Let's calculate the immorality and mistakes of each side:

People, who are against Andreas:

Ableism (+7);

Manipulation (+3);

Lability;

Document's wordiness;

Radnormals;

Slandering (+6);

Not relativists (Not tolerance);

Condemnation and ridicule of polyamorous people;

Double standards (+3);

Copyright infringement;

The entire document is highly suspect as there is no evidence in some places (+3);

Disclosure of personal secrets (+2);

Why was a minor talking to an adult and using vulgar language? She could have stopped the conversation;

Cyberbullying that still happens today;

What's wrong with self love if this is true?

Andreas:

Manipulation (+2);

Racism (+2);

Slandering;

Lability;

Ableism;

Public insults;

Disclosure of personal secrets;

Double standards (which are caused by trauma, therefore 0.5);

Copyright infringement.

33 VS 10,5

I stopped halfway through the document, bro.

It turned out that Andreas was not a pedophile (They were even just INTERNET friends), since the girl was 18 years old (they confirmed this in the document twice or three times). Anyway the age of sexual consent is 16 yo (15 yo in Sweden).

Andreas was transphobic (but this is not even justified, since at that time that trans man considered himself a woman, AS HE SAY HIMSELF) towards only one person (It's just putting pressure on a weak spot if he knew about his transgender status). And the claims that Simon is straight are not homophobic or transphobic. You're either Radqueer or put on ur pants.

The document is very poorly done, the events are completely mixed up. It feels like they are at the start fed us transphobia so we'd already be mad at Andreas. This is a manipulation of feelings to make people think that accusations without proof are as true as everything else.

The author of the document is clearly picking on Andreas, as they felt that he is self-centered only because he likes his appearance (Or he's a potential narcissist) and the way people literally drool over him. (This is also potential ableism btw). A person becomes a grandiose narcissist only because of trauma or education. If you are offended by the fact that a person considers himself superior to other people, you are a stupid, labile imitation of tolerance (It's very funny so they're pro-queer) and you're just perpetuating the stigma of narcissistic people.

I don't understand how you can not know about this if you respect the author of the document.

In fact, this document looks like crap because there is too much wordiness here that no one need. Insult through insult is a very good way to convey important information, uh-huh. The author of the document also notes that his dislike for Andreas has always been.

The document often throws the blanket onto the authors of the document themselves, who describe in a few sentences how much he love his community, game, etc. Why do we need to know this if we want to get information about Andreas? I see two options: manipulation or fear of being blamed.

I don't understand how Andreas wife didn't notice his self-harm, which he tried to manipulate.

The document also states that he had been friends with his victim for a long time, but Andreas was 29 at the time and she was 16. But at the same time, she helped him in a conflict that happened several years ago🤨🤨. The question is, can a minor resolve a conflict between adults?

I also don't understand how Andreas was accused of promoting drugs when he simply answered people what prescription drugs he takes (these drugs don't work at all, because these are weak medical drugs for mild anxiety) and why he uses weed and etc. By the way, it is, in principle, expected from a drug addict to praise drugs, because that is how the human psyche works (anosognosia, loss of natural joy and psychological defense), especially if a person has low critical thinking about his condition (as we know Andreas has Sukhareva syndrome. Some symptoms: straightforwardness, rigidity, difficulty with theory of mind).

The author of the document constantly screams that Andreas is breaking Swedish law because he is a drug addict, but at the same time the author of the document publicly insults (Article 5.61 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) Andreas and arranges lynching (Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the article includes causing moral harm). I'm not threatening, I'm just saying.

I don't understand how people can simultaneously enjoy reading the ableist insults (psychopath, troubles with the head as an insult, which means you're wrong, "schizophrenia" in the context of Andreas' irrationality, megalomania as an insult) the author says. If you knew Russian, you would discover so much about both sides.

Some examples of ableist insults

The author of the document also says that all people should not take any action and not harm anyone, but then he calls all people with the opposition that they are stupid and should be hit on the head.

Fuck, the author of that post really pulled a stretch by claiming Rumpel’s donations go toward games and weed and that the game isn't free out of the goodness of his heart. It’s fucking obvious the whole conflict was pulled out of his ass — especially considering he’d already revealed he’d always looked down on Andreas. His egocentrism lies in thinking he gets to decide how people should live their lives, even when no harm is being done. If people want to donate — fine, whatever, their choice. By the way, I’d bet he only wrote that take about his group to fish for sympathy and get people donating to him. Like, "Look at me, I’ve been in the fandom for eight years, wasting my life away in some VK group; I’m such a selfless, poor soul — give me money."

Actually I don't understand the logic of some Savid fans. Like they love the adult/teen ship but despise Andreas and still terrorizes people who love his appearance. And this document is more than 5 years old, lol.

At the same time, they lick the remake of David's model and Simon's model, while this is literally Andreas's appearance.

In short: Three brothers fell in love with you, who will you choose?

An ableist who is easily emotional and manipulates people subconsciously.

Depressive potential pedophile manipulator.

A moron with moral nihilism and aempathy.

I don't think either side is holy or evil. Both of them can be justified and humiliated.

I will ask one question that interests me.

Rumpelstiltskin

He's a spinner

Does he know how to make them too?

That's not what how i remember that ep

Anna is not poor

Rumplestiltskin used her yes

She learned real quick how to solve it, how to deal with him

And WON against the Dark One

She was smarter then him

And the way she at the end used the dagger with him, the way she made a deal to him?

She absolutely slayed

Anna vs the Dark One is my favorite of all Dark One encounters

Anna was by far my favourite character to deal with him