Sydney Towles - Tik Toker with cancer being trolled

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am menopausal and I have breast cancer and I hate SM.

However, if this young person needs to have a SM account and post stuff, I have no problem. I also don't have a problem if she is faking cancer. Her followers or demographics are not influencing my own journey and treatment.

So, whatever gets her through whatever she is undergoing is fine by me. I choose not to watch her.

Sorry, correction. If she is peddling some misinformation about cancer and treatment options, I will have a huge problem. But, if she is just living her life and making videos in her bikini, I don't have a problem.

If she is chugging down beer while undergoing chemo...i will have a huge problem.

If she has a face mask on while getting a bikini wax..I don't care. If her trolls point that she should not need to get her pubes waxed because she will lose ALL HAIR EVERYWHERE because of chemo...I don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am menopausal and I have breast cancer and I hate SM.

However, if this young person needs to have a SM account and post stuff, I have no problem. I also don't have a problem if she is faking cancer. Her followers or demographics are not influencing my own journey and treatment.

So, whatever gets her through whatever she is undergoing is fine by me. I choose not to watch her.

She most definitely has cancer.

I’m sorry you’re going through this.

[Anonymous]

Some of this hate seems obvious and almost self inviting, as if the hate will also bring her views. And views make her money, even if she's not asking for it outright. It's obvious that posting about your chemo infusion and the nausea and making a "feel bad for me" style post and then soon after posting a scuba video from the Caribbean is going to cause people to hate and doubt you. But that's still engagement.

I dislike all SM stuff like this. I really don't like attention seekers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am menopausal and I have breast cancer and I hate SM.

However, if this young person needs to have a SM account and post stuff, I have no problem. I also don't have a problem if she is faking cancer. Her followers or demographics are not influencing my own journey and treatment.

So, whatever gets her through whatever she is undergoing is fine by me. I choose not to watch her.

Sorry, correction. If she is peddling some misinformation about cancer and treatment options, I will have a huge problem. But, if she is just living her life and making videos in her bikini, I don't have a problem.

If she is chugging down beer while undergoing chemo...i will have a huge problem.

If she has a face mask on while getting a bikini wax..I don't care. If her trolls point that she should not need to get her pubes waxed because she will lose ALL HAIR EVERYWHERE because of chemo...I don't care.

Did you read the article? She’s going to memorial Sloan Kettering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of this hate seems obvious and almost self inviting, as if the hate will also bring her views. And views make her money, even if she's not asking for it outright. It's obvious that posting about your chemo infusion and the nausea and making a "feel bad for me" style post and then soon after posting a scuba video from the Caribbean is going to cause people to hate and doubt you. But that's still engagement.

I dislike all SM stuff like this. I really don't like attention seekers

To me it seems like she’s a young girl trying to live her life. She posted scuba vacation type videos before she got sick.

Why would anyone hate someone bc they went scuba diving while taking a break from grueling chemo treatment?

[Anonymous]

I feel terrible she was trolled, and I don't relate to posting this sort of hateful stuff about someone you don't know. Hopefully this article will clear things up in terms of people doubting her diagnosis.

I also think it's not right of the NY Times to name a private person who trolled a famous public figure profiting off social media. A lot of social media following is due to "snark followers". They pay the bills as much as the lovely and kind followers do when it comes to people who are only famous for social media and not personal true achievements like acting, singing, sports...So it is an unfortunate price of fame and you have to know about it and decide if it is worth it or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost every well-known TikToker, Instagramer, or general influencer has a snark subreddit dedicated to them.

The people on those subreddits are brutal. And the #1 rule of all these snark subreddits is always "no defending" whoever the target of the snark may be. That's total BS. Why should these redditors be allowed to post whatever they want without anyone being able to fact check them or provide proof that they are lying?

I will say, though, that the Scamanda podcast and tv show really, really made me skeptical each time someone I follow shares that they have cancer or other major medical issue. It's sad that that is the case because so many people do fake it for monetary gains.

You know what? F these scammers. They are the absolute worst and they deserve everything they have coming. They have no issues preying upon others, so why should we care when they are the ones in the crosshairs?

Because...it doesn't sound like Sydney Towles is faking it? I mean, what reputable oncologist would go on the record saying a person has cancer if they don't? If that doesn't shut the haters down what will?

But that’s just the risk you take in that line of work. The reputation proceeds her. Like ACAB, or similar. People err on the side of they’re faking it for clout, or, they’re lying. Nobody is forcing her to be an influencer. It goes with the territory.

