Bingo Board Bants

[papierklemmen]

He sounds seriously bitter and frustrated with them playing up the ambiguity, you're right, but it was more concerning the "violent denial and reassurance of a heterosexual lifestyle" part of it, I think. Like nephilimcat said, I've never seen him reacting bitter to any phan-related tweets from Dan or Phil (but thinking about it, do these even exist post-2010?) It sounds more like him resenting the no-homoing going on back then to me. But it can all be interpreted in different ways, as always…

What stands out to me, though, is that none of their friends and colleagues from 2009/2010, a lot of them non-straight themselves and some of them probably bitter because deppy started ignoring them, ever called them out for shipbaiting or "milking a non-existent homosexual relationship" or anything (except maybe Charlie, but I still don't read his comments that way). Unless it happened and I just haven't heard of it, which would be completely possible.

yep, as you said it can all be interpreted in different ways. it's no point picking apart contextless tweets, but i love doing it so why not!!!
here, have some linguistic pseudoanalysis (yes, i am a linguist, but i graduated ages ago and i majored in japanese, also we know linguists suck anyway - remember phil's onomatopoeia):
to me it mostly sounds like resenting no-homoing because of the word "blatant" which, in my head, is subconsciously followed by "lies", or anything negative of any sort. blatant lies, blatant lack of interest, blatant propaganda... granted i'm not a native english speaker, but nothing "blatant" is ever good, and here he uses it with "homo intensity" - why would a bi/gay (i'm not sure what he identifies with) person refer to something "homo" in a negative light?
also, flirting... i don't know what to say about the word flirting, but it sounds off in this context lol.

interesting point about their friends and colleagues from 2009/2010 - i'm wondering that myself. but at the end of the day, it's safe to say that there is no "milking of a non-existent homosexual relationship" in the eyes of those who's not invested in them. after a year of casual watching i didn't suspect anything, because they are very blatant (HA!) in their mocking of shipping culture. they never cross the line into the real world - all "shipping" moments are played up jokes and they make sure it gets through to the viewer. i figure a gay friend wouldn't be offended to see them mock their shippers - it's out of their control and they do the best they can in this situation.

[opendoor]

on one hand it could be interpreted as him hinting at their sexualties, on the other... idk to me it sounds a lot more like resentment towards queerbaiting.

yep, as you said it can all be interpreted in different ways. it's no point picking apart contextless tweets, but i love doing it so why not!!!
here, have some linguistic pseudoanalysis (yes, i am a linguist, but i graduated ages ago and i majored in japanese, also we know linguists suck anyway - remember phil's onomatopoeia):
to me it mostly sounds like resenting no-homoing because of the word "blatant" which, in my head, is subconsciously followed by "lies", or anything negative of any sort. blatant lies, blatant lack of interest, blatant propaganda... granted i'm not a native english speaker, but nothing "blatant" is ever good, and here he uses it with "homo intensity" - why would a bi/gay (i'm not sure what he identifies with) person refer to something "homo" in a negative light?
also, flirting... i don't know what to say about the word flirting, but it sounds off in this context lol.

I'll preface this by saying I'm not an linguist, just a lover of words, but as for your analysis of the word 'blatant', I agree it has negative connotations. 'Blatant' is the word that stuck out for me, too, but for different reasons.
My thought was that Charlie could be using the 'blatant' as a synonym for 'undeniable' or 'unconcealable', rather than 'shameless', which I think is the interpretation you've gone for. (The word has too many meanings, help).
Therefore "blatant homo intensity" contrasts with "violent denial". A violent denial isn't necessarily an honest one. Essentially Charlie is saying that they can't hide the homo. He is bitter that they're trying to hide it, because the attempt is transparent, and also because it reasserts "the heterosexual lifestyle". Flirting can be faked for queer-baiting purposes but 'blatant homo intensity', not so much. The fact that he said 'blatant homo intensity' and 'flirting' makes me think that this isn't in fact an accusation of baiting, and that even though Charlie is judging them for concealing it, there is a real relationship underneath.

