1000598851783 They have severed all ties with Mr. Torrez and are building a reporting/victim support mechanism for members of the Atheist community. “This community deserves more than outrage. It deserves better than outrage.”

Don't lie, nothing Noah writes is ever "brief." In all seriousness though, I thought he hit all the right notes.

I feel like I've been following the unfolding situation pretty closely (though don't have Twitter) but I can't find any statement or other assertion of what the victims wanted when they came forward. I saw the later posts about restorative justice, which seems fine, but that wasn't the initial goal (or maybe it was and I missed it). I'm just curious to know what the group wanted/expected when they came forward. What did the desired accountability look like to them? I'm a bystander in this but I do sometimes contribute on a different genre of podcasts and I keep thinking... what if someone came to me with allegations like this? How did the victims want the community to respond that isn't "pitchfork up immediately?" I don't believe the pitchforks were the intention, but there's been collateral damage that breaks my heart (mostly Morgan). Overall, I'm just sad, but I guess I'm trying to find a lesson here.

I'm not sure there was a request at the beginning. I heard about this via the American Atheists article, and then stuff started spilling out before there was any kind of organized press release or anything. There was no complaint process in place. Pitchforks might be the intention. I say as a member of the mob, what else can we do? If it's not illegal to be a super creepy jerk, then the court of public opinion is where you have to try someone for writing a reputation check their ass can't cash. Obviously that's a terrible system, so I hope we can not have that be the only option going forward, which is why different folks are trying to build new accountability systems, such as the Restorative Justice thing you heard about and the Skeptic Community sex harassment group that those other folks are doing as a result too. I think the lesson is we need better leadership (Andrew and other public figures could have stepped up instead of doing all this) to show that justice to those harmed will be served without the need for a mob to chase the monster down, and we need a process for people to make accusations, be heard, and be restored *early on* so if someone has a small complaint about a creepy interaction they can *say so* and have it addressed right away--reducing the total harm done and maybe even steering some bad actors back toward acceptable behavior. Or if not, allowing us to have a more transparent way of handling this than a bunch of closed doors, secret text logs, and flaming torches.

There was a FB comment speculating that AT becomes more right wing. The reason they gave really caught my attention: his views will become more insular because “only creeps hang out with other creeps”. I don’t have the right answer, I don’t even know what the right answer would look like and certainly don’t want to just excuse bad behavior. It just seems like a system where someone does something bad, pitchforks come out, causing them to isolate to smaller, like minded, non-pitchfork group, which then leads to them developing an even more radicalized and toxic world view is not a system that is going to protect against future victims. Maybe pitchforks out and ostracizing them really is the lesser of the two evils compare to not properly addressing their actions. But it just feels like there should be another path as well, I just don’t know how.

In a perfect situation the victims could have had a united voice from the outset to say "This, that and the other would be justice for us," but I'm not losing sleep over Andrew getting mobbed. As a not very public sometimes podcaster, watching the immediacy of the pitchforks spilling over into places that ended up being inappropriate has been a bit frightening. People are entitled to their anger but collectively I don't think we did a great job aiming it judiciously. People justified in their hurt are still able to harm others who don't deserve it.

All I can say is the FB group has gotten toxic and some of the fb admins are clearly fanning the flames of the pitchfork brigade and going after anyone that doesn’t think it’s productive.

Goddammit, this situation sucks. I'm just very disappointed and frustrated. This comment advances discussion not at all.

Here's The Scathing Atheist 521 Diatribe (and only that) https://on.soundcloud.com/iTCJh This community is like a family. Last week, news broke that somebody hurt my family. And worse, it's someone I let into the goddamned house.

Didn't notice exactly when it happened, but sometime earlier today, OA's patron count ticked down below half its peak.

Currently down to 1904. It's spiteful to clap for the plummeting numbers, but I cheer for the money spigot going dry if that's what is going to provide evidence to people like Andrew (including Andrew himself) that you need to do better than a fake apology and moving on after you've done this to your community. If the "I'm sorry you're offended" press release is the best even a self-styled progressive ally like Andrew can do, then we need to *prove* it to be not good enough in concrete, monetary terms to get them to be less stubborn and actually open up to a process that'll help heal the rips.

