Answered · 7 allegations
Every claim about us, answered
Exoliner did not come up with most of these. It found old Discord drama and reposted it. Each claim is below exactly as it was made, followed by what kills it: the accuser taking it back in writing, a record that says otherwise, or something you can check in a minute.
- ANS-01Check it yourselfArya, in a Discord expose
That a girl was made to cut herself and write our operator's name into her thigh, published with an image presented as proof.
The answer
The image was built on an existing photograph of Breckie Hill, an adult content creator, that had been circulating publicly for years. The report shows the two side by side: same underwear, same skin tone, same background, and cropping and rotating the original lines it up at identical size. Arya later stated the images were not real and apologised. The separate self-harm images came from a Twitter post the girl in question said was not her.
Settles it: Reverse image search the original, then compare. The report links the public posts it came from.
Report p.16-25, admission at p.33, apology at p.34 - ANS-02Retracted by the accuserEric, in the document titled the Mariotalentatu files
A collection of screenshots presented as evidence of scamming and of predatory conduct.
The answer
Eric confirmed the document was made in anger and that its contents were not true. The report reproduces that confirmation, along with a message to a third party where he was asked directly whether the document was fake. He and our operator are on speaking terms now, and the report records him agreeing to state publicly that it was fabricated.
Settles it: The document's own author confirming it was made up.
Report p.21, p.55-56, p.62 - ANS-03Check it yourselfThe same document
That serversiding.wtf was seized by another operator because of scams, forcing a rebrand to serversiding.xyz.
The answer
That domain was never ours, so it could not have been seized from us. It was registered by a third party who pointed it at a logging page and then offered to sell it for ten dollars, which we declined. The DNS history is public and shows the redirect.
Settles it: Public DNS records for the domain, plus the seller's own messages.
Report p.46-47 - ANS-04Settled by recordsThe same document
That our operator exit-scammed the buyers of an earlier service.
The answer
Every buyer of the earlier service was given free access to the new one. The report sets out how: three announcements in the main server, two in the buyer server, one in the game logs, and eleven buyers emailed individually. All of them received access and, per the report, still have it.
Settles it: Announcement history and the migrated accounts themselves.
Report p.38 - ANS-05Settled by recordsA dox published on a third-party site
A page publishing our operator's supposed real name, city, phone number and business registration.
The answer
The details belong to somebody else. The report sets out that the name and city are wrong, the phone number does not correspond, and the business registration cited belongs to an unrelated 19 year old, a person who as far as we know still does not know their details were published this way. The page also used a photograph without consent.
Settles it: The registration cited resolves to a different, unrelated person.
Report p.39 - ANS-06Retracted by the accuserCroaxer, repeated by Exoliner
That a member of our staff, Isiah, sent illegal imagery in a group chat.
The answer
This was answered before Exoliner repeated it. The original document's author, LuaU, publicly retracted it and confirmed Isiah never sent it. The person who took the screenshot also acknowledged it was misinformation and apologised. The content came from a different user who had copied Isiah's username and profile picture in the same chat. The report reproduces both retractions. When Isiah put this to Croaxer directly, Croaxer blocked him.
Settles it: Two independent retractions, from the document's author and from the person who took the screenshot.
Report p.436-441 - ANS-07Settled by recordsExoliner, in its counter-document
That our reviews are manufactured and that customers are made to leave five-star ratings to keep access.
The answer
The report goes the other way and checks the reviews left against us. None of the accounts that posted them appear in our transaction records, none supplied a reference number when asked, and the report reproduces Exoliner directing its own buyers to our listing shortly before they appeared.
Settles it: Our transaction records, against the named reviewer accounts.
Report p.308-314, p.399
Why this page is shorter than the document
The report answers more than what is on this page. What is here is the part that can be settled without taking anyone's word for it: accusers who retracted, records that contradict the claim, and images you can reverse search yourself.
The rest of the answers work by explaining the context around a message, and context arguments belong in the full document where there is room to make them properly, not on a summary page where they read as excuses. It is all in the report, unedited.
If you think something on this page is wrong, the correction route is on the legal action page. That applies to everyone, including the people named in it.
Now the other half
That is the case against us. The findings index is the case against exoliner.wtf, and most of it can be checked from a file hash or a company registry.
See the findings