This is just an interpretation, and I still think it could be a baiting accusation, especially if by 'blatant', Charlie meant 'shameless', though that doesn't really make sense in the context of Charlie's other tweets about them where he constantly brought up them having a relationship into unrelated conversations. Though Charlie isn't exactly known for consistency...

[melon lord]

As a fellow lover of words (hey there word people I see you ) I love analysing.

The thing is with charlie is that every dig is always directed at Dan. As though Dan is this big bad corrupting force in Phil's life. Like, from that exchange it sounds like a bitter, drama-llama version of "you've changed, man" towards Phil, with shade at Dan.

Can I assume that prior to Dan becoming a huge part of Phil's life, Phil was potentially more open about his sexuality? Maybe not to Charlie's degree, but also honest enough about it. And now, I don't get why Dan would make him "act hetero", since you'd assume it'd be the opposite, but why would Charlie even care how they act?

"blatant homo intensity" doesn't explain if the homo is real or fabricated. Which is where the baiting comes in. So the tweet either goes two ways:

a) "You're using bisexuality/m-m pairing as a selling point and you're disregarding the fact that some people can't just turn it off and deny everything, like you are. You love pushing the boundaries as much as you feel comfortable with and then retreat back to your little hetero safe space when it gets too awkward for you"

b) "You're obviously flirting and clearly want to bishi bashi but you try and squash it out with the hetero because being available to thirsty fangirls is crucial to your popularity and your moral integrity is terrible because of it, because you would rather deny your feelings and instinct to save face to people rather than deal with it and accept it"

Either way it doesn't relate to him directly unless maybe phil would have been too ashamed/not ready at the time to be seen/acknowledged with a guy and that really hurt charlie so when he sees Phil act so... bisexual towards Dan he becomes bitter like "why wasn't he okay with me?"

[alittledizzy]

Ooh, Charlie talk - my favorite topic and I'm too busy working to contribute to the extent I'd like.

But I will point out that Charlie only had the negative attitude toward closeted/successful youtubers from around 2012 onward. If you're taking his comments as evidence to legitimize or de-legitimatize Dan and Phil as a couple/their sexuality then you should be looking at some of his older tweets, too - not just the ones where he had a bone to pick with them. A few that immediately come to mind:

Charlie openly talking about their sexuality (almost as if he weren't aware he was supposed to not):


But citing that their relationship is no one's business:


And again:

Either way it doesn't relate to him directly unless maybe phil would have been too ashamed/not ready at the time to be seen/acknowledged with a guy and that really hurt charlie so when he sees Phil act so... bisexual towards Dan he becomes bitter like "why wasn't he okay with me?"

This part is interesting to me too, because Charlie and Phil only met irl once (pre-Dan) that we know of, but I'd probably say Phil definitely made more sexual jokes with Charlie on twitter/let Charlie get away with saying more romantic/sexual things about him than Dan did so I don't really know that Phil's reluctance to be out had a lot to do with it. But Phil's reluctance to be the one pursuing a relationship in general might have been. Despite Phil being years older I really think they were on the same level when it came to relationship experience. And (as someone who thinks voldy is real) we know Dan made the first move with Phil by kissing him.

[nephilimcat]

As IckleMissMayhem mentioned, he was the one who was shipbaiting

No i didn't. I said baiting. (As in the now thankfully illegal sick kind with bears and chains and dogs in a pit.) Often done in public/for an audience. Attack the victim repeatedly until they're forced to lash out themselves, or get ripped to shreds.

Oops, sorry, I misunderstood that, I didn't know that baiting meant that as well

Either way it doesn't relate to him directly unless maybe phil would have been too ashamed/not ready at the time to be seen/acknowledged with a guy and that really hurt charlie so when he sees Phil act so... bisexual towards Dan he becomes bitter like "why wasn't he okay with me?"

Something like this is what I believe to be the likeliest reason for Charlie's behaviour. At one point, Phil did things with Dan he never did with him/chose Dan over him/replaced him with Dan. And being replaced hurts a lot. Being hurt and jealous can bring out the worst in a human. I really think that if he had any specific intentions, he would have addressed it differently. To me, all his tweets scream "I'm jealous, I'm angry and I'll be an asshole because I can't get over it". Wow, with this analysis, I kind of feel sorry for Charlie. It's no excuse for his behaviour, but if this was the reason, I kind of understand how he could be like that.