Really? Death threats? People calling your oncology center to complain about you, and encourage them not to treat you?

As far as contacting people IRL, no, don’t think that I agree with that, but I think that people should be skeptical and not blindly trust these scammers, they are one and the same. Frauds. This one just happens to have cancer, but I don’t think that gives them a free pass. Would you suddenly have compassion for Trump if he had cancer? Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of this hate seems obvious and almost self inviting, as if the hate will also bring her views. And views make her money, even if she's not asking for it outright. It's obvious that posting about your chemo infusion and the nausea and making a "feel bad for me" style post and then soon after posting a scuba video from the Caribbean is going to cause people to hate and doubt you. But that's still engagement.

I dislike all SM stuff like this. I really don't like attention seekers

To me it seems like she’s a young girl trying to live her life. She posted scuba vacation type videos before she got sick.

Why would anyone hate someone bc they went scuba diving while taking a break from grueling chemo treatment?

I'm PP. I don't care and think people should live their lives how they want. But from what I've seen and read about other people, it's the idea of " I'm going to make posts for you to feel bad for me for attention and engagement" and that annoys people so when they post these happy in the Caribbean posts, people think they are inauthentic. I think it boils down to 2 things.

1. People have a weird jealousy over those with a large SM following, even when they have cancer.

2. People want to be "the one" who exposes the liar and then they get all the attention.

Unfortunately there have been enough fakers out there that people have become much quicker to jump on the "fake" train.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel terrible she was trolled, and I don't relate to posting this sort of hateful stuff about someone you don't know. Hopefully this article will clear things up in terms of people doubting her diagnosis.

I also think it's not right of the NY Times to name a private person who trolled a famous public figure profiting off social media. A lot of social media following is due to "snark followers". They pay the bills as much as the lovely and kind followers do when it comes to people who are only famous for social media and not personal true achievements like acting, singing, sports...So it is an unfortunate price of fame and you have to know about it and decide if it is worth it or not.

Why? It’s publicly available information. Reddit didn’t disclose the name of the snarker. The snarker made herself known by her own actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost every well-known TikToker, Instagramer, or general influencer has a snark subreddit dedicated to them.

The people on those subreddits are brutal. And the #1 rule of all these snark subreddits is always "no defending" whoever the target of the snark may be. That's total BS. Why should these redditors be allowed to post whatever they want without anyone being able to fact check them or provide proof that they are lying?

I will say, though, that the Scamanda podcast and tv show really, really made me skeptical each time someone I follow shares that they have cancer or other major medical issue. It's sad that that is the case because so many people do fake it for monetary gains.

You know what? F these scammers. They are the absolute worst and they deserve everything they have coming. They have no issues preying upon others, so why should we care when they are the ones in the crosshairs?

Because...it doesn't sound like Sydney Towles is faking it? I mean, what reputable oncologist would go on the record saying a person has cancer if they don't? If that doesn't shut the haters down what will?

But that’s just the risk you take in that line of work. The reputation proceeds her. Like ACAB, or similar. People err on the side of they’re faking it for clout, or, they’re lying. Nobody is forcing her to be an influencer. It goes with the territory.

Really? Death threats? People calling your oncology center to complain about you, and encourage them not to treat you?

As far as contacting people IRL, no, don’t think that I agree with that, but I think that people should be skeptical and not blindly trust these scammers, they are one and the same. Frauds. This one just happens to have cancer, but I don’t think that gives them a free pass. Would you suddenly have compassion for Trump if he had cancer? Exactly.

Uh, yes? Even though I despise the man, I’d have compassion for him. That is what makes me human, not a psychopath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost every well-known TikToker, Instagramer, or general influencer has a snark subreddit dedicated to them.

The people on those subreddits are brutal. And the #1 rule of all these snark subreddits is always "no defending" whoever the target of the snark may be. That's total BS. Why should these redditors be allowed to post whatever they want without anyone being able to fact check them or provide proof that they are lying?

I will say, though, that the Scamanda podcast and tv show really, really made me skeptical each time someone I follow shares that they have cancer or other major medical issue. It's sad that that is the case because so many people do fake it for monetary gains.

You know what? F these scammers. They are the absolute worst and they deserve everything they have coming. They have no issues preying upon others, so why should we care when they are the ones in the crosshairs?