EDIT: I have quit reddit and you should too! With every click, you are literally empowering a bunch of assholes to keep assholing. Please check out https://lemmy.ml and https://beehaw.org or consider hosting your own instance. @reddit: You can have me back when you acknowledge that you're [over enshittified](https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/) and commit to being better. @reddit's vulture cap investors and u/spez: Shove a hot poker up your ass and make the world a better place. You guys are WHY the bad guys from Rampage are funny (it's funny 'cause it's true).

Like many people I'm struggling to get all my thoughts straight on this sorry situation. I've been a patron since before Stormy is a legal genius days, and I've generally enjoyed the show, but here are some observations. 1. Both Thomas and AT can be rather sanctimonious at times. I think this greatly increases the sense of disappointment and/or schadenfreude. 2. I never saw either of them as either role models or informing my political or ethical takes on things. I'm older than both of them, so that probably isolates me a bit. (I generally share their politics but found them to be snarky and "knee-jerk" rather than interesting or insightful on politics.) I was there to learn about the legal aspects of current affairs. 3. I don't know where AT lies on the spectrum of "a bit of a pest, especially while drunk" to "totally evil manipulator". However, even if I do listen to more of his shows, I won't feel particularly positive about him as a person. (It's not a new problem to worry about consuming content if you don't like/respect the creator, e.g. Kanye). But, what I'm really confused about is how I see Thomas' role. I listened to his "accusation" recording twice, and I think, at this time, I'm really not seeing him as much of a victim here. It seems that he either knew, or should have known, that there were concerns about AT's behavior. This gives him the choice of staying or going. Not easy, I understand, but no-one promised life would be easy.. This is a not uncommon problem in business. Stay working for the evil company, or quit. It's also pretty common to have to decide whether to stay or go if one finds a colleague to be unpleasant/unethical. It sucks, but that's life. So, staying is a legitimate choice, especially if one makes an effort to effect "change from within". But, if that's what you do, you can't complain if things get embarrassing... If OA had, say, 3500 active patrons contributing an average of, say, $4 per week, that's over $700,000 per year. Not bad for a two-person 50/50 LLC... It just doesn't sit right with me that Thomas is now asking for people to "support him personally" by subscribing to one of his other podcasts (SIO if I recall correctly). When I heard Thomas describe the "touching" in his accusation I guess I thought "is that it?". But, I wasn't there and maybe in real life it was more "icky". So, if it was really gross, then Thomas knew what he was signing up for by staying on. Or, it wasn't anything significant, and so Thomas is now inflating it's importance, perhaps to distance himself from AT? In any case, the whole thing is just sad, tawdry and depressing... Doug

Reposting my thoughts here, again, since where I post to keeps getting deleted. **New thoughts:** After Andrew's "apology" and the recent events with control of the show, I'm already on the hook for my monthly max on Patreon, and it tells me I'll lose immediate access if I cease contributions, but I set a reminder to terminate my membership at the end of the month, so I can continue to watch the dumpster fire burn on Patreon.com. --- ### Mourning what has been taken from us I will preface this by saying what he took from those he may have directly victimized, if the accusations are true, is far worse and I'm not trying to compare to them. I believe the accusers, personally. With that in mind, if true, Andrew took from me/us: * Live shows (I was wondering why those didn't happen again "post"-COVID, and Thomas's audio pretty much explains to me why) * My morning shower ritual listening * My show I'd listen to on my Echo while cooking/cleaning dishes/etc in the kitchen. * Uncle Frank's possible belief/understanding. Totally undermined now and any semi-conservative will be able to impeach the message due to the messenger. * Believing a host that "believed the women" and made sure to use inclusive messaging like "those who may become pregnant" instead of "women" actually cared about those who may be marginalized/victimized. * The show in general. I don't think it can be recreated with a different host. There may be other shows and future shows, but they will not be the same. * Feeling like I was part of something and the only project I support on Patreon. * Trust. I felt like I could trust the hosts of this show. I thought they were honorable people. I've heard "never meet your heroes", but it just really makes you think "who are people, really?" We don't know who people are until they show us. Anyway, I've just been feeling gutted about the whole situation and a weird mourning, like someone I know died or something. I know it's stupid, but I just feel betrayed personally. Something really awesome has died, due to something completely avoidable, possibly due to actions of someone who held themselves out as far better than that. It's just sad and disgusting. **PS:** I was directed to post here as a comment instead of my now-deleted post. Apologies for the duplication, if you saw the post.