[alittledizzy]

Either way it doesn't relate to him directly unless maybe phil would have been too ashamed/not ready at the time to be seen/acknowledged with a guy and that really hurt charlie so when he sees Phil act so... bisexual towards Dan he becomes bitter like "why wasn't he okay with me?"

Something like this is what I believe to be the likeliest reason for Charlie's behaviour. At one point, Phil did things with Dan he never did with him/chose Dan over him/replaced him with Dan. And being replaced hurts a lot. Being hurt and jealous can bring out the worst in a human. I really think that if he had any specific intentions, he would have addressed it differently. To me, all his tweets scream "I'm jealous, I'm angry and I'll be an asshole because I can't get over it". Wow, with this analysis, I kind of feel sorry for Charlie. It's no excuse for his behaviour, but if this was the reason, I kind of understand how he could be like that.

He didn't, though - Phil and Charlie met irl one time in March of 2009. Charlie and Stephen were talking and close the entire time Phil and Charlie were also close. In May of 2009 Charlie and Phil stopped talking as much, and Charlie and Stephen got closer. In June of 2009, Charlie and Stephen started dating - the same month that Dan started tweeting Phil, but before they were actually close.

Now, it's entirely possible that looking back years later Charlie was mad at himself for picking Stephen over Phil or mad at Phil for not pursuing him harder. But Phil choosing Dan over Charlie is the one conclusion that is just completely ruled out by the actual timeline. If there was any kind of emotional response happening it would have been from Phil, upset that Charlie chose Stephen over him, and using Dan as a rebound. (Which I don't actually think happened, because I don't think Phil was that upset over 'losing' Charlie for long, but is still a more plausible scenario.)

[papierklemmen]

we also shouldn't forget that he lied that he'd dated phil. so... as always, back to square one.

p.s. what is with this fandom and lies

[alittledizzy]

we also shouldn't forget that he lied that he'd dated phil. so... as always, back to square one.

p.s. what is with this fandom and lies

He said he dated Phil, but was not in a relationship with Phil. Those two terms don't necessarily mean the same thing, so I don't think he lied. You can be dating multiple people at once (for example, if Charlie was interested and pursuing Stephen and Phil at the same time) without being in a relationship.

[pearshaped34]

we also shouldn't forget that he lied that he'd dated phil. so... as always, back to square one.

p.s. what is with this fandom and lies

Well to be fair we don't know for sure it was a lie. He has said both that he dated Phil and that he did not date Phil so he lied but we don't really know which of those statements was the false one. And probably never will.

Or as alittledizzy says maybe he was just playing word trickery and both statements could be true and he did date Phil without ever being in a relationship with him.

[melon lord]

we also shouldn't forget that he lied that he'd dated phil. so... as always, back to square one.

p.s. what is with this fandom and lies

we ARE the endless spiral of lies

In all seriousness, though So much doesn't add up. So I accept alittledizzy's post about charlie and phil and such but it doesn't make sense!

I feel like there is a crucial puzzle piece somewhere we've missed, which fills in the bigger picture

[kusunoki masashige]

interesting point about their friends and colleagues from 2009/2010 - i'm wondering that myself. but at the end of the day, it's safe to say that there is no "milking of a non-existent homosexual relationship" in the eyes of those who's not invested in them. after a year of casual watching i didn't suspect anything, because they are very blatant (HA!) in their mocking of shipping culture. they never cross the line into the real world - all "shipping" moments are played up jokes and they make sure it gets through to the viewer. i figure a gay friend wouldn't be offended to see them mock their shippers - it's out of their control and they do the best they can in this situation.

yeah, I agree, they acknowledge shipping culture but don't really do any obvious shipbaiting in my opinion (on the other hand, why did they put cute moments together on theirPhil's tourbusbed in the trailer for the documentary? they know exactly how to play us). But as we know, other youtubers are very aware of what the phandom is up to and how it reacts to anything danandphil. Quite a lot of people mentioned after #busgate or some other time that if it turned out deppy weren't together, they would see their behaviour in another light, as something morally questionable, and I think some of their old youtube-colleagues who didn't manage to make it on youtube might see it the same way. But who knows.