Because...it doesn't sound like Sydney Towles is faking it? I mean, what reputable oncologist would go on the record saying a person has cancer if they don't? If that doesn't shut the haters down what will?

But that’s just the risk you take in that line of work. The reputation proceeds her. Like ACAB, or similar. People err on the side of they’re faking it for clout, or, they’re lying. Nobody is forcing her to be an influencer. It goes with the territory.

Really? Death threats? People calling your oncology center to complain about you, and encourage them not to treat you?

As far as contacting people IRL, no, don’t think that I agree with that, but I think that people should be skeptical and not blindly trust these scammers, they are one and the same. Frauds. This one just happens to have cancer, but I don’t think that gives them a free pass. Would you suddenly have compassion for Trump if he had cancer? Exactly.

But she is not a scammer. Or a fraud. She has a rare form of cancer, and at age 25, she is stage 4. She shouldn’t be able to talk about it publicly? Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was fascinating and sad. I wonder why they only revealed the name of one. Was that person so much worse?

Op. Not sure but I also wondered why they chose to disclose her, and with so much detail- where she’s from, her job, and name. Hopefully it will teach her and others a lesson, but I guess I feel like they could have done it more gently. People expect to be anonymous

If you leave enough clues that people can figure out who you are, you should not expect to be anonymous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost every well-known TikToker, Instagramer, or general influencer has a snark subreddit dedicated to them.

The people on those subreddits are brutal. And the #1 rule of all these snark subreddits is always "no defending" whoever the target of the snark may be. That's total BS. Why should these redditors be allowed to post whatever they want without anyone being able to fact check them or provide proof that they are lying?

I will say, though, that the Scamanda podcast and tv show really, really made me skeptical each time someone I follow shares that they have cancer or other major medical issue. It's sad that that is the case because so many people do fake it for monetary gains.

You know what? F these scammers. They are the absolute worst and they deserve everything they have coming. They have no issues preying upon others, so why should we care when they are the ones in the crosshairs?

Because...it doesn't sound like Sydney Towles is faking it? I mean, what reputable oncologist would go on the record saying a person has cancer if they don't? If that doesn't shut the haters down what will?

But that’s just the risk you take in that line of work. The reputation proceeds her. Like ACAB, or similar. People err on the side of they’re faking it for clout, or, they’re lying. Nobody is forcing her to be an influencer. It goes with the territory.

Really? Death threats? People calling your oncology center to complain about you, and encourage them not to treat you?

As far as contacting people IRL, no, don’t think that I agree with that, but I think that people should be skeptical and not blindly trust these scammers, they are one and the same. Frauds. This one just happens to have cancer, but I don’t think that gives them a free pass. Would you suddenly have compassion for Trump if he had cancer? Exactly.

But she is not a scammer. Or a fraud. She has a rare form of cancer, and at age 25, she is stage 4. She shouldn’t be able to talk about it publicly? Why?

Because she makes money from what she posts. Some people aren’t blind to the fact that these influencers curate “perfect” lives, exaggerate stories of woe, and embellish every other aspect of their life, in an attempt to make money through likes and followers and the sponsorships they get from scamming people. As I said and will say again, the reputation of other scammy influencers proceeds them. It’s the cost of doing business that some people won’t trust you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel terrible she was trolled, and I don't relate to posting this sort of hateful stuff about someone you don't know. Hopefully this article will clear things up in terms of people doubting her diagnosis.

I also think it's not right of the NY Times to name a private person who trolled a famous public figure profiting off social media. A lot of social media following is due to "snark followers". They pay the bills as much as the lovely and kind followers do when it comes to people who are only famous for social media and not personal true achievements like acting, singing, sports...So it is an unfortunate price of fame and you have to know about it and decide if it is worth it or not.

Why? It’s publicly available information. Reddit didn’t disclose the name of the snarker. The snarker made herself known by her own actions.

Did you read the article? The NYT disclosed her name. And whoever found her - the NYT chose to keep her anonymous- had to expend a great deal of effort sleuthing and putting together info to identify her. Reddit users- like DCUM users- assume anonymity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was fascinating and sad. I wonder why they only revealed the name of one. Was that person so much worse?

Op. Not sure but I also wondered why they chose to disclose her, and with so much detail- where she’s from, her job, and name. Hopefully it will teach her and others a lesson, but I guess I feel like they could have done it more gently. People expect to be anonymous

If you leave enough clues that people can figure out who you are, you should not expect to be anonymous.

That’s not accurate and you know it