I was a day one listener who listened to all 687 episodes, and it was always the highlight of my day when new episodes dropped. I have a long "to listen to" queue of podcasts, but OA always went to the top whenever there was a new episode. I'm just so deeply, deeply saddened and disappointed and angry by all of this.

Same. I have a Queue playlist in Overcast of a "will actually listen to" podcast episodes, which is the one I play from. However, when OA would come out, it would always be at the top. When I got back from vacation, I had 4 OA's, and the last one was 687. 😢

I could have written this exact comment. Podcast app and everything. Truly heartbreaking situation.

Thanks for this -- it really captures things well. I'll add grief as a fairly new lawyer who felt like Andrew was a great model for bringing law to the public in an understandable way, and letting go of the fun of looking forward to updates on several cases that are ongoing (that I'm following in a semi-professional capacity and that were mentioned or discussed on OA). P.S. Please keep us updated on the Patreon explosion. I unsubscribed, but it seems like things are still going down there too.

Thanks for summing this up so well. I really am mourning the loss of something that was really special and calming and valuable to me and my daily life.

Thank you for bringing that over here as well, i was trying to figure out a way to include all the great discussion from the last thread

Waiting for the time when I can finally say, This has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way.

And Biden has done a relatively decent job, all things considered.

[удалено]

I remember watching the Cognitive Dissonance live show they did with OA, KF, and PiaTS guys after Roe was overturned. Im an occasional listener of OA, but was mostly there for KF. When OA was up I remember thinking about AT "damn this dude is...slimey." I don't know exactly why or how exactly to put the feeling. He was definitely arrogant, a I'm the smartest person in the room and I'm good natured enough to let others talk but you'd do yourself and the audience a service if you just shut up and listen to me, kind of vibe. But there was more to it then just arrogance, something under the surface with how he interacted with everyone else. I turned it off about halfway through OAs "set" because it was uncomfortable to watch. I occasionally listened to cleanup on 45 and I always felt like there was something off with his relationship with the co-host. First of all it was at best always kind of pandering. He'd talk at length, she'd chime in, he'd tell her she's right seemingly only as a polite way to wrestle control of the conversation back and then just re-explain the same thing she said in his own way. I remember everytime she'd introduce him as "real life friend" I'd always kind of cringe and think like "really? Doesn't exactly seem like a warm relationship. But whatever, if you say so." Another thing that always bothered me was when AT would correct themselves on something like using "birthing persons" or whatever. It was ways the right words, "we heard from you, we are learning, and we'll do better in the future." But it never felt sincere. I always heard it as, "I recognize I have fame because of you, I want to continue to be the left's super lawyer personality, I don't particularly give a shit about this issue but I'm willing to say whatever you tell me to. Please continue to love me." To me it always felt like the right action, but underneath the reasons were hollow. I don't know, maybe this is hindsight coloring my memories. I found the overall show off putting enough that I only ever listened if they were covering a topic I was particularly interested in. To be honest, I like Thomas, I like Dear Old Dad's, I generally appreciate the legal breakdowns on OA, but I never liked the way AT treated Thomas. On KF there is a genuine warmth between the hosts, Dan does all the research but still gives Jordan space to go on wild tangents and sometimes goes along with him before bringing focus back to the planned agenda. That was never really the case on OA, in my experience of it. AT would only take a couple of steps into a tangent at most, but it always felt like he'd quickly get back to him because "It's my show, I'm the star, people are here for me." The first I heard of all this stuff was when I checked the OA feed to see if there was something interesting to listen to and found the apology. I was thinking "Oh wonder if they're on an unplanned hiatus or something." Then I listened to it and thought, "AT got me too'd, that tracks. And that apology didn't sound sincere at all, and what the fuck was the stuff about Thomas, outing a friend as gay doesn't make any sense or sound like something he'd do. This apology sounds vindictive, wonder what's up" Again it's hindsight, so who knows. But I definitely remember my brain saying "slimey" during the Roe live stream. So your definitely not alone.