(hey papierklemmen, I majored in Japanese studies!! )

Ooh, Charlie talk - my favorite topic and I'm too busy working to contribute to the extent I'd like.

But I will point out that Charlie only had the negative attitude toward closeted/successful youtubers from around 2012 onward. If you're taking his comments as evidence to legitimize or de-legitimatize Dan and Phil as a couple/their sexuality then you should be looking at some of his older tweets, too - not just the ones where he had a bone to pick with them. A few that immediately come to mind:

Charlie openly talking about their sexuality (almost as if he weren't aware he was supposed to not):


But citing that their relationship is no one's business:


And again:

Yeah, they seem to have been really friendly for quite some time. When/why did this change, what do you think? (I really want to hear more of your opinions on Charlie!!)
And Charlie talking about their sexuality, well, they both said they were bisexual on formspring, didn't they, so he was only confirming something they already said themselves.


Also, pretty off-topic, but what do you make of Adam's response to Dan's sushi roll tweet?

[papierklemmen]

interesting point about their friends and colleagues from 2009/2010 - i'm wondering that myself. but at the end of the day, it's safe to say that there is no "milking of a non-existent homosexual relationship" in the eyes of those who's not invested in them. after a year of casual watching i didn't suspect anything, because they are very blatant (HA!) in their mocking of shipping culture. they never cross the line into the real world - all "shipping" moments are played up jokes and they make sure it gets through to the viewer. i figure a gay friend wouldn't be offended to see them mock their shippers - it's out of their control and they do the best they can in this situation.

yeah, I agree, they acknowledge shipping culture but don't really do any obvious shipbaiting in my opinion (on the other hand, why did they put cute moments together on theirPhil's tourbusbed in the trailer for the documentary? they know exactly how to play us). But as we know, other youtubers are very aware of what the phandom is up to and how it reacts to anything danandphil. Quite a lot of people mentioned after #busgate or some other time that if it turned out deppy weren't together, they would see their behaviour in another light, as something morally questionable, and I think some of their old youtube-colleagues who didn't manage to make it on youtube might see it the same way. But who knows.

(hey papierklemmen, I majored in Japanese studies!! )

Ooh, Charlie talk - my favorite topic and I'm too busy working to contribute to the extent I'd like.

But I will point out that Charlie only had the negative attitude toward closeted/successful youtubers from around 2012 onward. If you're taking his comments as evidence to legitimize or de-legitimatize Dan and Phil as a couple/their sexuality then you should be looking at some of his older tweets, too - not just the ones where he had a bone to pick with them. A few that immediately come to mind:

Charlie openly talking about their sexuality (almost as if he weren't aware he was supposed to not):


But citing that their relationship is no one's business:


And again:

Yeah, they seem to have been really friendly for quite some time. When/why did this change, what do you think? (I really want to hear more of your opinions on Charlie!!)
And Charlie talking about their sexuality, well, they both said they were bisexual on formspring, didn't they, so he was only confirming something they already said themselves.


Also, pretty off-topic, but what do you make of Adam's response to Dan's sushi roll tweet?

idk i think #busgate was only a thing in very invested parts of the fandom... plus, they emphasized that they did not share the bed, so why would their old youtube friends be offended? and i'm sure youtubers know how fake a lot of filmed stuff is.

what i'm curious about though, is how close charlie was with phil... for some reason i thought they were irl friends and took it as a fact, but now that i read this

He didn't, though - Phil and Charlie met irl one time in March of 2009. Charlie and Stephen were talking and close the entire time Phil and Charlie were also close. In May of 2009 Charlie and Phil stopped talking as much, and Charlie and Stephen got closer. In June of 2009, Charlie and Stephen started dating - the same month that Dan started tweeting Phil, but before they were actually close.

