The fine details are being hotly debated by others in the replies. But briefly:
Performed badly wrongly in deeply fucked up relationships that included a profoundly hazardous unwise mix of trauma cases, heavy drugs, other extreme kink, extreme emotional neediness, narcissism, OUTRAGEOUS demands for control and obsequious support absolutely no-one should have EVER granted him, even in part, based on his self-characterization.
AND TO BE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR: sometimes Brent still says he needs outrageous amounts of power and control that no sane person should ever give a person so wounded. To which I say...DON'T DO THAT. THAT WAS REALLY STUPID WHEN BLACK LOTUS DID IT, AND IT WOULD BE BEYOND PROFOUNDLY STUPID TO REPEAT.
Obviously! (I wish).
Relatedly, I have come to a motto for relationships: you always want the more compassionate aware person to win the principle dominance games.
One way to frame the SERIOUS BADNESS was a house full of famous brilliant people (with neurotypes like mine, that lead some of us to seek out scenarios in which we DEFINITELY won't be the 'bad guy;) that endorsed and supported and looked the other way while Brent was being given power he was manifestly --as he described very publicly-- ill-equipped to wield compassionately.
Which brings me to the next SERIOUSLY DESTRUCTIVE thing Brent did:
Brent failed to push back on the lies. Bad for him, worse for the scene, because his tacit endorsement of his own immolation hurt the epistemic and reputational commons BADLY --and permissioned the space for unhinged scapegoating dynamics that are vibe poison with very wide reach.
x.com/RichDecibels/status/20…
how would you describe “the legitimately bad stuff Brent did”? I am reading a very long post about how good he is. but that phrase kinda sticks out y’know? double-click please sir