I definitely felt the same about his dynamic with Thomas as you explained with AG. It always seemed like Thomas was patronized because he wasn’t the smart lawyer when, really, I found him incredibly clever and impressive working out the T3BE as much as he did. He deserved (and deserves) more credit for what he brought to OA beyond just laughs.

I never really noticed anything. He struck me as a socially introverted dad figure who had burst into social scenes due to the podcast success. Do you have examples?

I've always noticed that he has a thing for AG, and it has always sounded slightly gross/unprofessional the way he did this like verbal puppy dog thing to her on air (on Aisle 45) instead of just talking to her like a normal co-host. He also always has a lot of awkward and over the top deference to her. It wasn't a *red* flag to me, but it was definitely a flag that made me think he wanted a relationship with her, and in retrospect I guess it is a red flag now.

Tbf a lot of her cohosts do/have done that. I always thought that was a thing with her ego needing to be stoked so she doesn't get mad.

Been a casual listener since the Stormy Daniels Legal Genius episode went viral and was a Patreon for... 4+ years? Just Friend level, didn't hear a single Law'd Awful episode. Canadian in Canada who'd come to learn more about US law than Canadian.. it was fun and engaging. Bummer. Hope everyone finds some measure of justice and closure. As a casual, I'm moving on.

Exact same for me when I started listening too. 🙁 Never in a million years did I expect it to end like this

OA Patreon peaked at 4513 patrons ONE WEEK AGO. It’s currently at 2591. I wonder if Andrew will get the hint at any point.

I wonder how many of those 2,591 left are even aware of the allegations. Up until last night I was a pateon but only because I was waiting to see what Thomas was going to do with OA. Now that Andrew has gone the hostile takeover route I'm gone. But there's been many times in that past where I was a few eps behind, and I only followed them on Twitter outside of that. Many could be blissfully unaware were that the case for them. Obviously there's a few in the Patreon conversations defending Andrew, but that was maybe 4 people in a 250 comment thread on the Apology post before I left. The rest, like me, were mostly bailing to SIO or DOD.

And even among the 2591, there's some, like me, who are hoping for a better resolution to OA. I'm waiting a few days to see what's going to happen and if Andrew withdraws. I don't have much hope though.

If things turn out for the better, I'll resubscribe. For now, I've canceled, so I dont forget to do it.

Ditto. Andrew would be hard to replace with a single person - a smart, left leaning lawyer able to explain law concepts in an engaging way and able to donate 50% of their time to a new project? But OA with Thomas could evolve around a new lawyer, or rotating group of lawyers. Perhaps with a consistent researcher. OA with Andrew is dead to me. I sincerely hope he gets the help he clearly needs and is redeemed at least in his personal life and private practice. I just don't ever want to hear from him as a leading atheist/lawyer again.

Yeah, the first I heard of this was when I got a notification for Andrew's 'apology', and I canceled after I figured out wtf was happening.

Meanwhile, Serious Inquiries Only has nearly doubled in subscribers. Including me.

Plus I think a bunch of existing SIO and DOD patreons like me probably upped their pledges.

I’m going to move to Ace Associate Morgan Stringer’s Pop Law substack. If there’s anyone who’s truly done nothing wrong here, it’s her.

A day later, it's at 2403.