Now, it's entirely possible that looking back years later Charlie was mad at himself for picking Stephen over Phil or mad at Phil for not pursuing him harder. But Phil choosing Dan over Charlie is the one conclusion that is just completely ruled out by the actual timeline. If there was any kind of emotional response happening it would have been from Phil, upset that Charlie chose Stephen over him, and using Dan as a rebound. (Which I don't actually think happened, because I don't think Phil was that upset over 'losing' Charlie for long, but is still a more plausible scenario.)

and ... they weren't even that close, apparently? we really don't know. they met up ONCE? they could have been "close" for internet buddies, but not "share everything about my life" close. sooo, charlie probably didn't even know a lot of what was happening and based his conclusions on the same evidence that we have today (their formspring answers, for example - although i do believe he and phil would have talked about it...idk).
honestly, it's just an infinite loop of "true/false/no one knows".

btw, yeah we don't know if he lied before or later or there was something else, but as always, i choose to believe 1) the answer that was given later 2) the answer that was given after he stopped being a dick and was in an good place emotionally

Re: adam's response - i don't think it means anything, i sometimes leave meaningless and stupid replies to people's pictures too lol

P.S. hurray for japanese studies!!!

BTW lol

[alittledizzy]

and ... they weren't even that close, apparently? we really don't know. they met up ONCE? they could have been "close" for internet buddies, but not "share everything about my life" close. sooo, charlie probably didn't even know a lot of what was happening and based his conclusions on the same evidence that we have today (their formspring answers, for example - although i do believe he and phil would have talked about it...idk).
honestly, it's just an infinite loop of "true/false/no one knows".

btw, yeah we don't know if he lied before or later or there was something else, but as always, i choose to believe 1) the answer that was given later 2) the answer that was given after he stopped being a dick and was in an good place emotionally

Charlie and Phil were very close, just close online primarily. They had a collab channel together (pabloislove) and constantly tweeted about being on the phone to each other, and they played WoW together. Their heavy period of flirtation/affection was late 2008 to about April/May 2009 which kind of gives the impression that after they met irl things fizzled a little. (Which leads to my speculation that maybe Charlie expected something more than Phil gave.)

I suppose there's also the chance they could have met up irl again and kept it private. I don't really think that happened, but it's a possibility.

I'm also fairly certain Phil has deleted some Charlie related tweets that would indicate their closeness, but Charlie has yet to delete anything. I've shared these in the Charlie thread before but I'll stick them here too. (Might replace later with screencaps when I have time, but for now just copying links to originals.)

and a couple gems where Charlie is quoting Phil:

We also know Phil and Stephen continued to be good friends and Phil worked on Apartment Red with Stephen (Charlie's boyfriend) so even if Charlie and Phil lost touch, Charlie still would have had an insight into them for a while. (Not to mention, Charlie was friends with basically everyone else in their youtube social group. Man, his conversations with Chris/crabstickz were a trip.)

[helvetica]

off topic but I was just wondering
where does the word stan come from? from context I think it means make someone ur fave but idk the history behind it ( if there is any)

[000dia000]

off topic but I was just wondering
where does the word stan come from? from context I think it means make someone ur fave but idk the history behind it ( if there is any)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stan_(fan)

A stan is an avid fan and supporter of a celebrity, franchise, film, or group, often a rock/pop musician. The object of the stan's affection is often called their fave. Based on the song "Stan" by American rapper Eminem,the term has frequently been used to describe artist devotees whose fanaticism matches the severity of the obsessive character named Stan in the 2000 Eminem song. The word has been described as a portmanteau of "stalker" and "fan".

[helvetica]

off topic but I was just wondering
where does the word stan come from? from context I think it means make someone ur fave but idk the history behind it ( if there is any)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stan_(fan)

A stan is an avid fan and supporter of a celebrity, franchise, film, or group, often a rock/pop musician. The object of the stan's affection is often called their fave. Based on the song "Stan" by American rapper Eminem,the term has frequently been used to describe artist devotees whose fanaticism matches the severity of the obsessive character named Stan in the 2000 Eminem song. The word has been described as a portmanteau of "stalker" and "fan".

thank you

[melon lord]

Does anyone from the old forum remember turnip? How they said to have sent some asks that riled Dan up? being part of a small friend-of-a-friend style youtuber clique?

