Your link is just repeating one of the oldest anti-Xiao Zhan talking points—a narrative that's been circulating…
You don't need to feign innocence. I'm simply pointing out, in plain terms, that the narrative you're trying to sell is tired.
Your own reply gives you away. Calling it "a research article," saying "I don't think it's wrong either," throwing out the clichéd "sharing is caring," and then trying the predictable "I got it from someone else" excuse to distance yourself from responsibility—it all follows the same script.
And then comes the funniest part: "I don't know what narrative is being pushed with this article." Come on. You know exactly what narrative you're trying to push, or you wouldn't be posting it here in the first place.
I've been a fan of Xiao Zhan since 2023, and even I—someone who wasn't around during 2020—can see how stale and repetitive this has become. You're not changing anyone's mind by showing up here to recycle the same old talking points. You're just wasting your own time.
Found an interesting article about XFX.https://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/view/2053/2801#:~:text=AO3%20users%20from%20a%20wide,have%20the%20website%20successfully%20blocked
Your link is just repeating one of the oldest anti-Xiao Zhan talking points—a narrative that's been circulating since 2020 as part of a coordinated effort to divide the Xiao Fei Xia fandom because his antis believed they couldn't bring him down any other way.
That campaign has already fallen apart. The lies have been exposed, the motives behind them are well documented, and many of the people responsible have ended up facing lawsuits, with some even prosecuted on criminal charges.
So there are only two possibilities here. Either you've been misled and are unknowingly recycling anti propaganda—in which case you should do your own research before repeating it—or you know exactly what you're doing.
If it's the latter, then continuing to spread a narrative that has already been thoroughly debunked doesn't make you informed or principled. It simply shows you're willing to abandon honesty in order to push an agenda.
Your own reply gives you away. Calling it "a research article," saying "I don't think it's wrong either," throwing out the clichéd "sharing is caring," and then trying the predictable "I got it from someone else" excuse to distance yourself from responsibility—it all follows the same script.
And then comes the funniest part: "I don't know what narrative is being pushed with this article." Come on. You know exactly what narrative you're trying to push, or you wouldn't be posting it here in the first place.
I've been a fan of Xiao Zhan since 2023, and even I—someone who wasn't around during 2020—can see how stale and repetitive this has become. You're not changing anyone's mind by showing up here to recycle the same old talking points. You're just wasting your own time.
That campaign has already fallen apart. The lies have been exposed, the motives behind them are well documented, and many of the people responsible have ended up facing lawsuits, with some even prosecuted on criminal charges.
So there are only two possibilities here. Either you've been misled and are unknowingly recycling anti propaganda—in which case you should do your own research before repeating it—or you know exactly what you're doing.
If it's the latter, then continuing to spread a narrative that has already been thoroughly debunked doesn't make you informed or principled. It simply shows you're willing to abandon honesty in order to push an agenda.