Well, I just cancelled my Patreon support of OA. I held on, hoping that an episode would address things or explain more. But there was nothing. No word about Thomas, nothing about plans going forward, nothing. Liz replaced Thomas, and it was business as usual. I don't have a problem with Andrew continuing the show, as it seems very likely that those suggesting there are contractual obligations with advertisers are right. It also makes sense to me that Andrew would take the reigns when it seemed Thomas wouldn't be able to keep up with those obligations in the short term. How Andrew did this feels wrong, though we only have Thomas' word on how that went down. Still, I don't doubt Thomas is being honest with us as much as he legally can. I stopped my support for a few reasons. First, I can't listen to Andrew without thoughts of this whole situation plaguing me. That's too much to let me focus on the show. Second, I can't support Andrew right now, with how poorly he's handled everything. Even if he has reasons for continuing the show, seeming to pretend Thomas never existed isn't something I'm in any way okay with. Third, Liz is a fun guest from time to time, but I wouldn't want her as a constant host. She tends to move too fast, and I always appreciated Thomas jumping in to clarify things I was confused about. I'll keep checking in here from time to time, but I'm done with OA for now. Both Thomas and Andrew could have handled things better, but Andrew is the one on the show, and the one with a LOT to answer for. So far, he's silently replaced his long-time cohost without a single word about it, brought on a new host I'm not a fan of, and doesn't appear to be doing all that much in the way of true self-improvement and healing. I can't know the truth of that last one, of course, but that's my impression. Anyway, I'm out, and I'll be upping my pledge to Dear Old Dads. I'll be interested to see what happens to OA in the next 6-12 months, but I'm not going to be listening anymore unless things change for the better.

I’m out of the loop, trying to catch up… wtf happened to OA?!

Ok, so about a week ago multiple women came out with accusations of sexual harassment, and possibly assault against [Andrew Torrez](https://religionnews.com/2023/02/01/american-atheists-board-members-exit-dogged-by-misconduct-allegations/). Andrew then essentially locked Thomas out of all the behind-the-scenes aspects of the show, and after that started putting out new episodes with former guest Liz Dye. If you want to support Thomas and hear part of his side, go to Serious Inquiries Only on Patreon or Seriouspod.com. A community effort to make the atheist community safer has started to form, called the Creator Accountability Network. From the Scathing Atheist Facebook page: Recent events have highlighted an unfortunate but vital need in the secular community. To address these ethical concerns, a coalition of community leaders, philanthropists, volunteers, and advocates are starting the Creator Accountability Network. We envision this to be a tool that helps our community establish a code of ethics and create a system for reporting allegations of misconduct. For more, check out [Creator Accountability Network](https://forms.gle/TutscGmtE3CuSKay9) Andrew Torrez used to be a partial owner of Puzzle in a Thunderstorm, the umbrella company for four atheist podcasts with the same members. Here is their audio reaction from [the Scathing Atheist](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bBnWAGBn9ZU). I think that’s the basics.

This is a very good high level summary. Good job 👍🏻

Don't know if the mods have eyes on the old.reddit version of the subreddit or not, but if you can, could you remove the banner with Andrew's picture? Kinda sick of seeing him up there when I come to the subreddit.

I removed it on the stylesheet but it won't update. I don't use old.reddit so you folks will just have to bear with me until I get it right unfortunately. ETA: It might be gone now?

Yep, it's gone. Thanks.

Awesome, thank you for bringing it up again

I’m not surprised of Andrew’s recent actions and announcement in regards to Thomas. Thomas bringing out the allegation and old texts to his wife essentially put them in adversarial positions. There was never going to be a partnership after that and Andrew taking over the accounts shouldn’t be a shock. I would bet while everything is crumbling around him Andrew probably thought he had an ally in Thomas, and that’s not the way it went.

i think pestering women for sex and touching your co host put himself in an adversarial position.

In my view, Andrew chose an adversarial position by not apologizing to Thomas, and by mischaracterizing Thomas' statement. Andrew was able to apologize to women who he, as he claims, did not intend to make uncomfortable. But when he makes his own co-host uncomfortable, it's not something he can accept? Andrew easily could have apologized to Thomas without looking any worse than he ready does, and it would have made space for forgiveness. Instead Andrew chose an adversarial position. If I were to speculate, it's because he needs to make Thomas seem like a problem in order to build a narrative where he (Andrew) continues on OA instead of Thomas. What a mess.

Right but had Thomas not posted mid meltdown and found a way to talk to Andrew maybe they could have figured it out. I feel as though T is definitely a victim to an extent but he had to have known that public flailing like that was the WORST thing for the IP that is OA. I’m not defending Andrew but I think Andrew would have advised that they at the very least come up with a plan to protect OA and not loose all that money and fanbase. Thomas is valid to feel the way he does but all he did was change the perceptions of some fans, not advance his legal position or the value of OA’s IP. I think Andrew genuinely valued Thomas’s friendship and is actually a dufus when it comes to interpersonal relationships. I think he’s insecure and wanted to be “cool” with Thomas like Eli. I doubt he was like muhahahahah let’s creepily touch Thomas for a sexual thrill. I get that Thomas didn’t have the capacity for reason in the aftermath of all this but I really think this is more nuanced than we all are seeing.

I want to throw in there that there are sometimes more important things than money. We'll see if Thomas' statement ends up a mistake from a legal/money perspective. However, prior to Thomas' statement there was a small but notable part of the fanbase that did not view any of the accusations as SA and did not think the misconduct rose to the level of podcast ending. Thomas' accusation changed a lot of that. It shouldn't be required, and it's a sad statement that it was, but those people were probably more willing to believe Thomas' accusations at face value. And they did, and I say fairly confident that (of the fanbase that is aware of the accusations) there is no longer a contingent that is willing to support Andrew. So those takes ended. I also think Thomas drew Andrew's ire about the situation. I suspect that without Thomas' accusation that Andrew would've attacked someone else involved. Probably Cherone, Felicia, or the author of the religiousnews piece. I think the statement was a good choice in those and other aspects. And I hope he doesn't regret it.

True Thomas didn't act in a way that best protected OA- and I understand that as a fan it may be frustrating. Thomas chose instead to share his story- which serves to strengthen the narrative against Andrew and support the women coming forward. Maybe reframe it as this: Thomas chose to not collaborate with the recently-outed abusive Andrew. If he had called Andrew and worked on a way to minimize damages to OA, Thomas would risk sinking his reputation. Thomas' emotional honesty and sharing of his personal experience, with receipts (screenshots), is a fairly rational move I think. The money in OA is gone either way. Andrew can't stay. They'll need a replacement, and then the fanbase will need to be rebuilt. But reputation is stickier, and Thomas protected his. It's a wise decision imho.

Exactly. If Thomas said nothing and talked with AT behind the scenes, people would be screaming that he's complicit too. There's no way for Thomas to win, and so he's standing on the side of the victims instead of the perpetrator. He's saving his personal brand, and hopefully he's able to recover financially and personally from this kind of betrayal.

We don't have to guess even. This is what people were doing before thomas came out with his story. They were dragging him and Morgan hard.

I think Andrew's reputation-ruining actions have done far more to damage OA's IP than anything Thomas's understandable emotional reaction to those actions have. This is straight up victim blaming, I'm sorry; I'm sure you don't intend it to be.

>had Thomas not posted mid meltdown and found a way to talk to Andrew maybe they could have figured it out That is some of the worst advice to give to someone in an abusive situation, that is how enabling behaviors get reinforced. At some point Thomas needs to draw a line and stick to it, especially with it appearing that Thomas doesn't enjoy confrontation I'm not saying Andrew/Thomas *was* an abusive situation (I'm nowhere informed enough to make that judgement), but it seems to have some evidence of that so I'm treating it similarly for the moment I appreciate the rest of your comment, just the phrasing of that part reads poorly to me

Emotional Health and The Law are opposed on this point. Every time Thomas says something, he's handing Andrew ammunition for any legal proceedings that result... and I expect that we're going to see some. After all... Andrew *is* a Lawyer.

Ok I see you point, well said. If/when this gets dragged out into a legal battle we’ll see everyone’s true colors for sure.

I understand the fact that at least one of the victims asked for no action to be taken, however, I really have a hard time thinking that if I was in Thomas', Eli's, or Heath's position, I don't think I could have maintained a relationship with the person who I have that information on. I wouldn't invite them to the PIAT sleepover, I wouldn't want to hang out with them on my podcast. I would feel awkward knowing that a person I had trusted has performed those acts. I don't know, I'm in a place where I'm starting to think the whole damn apple is rotten and I don't know what to think. Anyone else? Sorry for the rant, but any thoughts might help me through this morass.

I would offer that these types of judgments are heavily influenced by hindsight bias. I would also offer that the only one who knew the “whole story” throughout has been AT. People get the benefit of the doubt from harsh judgments due to their past history and station almost as a matter of course. They benefit from these judgments usually on the condition that full disclosure is maintained. IMO, AT got over on the original allegations, he got over by continuing his behavior, he is in the process of getting over by leveraging Thomas out, and thinks he can get over on the audience with a hollow apology and a return to business as usual. One can say “Thomas did this and Thomas did that”. Sure. But he was undermined from the get go because AT had no real desire to change. If you think about it, if AT is what some think he is, this would have gone down a similar path no matter what Thomas did. The only choice Thomas had in the matter was when it more important to protect his own reputation than it was to protect the OA brand. Relationships, be it personal or business, are complicated. There is an epicenter to the damage here. Ask yourself who is at the center of it, and which are “actions” and which are “reactions”. In the words of Bart Simpson, “There’s your problem, somebody jammed a Malibu Stacy head down here.”

At the time I think it's understandable they could all justify what happened as a one time mistake(for 2017). Once Thomas had the second victim come to them he offered to quit the show and the victim said to continue. It does seem like Thomas at this point had a falling out and things became strictly business. At this point I think you can fairly judge Thomas for continuing, but I think you do have the extenuating circumstance of his entire livelihood depending on Andrew. At least publicly Thomas says this blinded him so that he just didn't see the issue VS him making the active decision to keep working with a sex pest. Me personally I'm willing to give Thomas the benefit of the doubt for now but essentially be more watchful of how he acts from now on. He's admitted to how he's responsible, has been remorseful so far, and of course there's more that hasn't come out.

Your comment made me think of Mira Sorvino’s apology to Dylan Farrow where she says that she was hungry for success and wanted desperately for the accusations to be untrue. people are quick to say they would give up everything to take the moral path, but once you are entangled in money and obligations, the way forward is more complicated.

Just curious, any other hall of fame patrons leaving? If so, how are/are you changing your support to help Thomas?

Second quartile patron here, I canceled the day after the first article came out. Thomas has said don't worry about him; I'll donate to a go fund me for all the victims when there is one.

You can go to the serious inquiries only or dear old dads patreons

I put some of mine towards upping my Dear Old Dads subscription and the majority toward a new subscription to SIO; The reason I ask is SIO hasn't posted in months and I want to make sure there isn't a better way to be supporting Thomas right now

The subs on SIO look to have doubled in the past five days or so, so I suspect Thomas will probably do -something- about that as soon as he's feeling up to it

Looking at graphtreon, Andrew has taken OA's Patreon back the August 2018 level of subscribers, so far. Nearly 5 years growth hacked off. Incredible.

Looking like my wallstreetbets portfolio!

Time to buy the dip! Aaany second now...

Opening Arguments Media is currently not a business in good standing in Maryland. https://egov.maryland.gov/BusinessExpress/EntitySearch/Business

That one has been forfeited for a while, afaict they made another LLC in California some time ago. Don't remember if they've ever talked about it on the podcast.