Didn't Evan also claim the same thing somewhere? sending dan an ask and getting a response? also someone who is not part of the circle but a bit outside of it?

[x-files theme]

[starlight-still]

This is completely random but I wanted to share.

I saw a reference to "buffyphil" recently, was curious about the remnants of it still floating around the internet, and stumbled upon this from way back in 2004:

http://www.picassohead.com/?id=c356f6f#c356f6f

I found it quite interesting how even back then he was promoting himself (getting that e-mail in the drawing title, clever), building a following, and referring to himself in the superlative It's nice to see a bit of his artwork too.

[000dia000]

This is completely random but I wanted to share.

I saw a reference to "buffyphil" recently, was curious about the remnants of it still floating around the internet, and stumbled upon this from way back in 2004:

http://www.picassohead.com/?id=c356f6f#c356f6f

I found it quite interesting how even back then he was promoting himself (getting that e-mail in the drawing title, clever), building a following, and referring to himself in the superlative It's nice to see a bit of his artwork too.

Should this be psycho-analysed? lol
Seriously, Phil has left such a messy digital footprint online I wonder what else exists of him

[melon lord]

I don't want to stir the shipping pot, but like, does anyone have an idea/theory about the progression from "openly emotional/clearly visiting each other and talking to each other a whole lot" to "absolutely no-homo ever" between the two?

I mean, I'd understand hiding it from the start if there was an issue of family or from fans, but it doesn't make sense to hide/deny anything when they were so open and honest at the beginning. Does that make sense? Like what happened between "I wonder how biology can explain" to "we never dated and never were dating"? Was it the sudden influx of fans? Was it rude people in the community? I've read responses on this forum from members back in the early 09 days that said it seemed normal and nothing worth having a hoohah over. If they were willing to be open about what they were up to, from sharing pics on twitter and dailybooth to basically showing how much time they spent together, what happened that made them turn a 180?

[confusedpanda]

I don't want to stir the shipping pot, but like, does anyone have an idea/theory about the progression from "openly emotional/clearly visiting each other and talking to each other a whole lot" to "absolutely no-homo ever" between the two?

I mean, I'd understand hiding it from the start if there was an issue of family or from fans, but it doesn't make sense to hide/deny anything when they were so open and honest at the beginning. Does that make sense? Like what happened between "I wonder how biology can explain" to "we never dated and never were dating"? Was it the sudden influx of fans? Was it rude people in the community? I've read responses on this forum from members back in the early 09 days that said it seemed normal and nothing worth having a hoohah over. If they were willing to be open about what they were up to, from sharing pics on twitter and dailybooth to basically showing how much time they spent together, what happened that made them turn a 180?

What most likely happened was the vday video leaking on YouTube. Regardless of your views on if it's real or not, that's what probably caused the flip. If it was real, that switch would be a defense coping mechanism towards the situation. Deny anything that has to do with eachother, even if it means lying about our friendship and delete our past so no one knows we were (or are) dating. Basically wanting to cover up any proof that the video could be proven true. If it wasn't real, it was the flux of comments about them being together after the video came out that made them flip. That would make anyone really irritated, specially if you keep telling them it was a prank/wasn't real.

[pearshaped34]

I don't want to stir the shipping pot, but like, does anyone have an idea/theory about the progression from "openly emotional/clearly visiting each other and talking to each other a whole lot" to "absolutely no-homo ever" between the two?

I mean, I'd understand hiding it from the start if there was an issue of family or from fans, but it doesn't make sense to hide/deny anything when they were so open and honest at the beginning. Does that make sense? Like what happened between "I wonder how biology can explain" to "we never dated and never were dating"? Was it the sudden influx of fans? Was it rude people in the community? I've read responses on this forum from members back in the early 09 days that said it seemed normal and nothing worth having a hoohah over. If they were willing to be open about what they were up to, from sharing pics on twitter and dailybooth to basically showing how much time they spent together, what happened that made them turn a 180?

Even though Dan and Phil have always used their twitter accounts for self-promotion back in the days when they also used them to flirt with each other they just generally treated them like they were just a normal personal account. They lacked filters in most areas not just their interactions with each other. I just don't think it occurred to them at the time that anyone would care enough that they had need to protect their privacy.
I think when people started to become not only more interested in them but invested they became more uneasy about how much private information they'd made freely accessible and felt it was no longer appropriate for them to put their personal lives on display.


Another factor that may have played a part is Dan realising his online life wasn't in a magic impenetrable bubble his family would never be able to access.
Like a lot of teenagers with parents who don't know how to internet I think it never occurred to Dan at 18 the stuff he did online would be something his parents (or other family members) would ever know anything about.
Even though he said things that imply his parents have never really got that into the internet to really follow him properly I bet there was a moment in time where he had a panic attack realising everything they might see.
I am mildly curious how in the dark his managed to keep them or if his grandmother is like aware that nakedbooth was once a thing .

[melon lord]

I don't want to stir the shipping pot, but like, does anyone have an idea/theory about the progression from "openly emotional/clearly visiting each other and talking to each other a whole lot" to "absolutely no-homo ever" between the two?

I mean, I'd understand hiding it from the start if there was an issue of family or from fans, but it doesn't make sense to hide/deny anything when they were so open and honest at the beginning. Does that make sense? Like what happened between "I wonder how biology can explain" to "we never dated and never were dating"? Was it the sudden influx of fans? Was it rude people in the community? I've read responses on this forum from members back in the early 09 days that said it seemed normal and nothing worth having a hoohah over. If they were willing to be open about what they were up to, from sharing pics on twitter and dailybooth to basically showing how much time they spent together, what happened that made them turn a 180?

Even though Dan and Phil have always used their twitter accounts for self-promotion back in the days when they also used them to flirt with each other they just generally treated them like they were just a normal personal account. They lacked filters in most areas not just their interactions with each other. I just don't think it occurred to them at the time that anyone would care enough that they had need to protect their privacy.
I think when people started to become not only more interested in them but invested they became more uneasy about how much private information they'd made freely accessible and felt it was no longer appropriate for them to put their personal lives on display.


Another factor that may have played a part is Dan realising his online life wasn't in a magic impenetrable bubble his family would never be able to access.
Like a lot of teenagers with parents who don't know how to internet I think it never occurred to Dan at 18 the stuff he did online would be something his parents (or other family members) would ever know anything about.
Even though he said things that imply his parents have never really got that into the internet to really follow him properly I bet there was a moment in time where he had a panic attack realising everything they might see.
I am mildly curious how in the dark his managed to keep them or if his grandmother is like aware that nakedbooth was once a thing .

Wow sorry for disappearing for so long on this thread

Yeah, I would be mortified saying half of the things they said back then, but I guess at that time people were less cautious

I just found it odd that like along with all the tweets, pics and the entire flirty past, when the "cat is out of the bag" as it were, with the video, why not just come clean and close the topic? Zoella and Alfie tried to keep it secret for a while, didn't they? Before that photo from their laptop got noticed? I mean that is pretty incriminating in itself but you'd think that after the video being leaked you'd just say "yeah" and shut it down forever, but the furious denial just never made sense to me. If there was never any indication ever of them being together then I'd sort of understand that it's a "secret" but there was so much interaction and nudge nudge hints to it that it's become the elephant in the room

as an apology for being late here is a random photo that got me giggling, from phantaray

[helvetica]

this is off topic even in the off topic thread, but I was watching some old school Phil yesterday and in his video called two thousand nine he mentioned talking to a girl on a train that said she recognized him from a commercial where he said "YES",
does that commercial exist? or was he joking?

[000dia000]

this is off topic even in the off topic thread, but I was watching some old school Phil yesterday and in his video called two thousand nine he mentioned talking to a girl on a train that said she recognized him from a commercial where he said "YES",
does that commercial exist? or was he joking?

Phil made an appearance in a few confused.com adverts in 2009, these would have been all over British tv: