In the aftermath of the cancellation, Kerzner has authored several narratives about and around us, the events surrounding the 'Big Ugly Fight' and other things beside. Because of the sheer breadth and scope of them, I will not be examining all of them here, but I will simply choose the most representative examples. 

Rest assured: for every example I am choosing, there are many similar ones— this is something I can produce and organize, if necessary, though I do not think that, at this point, that is a very pressing need if we consider everything that has come before. I have the entirety of Kerzner's "Lianarama" Discord server logs from the date of October 4th  2024  onwards . 

In her It's Not Therapy radio series episode Why Your Apologies Don't Work on October 25, 2024, At the 37 minutes and 22 seconds mark, Liana Kerzner portrays the exchange as follows:

Now here's an interesting one where a story that a guy blew up on me, but I actually had to accept that he did not accept my apology. So here we go practicing what I preach breached. Here we go. Okay.

It was a tense situation. And this actually ended the friendship, at least for now.

A friend of mine accused me of acting like his therapist. Now we all know I am not a therapist, but I was going very slowly, being very careful because he previously accused me of being too mean to him by using blunter language because I was trying to avoid anything that remotely sounded like therapy, but I over corrected. Right?

Even though he was inappropriately angry. He was accusing me of a deliberateness that wasn't there. Ha, there's the I can relate to that too.

I expressed exactly what I just said to you. I accepted that he was angry. I had no intention of sounding like a therapist. It was, oh, I said I was sorry. I'm assuming here, but it was that typical. Oh, you've admitted wrongdoing. Get her, right? Not healthy.

Right. He just kept ranting.

After a while, I got a word in edgewise and said, "did you hear me say I was sorry?" His response was, "yeah, do you want a medal?"

No. I didn't want a medal. I wanted confirmation that he'd heard me, right? He was really going. I didn't know if he was capable of listening.

But that "you want a medal?" It was at that moment I decided this was all the waste of my time.

He was not going to accept my apology. He wanted to be angry at me. He was not in a forgiving mood.

It was in the apology. He didn't take it.
I began to wind down the conversation. That kind of lashing out when you are sincere, that indicates something's gone very wrong in the conversation. And I was pretty sure that (it was) nothing I'd done since I changed my approach to try to make him more comfortable again over corrected nothing I'd done warranted that kind of lashing out.

And context: it was far from the first time this individual's misery got the better of him. 

It is astonishing, and it bears remarking that this is an incredibly abusive framework. Not only is this a gross mischaracterization of the events that you have now had a chance to witness, but it is abusive to imply that Asher 'lashed out' when, after three days of being constantly belittled, embattled, condescended to and verbally abused, he responded in a cold and detached manner when it turned out it had all been 'calculated'. And, furthermore, to imply that Kerzner had done nothing to warrant any kind of 'lashing out' she thinks she received, when her conduct was perfectly abominable. Had Asher truly lashed out after that display, it would not have been unwarranted. 

Nevertheless, he did not, and that is a matter of record.

As we have mentioned before, Asher did not start speaking up about the cancellation video until 19 days after its publication. During that time, not only was I approached by several individuals in regards to the cancellation, but we were also immediately identified by third parties not intimately connected to us or the situation (as already demonstrated in the introduction to the project claims.)

Kerzner, however, started 'vagueposting' about the situation as early as October 5th on Facebook:

The day after the video was published on Youtube, friends of mine commented on the video.

Still in shock from the distorted portrayal, at that moment I felt that Kerzner was repeating the same pattern that she had established in her 'Very Ugly Fight' with Asher: I got the impression that she wanted us to be angry. She wanted us to lash out. It almost seemed like she wanted our participation in our own character assassination. At the time, I decided to remain as I had been in public: silent.

 However, as has already been established in the preceding chapters, Kerzner began talking about us and the situation on her radio show, youtube channel, discord server and Patreon. Her first volley of episodes, such as 'Let's Talk About Manly Tears',  were specifically directed at Asher.  

After October 19th, and several weeks of Asher freely writing his protestations on his own social media account, Kerzner gave the following self-aggrandizing account of the 'Very Ugly Fight', complete with diagnostic analysis on November 25th:

Kerzner assures her server that she spoke to Asher about his 'transphobia'— implying that her objection was in place at the end of  September when the 'Very Ugly Fight' took place, and that Asher went 'at length' about how he couldn't possibly be transphobic. 

However, as you have seen, that is not what happened at all. Kerzner never mentioned transphobia during her argument with Asher, and she certainly did not mention it to me during the two and a half weeks where Asher was returning to baseline. The term, in fact, did not come into play until the cancellation video. My conversations with Liana up until the 'Very Ugly Fight' were normal and not contentious, so she cannot claim that she was afraid that I was going to blow up at her.

Simply put: She is lying.

On December 27th, 2024, Kerzner then stated the following:

It will be useful for the reader to know that, at this point when Asher started speaking up, we were already getting reliable information about the mischaracterizations and untruths Kerzner had advanced. This December 27th skeet is  particularly egregious because Asher and I did not 'run away.' If anyone did, it was Kerzner who told us she needed time away after her abusive manipulation attempt backfired on Asher.  We respected that and did not contact her. As I have said, I was aware that she would make a statement about the game cancellation. I did not, however, know the contents of it (unlike what she has said to her server). I can now confidently say that the reason she did not approach me about it is because then I would know the magnitude of the lie she was about to tell and would have made a statement myself.

As Kerzner herself said in the week following the release of the video, whomever goes public with the story first controls the narrative. Her motives, in retrospect, appear very clear to me now.

Notice that Kerzner has immediately engaged one of the red flags of abuser language: "They're only seeking attention." 

It should also be noted that Kerzner implies that we should have tried to approach her and 'work things out'...  after she publicly lied about us in her cancellation video . This is an abusive framework that implies that victims of public falsehoods are obligated to negotiate or be conciliatory to their abusers in private. 

If anything, it is the person who has lied who is under obligation to provide restitution to the injured party, and the injured party owes nothing to the party who has lied. Kerzner claims that we "declared war" because we engaged her in  the same arena into which she chose to drag the conversation: the public sphere. If that is a declaration of war, how would one classify Kerzner's inciting actions?

On January 18th, Kerzner propagated the lie that we 'decided to blow it up' (supposedly, the 'Very Ugly Fight') and that that's when Kerzner decided to cancel the game:

This alternative timeline makes no sense when you look at the transcripts. Kerzner was he only person who was 'blowing' anything up— she was abusive, dismissive, insulting and cruel towards Asher, and Asher never descended to her level of insulting and name-calling. That he mirrored her very briefly at the end in a cold, sarcastic manner has now been transformed into something else entirely, and her behavior has been completely erased from the narrative, replaced by victimization. Take notice of Kerzner's server narrative aligning us with a 'hate campaign' and discussing ways to suppress us via legal intimidation. 

Kerzner's mention of me taking shots at the fact she has a disability will be addressed shortly in the next section. However, I would like to point out that Asher  does have a disability and he  is a legally disabled individual. When Kerzner's friend Bianca made a dismissive comment at me implying that my only source of income was church gigging, I countered it with the fact that no, I had steady employment. Kerzner's reaction (misquoting me, incidentally), for someone who was outraged I had 'taken shots' at the fact she has a disability, is telling:

Kerzner openly mocked an individual who has not been able to work for a decade because of his disability, and mocked him for being to incapacitated to even fill out the paperwork necessary to keep him on Medicaid.​ This is pretty cruel mockery from the peer counselor fighting against mental health stigma— and a comment that was "100% liked" in the server by Bobby Calloway, a person I've observed serves as part of Liana's Mean Girl trio alongside Aileyn. Liana Kerzner has promoted Bobby Calloway on her own show talking about the stigma of silent disabilities. Kerzner mocked Asher —backed by Calloway— for being too disabled to work, and no-one in her server, including a fellow 'advocate', seems to have considered that a hypocrisy or a contradiction. 

This speaks volumes as to the toxic cult-like environment that exists in the Lianarama server, the same kind of dynamic at work that descended upon Vagabond.

When Asher spoke up about Liana not having brought up transphobia at all, on January 19th, 2025 Liana Kerzner altered the narrative yet again:

This is another red flag that indicates an abusive dynamic at work re-framing past events. You have now seen the nature of the 'Very Ugly Fight' and what abuse Asher endured at Kerzner's hands. This skeet by Kerzner is essentially a reframed blaming of the victim— After being abused by Kerzner for three days, and then  lied about to a wide audience on Youtube, radio, social media and discord, Kerzner is now implying that Asher getting upset is proof that Kerzner was right about him—including, by insinuation, the transphobia.

Kezner has attempted to double down on the transphobia narrative by cherry-picking examples to her audience in order to continue something that can only be called character assassination. 
For example, after Asher denounced Kerzner weaponizing mental health stigma against him (and others), Kerzner responded in a September 24th video ironically called Mental Health Stigma: What it is, and what it isn't . The video itself is a case study in improper framing of stigma, but the section of interest comes at minute 31:

"​I mean, it’s like inception, right? It’s throwing mental health stigma at me—the accusation of mental health stigma—because I referred to something in the colloquial meaning of “crazy” while I was apologizing to the trans woman he attacked, since she knew he associated with me. Actually, it was another trans woman he also went after—notice a pattern here? But, you know, claiming that’s mental health stigma—one could argue that’s manipulative. That’s manipulating the situation, because this is now distracting from the reality of what he did, and two wrongs don’t make a right." — Time-stamped link

Kerzner here demonstrates two sophistical devices at work. The first one exists in the nesting framework she uses to introduce the topic: a tu quoque argument, also known as the appeal to hypocrisy.  The illogical framework is intended to dismantle any accusations of Kerzner actually employing stigma— of which there is now considerable evidence in this archive, quick as she is to weaponize the diagnosis of her critics for social ammunition. Kerzner then shifts the topic to Asher's alleged transphobic activities and deploys the second sophistical device: The fallacy of exclusion , or more colloquially known as cherry picking, in which Kerzner leaves out data that contradicts her premise while only presenting evidence that bolsters it. Kerzner concludes that Asher is a transphobe because he 'went after' another trans woman to her audience by saying:

"Notice a pattern here?"

What Kerzner is leaving out is the fact that ​the individual in question was a member of Poppy Diabolique's inner circle. And  most (not all) people in Poppy's circle are trans women. It is perfectly understandable that Asher would have a bone to pick with one of Poppy's closest friends. Their argument, in fact, had nothing to do with the woman's identity but with the fact that it seemed like she was building an argument geared towards the normalization of fictional content found in 'pro-shipping' stances, in the real world.

Terminology: "pro-shipping" features fictional pairings of characters that could be considered problematic and/or illegal, if they were to exist in the real world.  These themes often revolve around incest, abusive dynamics, inappropriate relationships between minors and adults, and other such themes. Poppy Diabolique, for example, frequently posts fanfiction and art featuring Anna and Elsa from  Frozen in an incestuous relationship.

Their disagreement had nothing to do with this person's gender identity, and it is not out of bounds to assume that a good number of people in possession of all of the facts, not Kerzner's truncated narrative, would see Asher had reasonable grounds to express concern. Especially since the individual that Kerzner was defending is someone who has admitted an attraction to minors and who participated in a server where there were some serious allegations regarding interactions between adults and minors.

This individual was also named by one ex-member of Poppy's circle, who entered her server while quite young,  with the following allegation:

It is also during her defense of this individual on Bluesky that Kerzner repeated and advanced the narrative that Kiwifarms had attempted to use against Asher — which we will see in its appropriate section.

Some may object to my description of Kerzner's tactics as sophistical— and yet, unlike Kerzner when she tried to leverage the term in her argument with Asher, I can point to very specific behaviors, wordings, phrasings, and verifiable distortions between Kerzner's account of events and documented reality that support the evidence that Kerzner was being deceitful through fallacious arguments and truncated information— actual sophistry.

Allow me to demonstrate Kerzner's arguments and rhetorical devices at work, briefly:

A) Liana Kerzner, over the last 17 months, has been engaged in a contentious relationship with two gay men. 
B) Furthermore, we have also received accounts from other gay men with whom she has severed relationships dramatically. 
C) Furthermore, several of our friends (who are, themselves, gay)  who were aware of the situation have made comments on the situation and Kerzner on Bluesky and her YouTube channel. Kerzner has labeled them trolls, harassers, stalkers, or worse, and has fought contentiously with them over comments. 
D) Finally, Poppy Diabolique herself is a lesbian— she is not attracted to cis nor trans men, and her relationship with Kerzner was severed as of November of 2025.

Therefore, Liana Kerzner is a homophobe. Notice a pattern here?

It is, indeed, a fairly ridiculous reasoning— but it is quite frequently one that Kerzner employs as an immediate recourse when she wants to shift the narrative away from her own actions. For example:

By now the pattern of Kerzner's contentious relationships shouldn't surprise the reader (indeed, every single rupture seems to read the same). But how Kerzner responded to the confrontation is very telling:

Shockingly poor grasp of Celtic mythology notwithstanding, I think it is important to see what Kerzner did, immediately. This is not unlike her argument with Lana in which Lana calling Kerzner out on a lie meant she was referring to the "lying Jew" stereotype. It appears that identity to Kerzner is not something to exist within, but to capitalize, and to weaponize outwardly. 

This is why my critique of her anger problems is rebranded as 'sexist' in her server, and why being called a Banshee who never knew love is sexist and gingerphobic, why my criticism of her behavior is 'misogyny,' because Kerzner is a woman who has red hair. Therefore, those are the  only reasons anyone could ever object to something Liana Kerzner ever did.

The woman who leveraged the epithet at Liana, incidentally, is of Irish descent. And has red hair.

No , Asher was not transphobic.  Asher has been in conflict with Poppy and her circle, who happen to be trans, but his objections to them have nothing to do with their identity. During the same time period, Asher also got into arguments with cis men and women (and far more men than women), and yet Kerzner is not making the argument that Asher is both a misandrist and a misogynist.  If Kerzner were honest — and I suggest that the evidence shows that she is not— she would take the full sample into account and see that the data does not match her conclusion.  But since her conclusion  must be valid in order to discredit Asher, then data needs to be discarded and massaged to fix an  a priori   conclusion.  

The majority of the individuals still associated with Poppy Diabolique's circle exhibit ​very problematic and troubling behavior​ that has nothing to do with their identity, and far more to do with the character of the person leading the sphere and the kind of community and environment that they foster. Even members who may be newly-ousted from Poppy's circle —such as Saige and Audrey— still exhibit many markers of the behavior that characterized them while in 'The Foundation,' and so it is almost inevitable we'd have significant disagreements when encountered.  Saige and Audrey themselves have sought to gatekeep the concept that they, and only those they approve of, have been harmed by Poppy (and by extension Liana's) actions and dismissed Asher's grievances as nothing but 'a twitter beef.'  As you have seen by the evidence presented here, that portrayal is far from the reality of the situation.

In the subsequent disagreement, Audrey and Saige behaved quite poorly (as you see in the blog entry) and then tried to erase the context of the argument by erasing their replies, and putting forth a truncated narrative. Having captured all of their posts, I restored the full context to the events. Unsurprisingly (as they exist within the same sphere as Liana and Poppy), both used weaponized boundaries and competitive victimhood as an attempt to control someone's behavior. Audrey leveled mental health stigma by implying my husband was 'manic' and 'taking out his mental health problems on others', while Saige leveled sexism and racism at me.

Since the event, Asher has written about their words and actions and pointed out several key points of hypocrisy— such as Saige's whiplash-usage of mental health stigma while also condemning mental health stigma.

I have noticed that in each documented instance in which Saige and Audrey, Poppy or Kerzner state that mentally ill individuals deserve empathy and understanding, it never quite seems to apply to the people they are dealing with and with whom they enter into conflict.  More often than not, this compassion and understanding are touted as ideals that float above tangible reality while those who invoke it remain at liberty to act in a manner that is contrary to these stated, lofty goals. 

These individuals are, to my judgement, manipulative. All four of the ones featured here behave in ways that they later publicly deny, and then seek to bury the evidence of it by covering their tracks, deleting comments and overlaying different narratives. They talk at length, and at liberty, about the people they target, speaking in insinuations with signifiers so as to cue their audiences in on the identity of their targets for content and sympathy. All the while, they claim to maintain an external veneer of respectability because they can claim they didn't  name anyone, and then they complain when their targets respond directly to their insinuations.

The game that is played is one of a perpetual chain of innuendo, insinuation, signifiers and circular misery-farming in which both target and targeter are expected to maintain a cycle that never breaks as they launch vague salvos across each other's bows.

The worst thing one could do to disrupt this perpetual game of mutual sympathy accrual and long-term attrition is to  name names, point out deeds, and show evidence . That is an unforgivable sin in the economy of competitive victimhood and long-form grievance-farming, since vagueness is profitable for social capital. And naming and showing evidence just so happens to be the thing that Asher does most often. It is, then, no surprise that to these individuals he simply must be anathema. Such an individual puts the entire transactional cycle in peril.

This manipulative routine, however, has nothing to do with their gender identities —Kerzner is a cisgender woman, after all, and Kerzner's moderators (Aileyn, Per and Bobby) all display the same behaviors and are of various gender identities including cisgender. Rather, it is their ​actions, their models of belief​ and the specific medium in which they move and operate that inform my judgement: all of them are, or have been, or seek to be, Youtubers/streamers seeking to speak with some authority within the mental health and culture influencer sphere. They all employ 'therapy speak' (a term employed by Saige often) to muddy concepts, turn the notion of boundaries into weapons of control, and constantly frame strong opposition and critics as 'haters' and 'stalkers', turning the act of disagreement —or indeed, at times, even asking a question—  into abuse that is profitable to their images as embattled —but brave people.

I have strong evidence to believe that Kerzner, as well as Poppy, Saige and Audrey mobilized their communities to brigade-report my husband to get him banned from Bluesky. You will see some of that evidence later on. Bluesky's moderation is notoriously easy to abuse. Its moderation team is singularly incompetent and non-responsive, and a large amount of its moderation is automated and most automated decision are seldom revised. If someone can get a large enough number of reports filed within a short period of time, the target will most likely suffer a suspension or some other form of sanction. Asher was inconvenient to all four individuals in question because his voice was gaining traction. Subsequently, he was banned from Bluesky for, essentially, naming his abusers (this is not an idle claim— Asher was able to download the .car file of his account shortly before it was deleted, and his entire Bluesky timeline is going to be restored for everyone to peruse, soon.)

Asher, then, simply wrote on his blog— his own personal space. He wrote about Kerzner's actions, about Audrey and Saige and their hypocrisy, and most importantly:  why he reached the conclusions he has reached. To these women, this is tantamount to dangerous stalking. Audrey, for example, has said on Bluesky:

The level of mental health stigma on display is through the roof, of course. When I confronted Audrey directly and called her toxic,  Audrey and Saige mobilized their community. As they could not get me banned, they simply ​mobilized their community to report me under the vaguest and most easily-abused tag on Bluesky, the  rude tag. Out of roughly 1.6k posts on my Bluesky account, the two posts where I directly confronted Audrey got my account permanently censored for "being disrespectful to other users" (according to the automated moderation e-mail. I've never received a response to my moderation appeals.) Calling another user a 'broken nobody' in an astonishing display of mental health stigma, apparently, is not being disrespectful to others... but confronting the person saying it, is.

You can see the asymmetry at play, and the dynamics that these individuals weaponize. Incidentally, none of these four women told us 'no'— it was Asher who said 'no' to Kerzner when she sought to tear him down into submission. We said 'no' to Audrey and Saige when they told us that speaking up about our experiences at Poppy and Liana's hands was, somehow, minimizing their victimhood and demanded we should stay quiet, and Asher said 'no' to Poppy when she sought to make him responsible for enforcing her own boundaries and kotow to her accusations without defending himself.

And all four women can't stand it, a whole year later. 

Kerzner, in particular, took great delight upon my branding. You can hear her go on about it on her radio show (potential circulation: 3 million) episode "Are You (Accidentally) an A**hole?":

"Considering this person's case" is an interesting turn of phrase. But it is nowhere near as interesting as what  else she said in that episode— an episode which crossed several ethical and moral boundaries... as we shall see later. Kerzner has, amazingly, tried to deny that the episode didn't mention me at all.

But Kerzner's claim that she doesn't brigade anyone, and that she doesn't know how you shadow ban on Bluesky, are not entirely accurate. You can see the proof here:

Here we have Aileyn, Liana's second-in-command, accusing me of taking out accounts to satirize Liana. Satire is, actually, protected speech under United States law. The interesting element here being Aileyn admitting that 'they' (the other moderators— namely Aileyn and Bobby Calloway) insinuated I owned some parody account without proof, actively campaigned to accuse me of... satire? And then implied the culprit deserved suspension.

I got reports that, over several months, Aileyn was coordinating report brigades. Eventually, this happened to my Bluesky account:

Since this was my merryjest account, I was apparently being accused of impersonating... myself? The friends that Kerzner claims I don't have organized a campaign:

Soon enough, my account was returned to me. However, several friends who spoke up for me also had their accounts suspended for impersonation, such as my friend, Argentinian tenor Leandro Tomas Cuadra, who had to prove he was not impersonating himself.

The account that Aileyn singled out to the server was also suspended at some indeterminate point. This will be seen in the section regarding Kerzner's critics.

At the end of the day, this demonstrates something very important, and in order to seize upon it you need to ask yourself a simple question:

Why is it so important that Asher and I be silenced?

My theory is that if it is important that only  one narrative survive, then suppressing other sources, especially ones that can show contradictions to the main story, is paramount. Asher  must remain a transphobe in order for Kerzner's narrative to remain intact, lest too close a scrutiny reveal the cracks, and Audrey and Saige are deeply invested in being prominent victims of Poppy's.

We are inconvenient because we will not play the game of vague insinuations. 

Kerzner's narrative was that during the 'Very Ugly Fight', she was terrified and in the midst of a trauma response that prevented her from acting in a rational manner. As per her October 31st, 2025 video Being Understood... and Other Stories (Feedback Friday), Kerzner describes the state of being in a trauma response as follows:

"I couldn't expect myself to function reasonably and rationally when I was having a trauma response. That's a disregulated response. That's just stupid. You know, that's asking a fish to breathe air. Um" (13:33)

Earlier in the month, speaking about us and our experiences with the 'Very Ugly Fight', Kerzner said in October 10th, 2025, in the Surprising Positives (Feedback Friday) video:

"It's not an easy task, but it's always important to stand your ground because it's real easy for people to weaponize their mental issues as a get out of jail free card. It's a real insidious cover to accuse others of punching down on someone with mental illness to personally absolve themselves of scrutiny. Because if you're privy to this sort of thing, you can tell with some people that deep down they're thinking, "I'm shocked that my actions have consequences because I never had to face consequences before because I'm too used to be surrounded by enablers who indulge every poor decisions I make."

Doubly so with hypocrites who are quick to accuse others of using their mental illness or disability as an excuse, yet turn around and do the exact same thing. Likewise, while it's important to quell disordered thinking, never forget to be mindful of risking swinging too hard into force positivity territory. And this is the challenge with all this stuff, right? It's more of an art than a science when it comes to day-to-day. And there are people I mean borderline personality disorder is an example where the the whole thing about being manipulative or lying and you know people who have BPD can say things that aren't true because their emotions are so strong that in that moment they believe it. And it's very hard for their loved ones because someone can go from being one person in one moment and then this awful thing in the next because of the lack of emotional regulation. But people with conditions like that are still people and some people lie more than others. And so the the reason it's mental health stigma to you know for instance say I am this out of control psycho right cuz I have PTSD and a fight response. Um that just invalidates every objection I have now saying to me at one point at one thing I went over the line. Okay fair. But characterizing my entire "she's this and she's that and she will turn on you."

You know, treating someone's traumatic response as turning on you. That's mental health stigma. Now, does that mean it's not possible to be both? Sure. But in my case, they're using a trauma response as [mockingly] she became a completely different person!

No shit, Sherlock.

That's what happens. That's why the only thing I control is controlling my stress levels and not going too far out over my skis."

I want you to make careful note of all the things Kerzner said in that excerpt related to us. It will become important. 

Needless to say, this was the dominant narrative Kerzner employed for over a year.

As early as October 9th of 2025 on her It's Not Therapy episode How Parents Teach Resilience (Or How They Don't), Kerzner discussing the event portended the massive shift in the shape of the narrative:----

"And you know, things like dumping private conversations into public view—stuff like that—have become normalized. And sometimes, yeah, if it’s a politician caught lying, okay, fair. But most of the time, it is actually a gross violation of boundaries. There’s another way to keep people accountable. Now, someone did that to me recently. And I’ll tell you—it feels like a violation. It’s embarrassing, especially when someone you thought was a friend did that. I’ll admit that. Going back and reading it, I said some pretty funny stuff in that fight. My favorite line might be:
“You run people over, then you want to be complimented on the tread pattern.” Like, Taylor Swift’s allowed to steal that, right? I think that’s a pretty good line. It’s a pretty good description of a chronic boundary buster. You run people over, then you want to be complimented on the tread pattern. Yeah."

Here Kerzner is referring to, of course, the chat logs that Asher publisher of the 'Very Ugly Fight' on his website, since Kerzner had spent close to a year offering commentary on the event without actually showing any documentation that proved her account of the situation, forcing Asher to seek to rectify the record. Notice her comment: "I said some pretty funny stuff in that fight."

Perhaps Kerzner is referring to the mocking of Asher's father's suicide? One has to wonder if she thinks Taylor Swift is allowed to steal that— or whether her audience is actually aware of what she said. In another October episode, she still claims to have been trauma-triggered. Now, however, a parallel narrative begins to emerge and co-exists briefly with the terrified, not-in-control person. There is also the witty, funny Kerzner who had enough presence of mind to say  funny stuff (according to her), which requires a level of control that is absent if one is  not in control . 

The factual drift was complete by 2026. By this point, Kerzner was very confident that she had silenced us after an inordinately cruel display from her part on twitter (which will be seen later.) Seeing Asher no longer as a threat to her image as of January 2026, the entire portrayal of the situation finished its transmutation. 

In her January 12, 2026 video Anxiety, Control, and Anger (Manly Monday), Kerzner says:

"And it's, trust me, it's a pretty decent feeling when something gets really heated and fights get really ugly and people take shots at me and I- I get assertive back and they dump the chat logs online trying to go, [imitating a baby crying] "She was so abusive. She was so deliberately cruel." 

And I look back at that and go, "Nope. Nope. I stand by every fucking word I said there. I meant it. It was true. I thought they needed to hear it. Nope. That was me being a friend and going, "Bro, you out of line right there." That was not me losing it and just trying to be mean. That is a really good feeling in a shitty situation because was I pissed off in those moments? Fuck yeah. People were fucking around, but I was in control and just because they were hurt by it. And to this day, I'm really not sure why it bothered them that much." 

Kerzner relies on her audience having a relatively short contextual memory. Despite the fact that most of her narratives experience drastic factual drift over time, very few people can put all the inconsistencies together that form a very dismal Big Picture— many of these items are scattered over her social media, Youtube, Discord and her radio show, covering a wide net that serves as an overlay with which to hijack other peoples' own narrative.  Her audience listens, nods and accepts her account unquestioningly, and they hardly ever cast a critical eye to the claims that she has made over a long period of time. 

If they had, they might have noticed this: 

The story has mutated from Kerzner being paralyzed by a trauma response, answering in  fear, not anger and being incapable of answering rationally and not being in control... to standing by 'every fucking word' she said; not afraid but, instead, 'pissed off' and ​in control​.  The notion of a ​trauma response​ has effectively vanished in a sleight-of-hand move that her audience didn't notice in January, because she has been priming this shift in narrative since October.

In the video section about taking shots at her, I am aware that Kerzner was referring to people 'taking shots' at her  after the fact, in public, about the fight. However, I put that text there to remind the viewer that  Asher never descended to the level of emotional and verbal abuse that Kerzner resorted to in the fight. That is not my opinion, it is a matter of documented reality in the transcripts. The only reason the fight got 'really ugly' was because of  Kerzner , and it was  she who brought the ugliness, and it remained with her. Asher's cold rejoinders at the end of the exchange were not commensurate with Kerzner's abusive and outrageous behavior, and they were far more centered and calm than Kerzner deserved at that juncture. 

One thing to notice in the transcript: Asher's opening apology included an apology for how his trauma response —what he called a pathological response— ended up hurting Liana. It was not an "if I hurt you" apology, but it named the specific course of action, the fact that he was sorry for having taken it, and the effect it had on Liana. Kerzner's apology amounted exclusively to her "miscalculating" because she thought the abusive, insulting, savage put-downs  was what Asher wanted .  Saying 'I miscalculated' without naming the actual behavior and actions is not unlike the infamous 'I am sorry IF I hurt you' insofar as evading the actual contents and context of her actions.

Kerzner clearly believes that her 'misreading the situation' was the only thing she needed to apologize for, as you can see in this following screenshot— which I've already used to prove that she identified us to her server, linking the infantile moniker 'Gruesome Twosome' to Asher and, by inference, me:

Sample Title

Sample Text

By her own admission, Kerzner was not terrified— she was angry. And she was capable of controlling herself, and she said so herself.  This is immediately evident  in her abrupt change in demeanor after Asher's second apology, which she misunderstood as a total capitulation to her philosophy. Her violent, aggressive and dismissive demeanor  evaporated almost instantly, which is a drastic behavioral change that is inconsistent with any sustained trauma response of the likes Kerzner claims to have experienced at the time.

Kerzner needed the exculpation of a trauma response because her actions and words were brutal, demeaning, and clearly fashioned with the intention of hurting Asher. Being able to  consciously choose this and execute it would mean, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Liana Kerzner was intentionally cruel towards Asher. Just as I observed.

And just like she has confirmed, now, in her final retelling of her mental and emotional state at the time of the events, proving that I was right all along.

Kerzner also seems to think that the promises Asher was willing to make to her in order to salvage the friendship are somehow still binding, despite the fact that Kerzner herself destroyed the friendship through her own actions. Asher is not beholden to any promises made to Kerzner, not after she destroyed any good faith that might still have existed after the 'Very Ugly Fight.' 

After reviewing the evidence here presented, we need to return to Kerzner's complaint and my claim about her. By  her own admission as of January of 2026, Kerzner  was not in the throes of a trauma response . Her own description of her mental and emotional state  directly contradict her own description of her mental and emotional states when engaged in a trauma response . 

So,  why did she need everyone to believe she was experiencing a trauma response during the 'Very Ugly Fight?'

This tweet by Kerzner may prove to be illuminating:

So, what would an actual apology from Kerzner would have looked like, had she taken ownership of the nature of her actions? Here is an example, taking a cue from Asher's first apology:

"I am sorry that I was insulting, dismissive and disrespectful towards you. I apologize for using the memory of your father and his suicide to hurt you. That was beyond the pale and unacceptable, and I understand now that it was incredibly cruel and hurtful to you." This is the type of apology that Kerzner  demands for herself but not the apology she extends to others— or at least not to Asher. Asher would have, in fact, forgiven Kerzner if she had ever uttered those words.

But now, after all of her actions since then, Kerzner is objectively unforgivable. This is something she has earned.

To this day, Liana Kerzner claims she stands " by every fucking word ", that she meant them, they were true, and that there was nothing wrong with them.

Proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Liana Kerzner is intentionally cruel, and therefore what I said —that she was hiding behind her diagnosis— to avoid accountability was right all along. 

My actions, then, are not stigmatizing: They are an objective observation of her behavior as she herself has stated. Her actions, however,  are stigmatizing and encourage mental health stigma. Weaponizing and hiding behind her diagnosis just like she accused Asher of doing—

—effectively poisons the field for any neurodivergent individual who are in the midst of trauma responses, and fosters mistrust and suspicion towards all mentally ill individuals. 

Based on all of this, and in my opinion, I can only conclude that Liana Kerzner is not a mental health advocate. She is a profiteer.

Kerzner has stated that Asher publishing the logs of the conversation involved a  'massive violation of boundaries ' but let us examine the situation. With the documentation and transcripts we have presented, we have demonstrated that Kerzner has given a truncated and largely untrue account of the 'Very Ugly Fight', paired up with moral condemnation based on an untrue premise, and copious amounts of mental health stigma. 

Scrutiny of the timeline will show the following pattern:

-Liana Kerzner publishes a lie.
-We speak up and respond to the allegations.
-We maintain pressure. Kerzner escalates in an attempt to control the narrative.
-Kerzner will, inevitably, violate boundaries and reveal personal and intimate information relayed to her in the confidentiality of friendship, often in a distorted fashion or leaving out crucial elements as part of character assassination.
-We publish sensitive information that sets the record straight, which is then treated as a violation by Kerzner. 

You saw that pattern with Emily Schooley, and Kerzner employs it any time any third parties are mentioned who could pose a threat to her narrative (see the Kim Crawley mention in the PAX incident as an example.) She has done it to Song as well, and of course one of the most egregious examples of that pattern that we have is Kerzner betraying, and mis-representing, the  one traumatic and painful thing about his past that, until he trusted Kerzner with it, Asher had never entrusted anyone with outside of his mother and his therapist. And Kerzner mocked him for it to her Discord server:

Once again, though I may sound like a broken record, this is someone who presents herself as a mental health, anti-stigma advocate.

I will be very ruthless in this statement: Liana Kerzner knows very well what effects intimate disclosures of this kind have on neurodivergent individuals, on individuals with personality disorders, and other difficulties.  Yet, nevertheless, she does it often, liberally, at just such targets: from the disclosure of Mitchell Jura's mental health history to friends, to painful and embarrassing details about Emily Schooley (whom Kerzner assures us has a personality disorder diagnostic), to this. Disclosure of such personal, intimate, private and  vulnerable details to an audience  of a hundred people (as are in her Discord) by an 'alternative to therapy' peer counselor has the possibility of  endangering  vulnerable individuals. Many individuals with personality disorders suffer from issues of dismissal, neglect, and struggle against suicidal ideation. Kerzner treating their personal and intimate details in such a cavalier manner, weaponizing them with a clear intent to hurt, poses a real danger for her targets' well-being.

There is no measure under which her actions cannot be characterized as intentionally cruel. And there is no measure under which any mental health professional who was paying attention would not be immediately alarmed by Kerzner's actions, and the fact that she is asking vulnerable individuals to trust her with their mental health history details, and other vulnerable information beside. Whether one is a friend or a client, it matters little to Kerzner at the time of weaponizing a person's vulnerable history.

One must consider it as Kerzner contributing to a dangerous situation.

Likewise as early as January of 2025, Kerzner was sharing even more private information:

I have already written at length how much this portrayal of Kerzner's does not match up with documented reality. Kerzner omits the fact that she was sharing recordings of her own husband with me, likewise recorded without his knowledge — recordings that I still have — and that, indeed, there was a mutual expectation of support. Was it unhealthy, proof that we were, perhaps, not dealing with the situations in a manner that was conducive to healthy relationships with our spouses, and not communicating with them? Was it, also, indicative that at some point we had lapsed into some sort of mutual therapeutic-adjacent expectation in the friendship? I think the answer to those questions is decidedly: yes.

Notice also that Kerzner provides nothing of that context. Devoid of it, it paints a very different version of events— one in which I unilaterally 'tormented' Kerzner with these recordings and she, poor and suffering soul, bore with the agony in nigh-beatific and self-abnegated resignation. And, yet again, Kerzner sacrifices my own stated words as to what was the source of my health complications to the service of the story she wants to paint. 

The narrative and reputational damage is very easy to pinpoint: Kerzner is building a picture of us as  incompetent, unstable, unreliable and, at the very core,  abjectly pathetic . This serves a double function: it lends credence to her claims because in order for  ridiculous claims to stick , the subjects need to be seen  as ridiculous as the claims, if not more . The reputational damage also has the effect of making counter-claims and our own protestations appear unbelievable and not authoritative, so that Kerzner can completely hijack our voices and 'explain' to her audience what we are really thinking, feeling, and what our  true motives behind our actions are.

And this is a pattern that exists not just with us, but with every opponent Liana Kerzner has accrued. The common denominator in these instances, however, is Kerzner. It is  very statistically improbable that a woman such as Kerzner should enter into conflict with associates who were once, allegedly, close friends, but which then always end up being portrayed in a very similar manner. That is indicative of a manipulated narrative, and that the practice thereof has been honed through repetition.

And one pattern that also remains consistent is that Liana Kerzner will often be the first to actually violate boundaries, all the while accusing her opponents of the same thing. The timeline of events and of our disclosures is easily verified: no sensitive or private communications were released to the public by either one of us until  six months later   when Asher published the entire transcript of the 'Very Ugly Fight', having waited in vain for Kerzner to set the record straight regarding her inaccurate portrayal of the situation.

For those who, understandably, are having a hard time keeping track of events because Kerzner has a tendency to flood the zone: Liana Kerzner lied about the 'Very Ugly Fight' for six months. Asher, in order to set that story straight, published the actual logs of the 'Very Ugly Fight.' You will find that  every disclosure of information from our part comes on the heels of  a particular lie told by Kerzner on the subject. Being exposed in public as a liar often results in Kerzner  reaching for more personal material to weaponize, in the process escalating and violating further boundaries.

Such as what I can only term as Kerzner's desperate display of September 28th, 2025. After weeks of Asher increasing his protests, and starting to point out that Kerzner had been leveraging mental health stigma against him, and  following one of two videos which were posted in that time frame. In the first video, I accurately pinpointed the man we are certain is impersonating us (more on that later) and a KiwiFarmer who was a part of Kerzner's community (more on that later.)  In another video, which would be published on the same day Kerzner went on her twitter tirade, I exposed a (relatively small, comparatively) number of lies and inaccuracies Kerzner has told her audience. This is the tirade that Kerzner posted on Twitter:

The respective threads have been archived here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here for perpetuity.

Of particular note is not simply the tone that Kerzner adopts in this Twitter tirade, but the breach of trust that it represents. This was a six-year friendship with an established expectation of mutual support and confidence, both of which were betrayed by Kerzner before we said anything in public, as the timeline shows. This disproportionate response by Kerzner followed the publication of the chat log that directly contradicted statements she had made publicly for over six months across her YouTube channel, radio show, and Discord. It also followed the publication of a video in which I addressed Kerzner's claims that we were sending her anonymous messages (that claim will be addressed in the next section) by identifying the individual in question. In that video I also identified the KiwiFarmer in her community whose actions, at the behest of someone, set this whole thing in motion by getting Asher featured on KiwiFarms and who was an active participant in the thread that targeted Poppy Diabolique.  In that video, I stated Liana Kerzner had, from the months of August 2024 through January of 2025, allowed this individual to remain in her community despite receiving copious amounts of evidence from Asher that Giancarlo Vanzzini was KiwiFarm's "Shaneequa", Erika Furudo, HeatherForever, Moviepi_rate and other monikers.

Kerzner immediately went on damage control  two days after the publication of the first video:

Incidentally, no, Kerzner has no evidence of this, as the conversation as she portrays it never happened and transphobia was never mentioned. This is verifiable in the transcripts, and it will be verifiable in Asher's output of the logs of his five year friendship with Kerzner.

However, we have now documented the fact that Liana Kerzner, by her own admission, has been a KiwiFarms consulting user since at least 2019, perhaps even further back.​ In light of that, we have no actual assurance that Kerzner's involvement with the site doesn't go beyond superfluous usage— but even in that case, by her own publicly-stated standards, she herself is to be condemned and (by her own metrics) should be avoided. Kerzner's performative virtue in this exchange regarding her swift and decisive action in regards to this user does not match the documented timeline— even by Kerzner's own timeline when she addressed her server: 

The image in question that Kerzner appended to the chat is the following:

As you see, the timeline matches exactly what was on my video. You will soon see from Asher's published history of his entire relationship with Liana Kerzner that he warned Kerzner of Giancarlo Vanzzini's presence as an active poster and participant in Kiwifarms as early as the Summer of 2024. Despite considerable evidence, Kerzner did not act on it nor confront Vanzzini until January of 2025.  Despite Kerzner's claims that she would not show the username, she did so in the screenshot that was linked. @HeatherAces fits Vanzzini's naming convention and is consistent with his Archive of Our Own username Heather4Ever2. That AO3 profile also has proof linking the username to fanfiction about DerrickNotAFish, which is the username of a Youtuber of whom Vanzzini is an assiduous fan. Derrick dedicates himself to trolling and harassing users in Second Life, and that is —in large part— the majority of his video content.  Derrick also maintains a Patreon presence with his harassment videos, even though their content violates Patreon's terms of service. 

The writing from that AO3 profile matches stylometric markers that are consistent with Vanzzini's published YA novel Outcasts, especially the early version of the novel that I was a consultant on, before editorial polish eased away some of Vanzzini's idiosyncratic turns of phrase and imagery. A style that also bleeds through in his posts as "Shaneequa" on KiwiFarms. Ironically, by posting the screenshot that did not blank out 'Heather's' screen name, Liana Kerzner has officially confirmed that Giancarlo Vanzzini is the KiwiFarmer in question. Should any doubts arise, however, Kerzner herself knows this is true as well and, should she press the matter further, she may need to either confirm information that she knows to be true, or perjure herself.

Notice how Kerzner refers to my husband fighting Vanzzini for falsely portraying him as a pedophile to an internet harassment forum linked to several suicides as 'taking the bait.' It is, in fact, because Asher confronted Vazzini on multiple fronts that he was able to piece together a lot of the information that would lead us to positively identify his multiple identities. This is something Kerzner knows, and which will also be proven by her Telegram exchanges with Asher. Saying someone is 'taking the bait' when they are reacting to being tormented or their life is being put in credible risk is exactly how KiwiFarmers express themselves. It is a classic blaming of the victim example.

I have already pointed out that Asher and I were monitoring KiwiFarms  because we were targeted . Specifically, Vanzzini was trying to get us targeted on the site, and we were monitoring it for our own safety. Anytime I have done so is because we, or other individuals known to me, were in danger of being targets. 

Giancarlo Vanzzini was introduced to us because Kerzner, indeed, referred him to me as a client — however, Kerzner once again omits crucial information. Vanzzini did not come to me as a peer counseling client, as I am not a peer counselor nor do I intend to ever be one, but as a creative consultant on his novel,  Outcasts , as Vanzzini was struggling with writing issues at the time, as can be seen in the exchange in which Kerzner suggested the consultation (notice what Kerzner says about my ability to set boundaries):

Vanzzini and I did not sign any confidentiality agreements, as ours was not a peer counseling professional relationship.  Kerzner , on the other hand, has said that all of her clients sign an agreement that states what her duties are in regards to confidentiality: 

"Life coaches charge 5,000 bucks a month. I don't. But people get offended and they're stalking my content. So, but anyway, in the work I do, everybody signs an agreement form like they agree to the terms of the form. And one of the things I say is I will do best efforts for confidentiality. I can't guarantee it because that was something I learned from suicide prevention with first responders.
You never keep suicidal ideiation a secret." — Liana Kerzner, How To Be Friends With Mental Health Conditions

Liana Kerzner, as we have seen, violated this confidentiality agreement with Mitchell Jura, disclosing his Facebook profile and mental health history to my husband, and it is safe to assume she shared that information with more than one person. Jura was confronting Kerzner publicly in an extremely inappropriate manner after she dismissed him and terminated their professional relationship. Kerzner did not violate Jura's confidentiality expectations because he was a credible danger to himself, but because he was annoying her— which is reflected in her conversation with Asher. By Kerzner's own standard, it was not an acceptable nor an ethical reason for disclosure. Yet, her community knows nothing of it.
 
Vanzzini and I began consulting in 2022. By January of 2023 Vanzzini —an ardent proponent and defender of generative AI— in his MoviePira_te alternate account was trying to upset me by engaging me on social media with harassing messages and running my art through generative engines.  This was going on while also receiving creative consultations from me under his identity as Giancarlo Vanzzini . 

In May of 2023, Vanzzini finally went too far on his main account and acted inappropriately towards my husband (his original account was deleted, hence the missing messages):

This was quickly followed by my termination of our professional relationship. Vanzzini, then, began to focus on Asher, which culminated in him taking a blog post Asher wrote and featured it on Kiwifarms with a false narrative (as will be seen in a few sections,) seeking to endanger Asher.

It was then that Asher set himself upon the path of uncovering the identity behind MoviePira_te/Shaneequa. A course of action that was  completely successful , verified by Kerzner's own admission. The evidence showed that Vanzzini was a deeply abusive individual: his subterfuge of consulting professionally with me while also 'trolling' me under an assumed identity demonstrated a propensity for disregarding the concept of consent, and his participation in (and egging on of) several KiwiFarms threads targeting trans and queer individuals demonstrated that he was willing to encourage mob mentality that could put people in credible danger— and going far enough to try to manufacture a narrative in which my husband himself could be at risk.

Under those circumstances, the notion that I would keep his identity secret is inconceivable. Especially since, as an author writing YA queer fiction, he is benefiting from, and establishing a rapport with, the very same demographic he preys upon. In fact,  since Kerzner had incontestable firsthand verification of his identity as per the conversation she posted on the chat — knowing who Vanzzini was and what public he was trying to attract— by her own stated principles of Duty of Care and protection of at-risk individuals,  she had a moral obligation to expose him using her larger platform in order to end his participation in harassment campaigns.

Did she?

Kerzner is suspiciously overprotective of Vanzzini's identity. She speaks of how we 'hurt' him (while also positing the incredibly self-absorbed narrative that it was done in order to get her to talk to us),  and in her Discord server she repeatedly made a large show of accusing us of violating client confidentiality in regards to him over this situation. It is astonishing, considering all the things that this individual has done.

Kerzner also proceeded to claim that we 'doxxed' Vanzzini. Doxxing​ is the publication of private information—such as address, private telephone number or social security numbers—without consent. The identification of this individual was done through entirely legal means and we did not disclose any private information, we merely showed some of the evidence that established an unquestionable link between the anonymous account and the person behind it, ​all of it publicly available​ ​​and easily linked by anyone paying close enough attention.  If doing so is 'doxxing' someone (it is not), then arguably, by showing his username, Kerzner doxxed Vanzzini to her own server while also demonstrating that the 'sleuthing' process that she so denigrated was accurate.

Since Kerzner reacted and posted the tirade before the second video was out, it is safe to assume that Kerzner reacted to the revelation that she had ignored Vanzzini's presence in her server for several months after receiving Asher's evidence. Her tirade, however, lasted several hours— from 6 am on the 28th all the way to 4pm on the 29th, four hours after the publication of the second video, which gave her ample time to discuss any of the falsehoods and contradictions I exposed.

Instead of addressing the issues I brought up— and, really, any of the actual complaints we had been raising for the last six months in any constructive fashion, Kerzner invoked private material such as the recordings, personal exchanges, mental health-related details, all clearly geared to deliver maximum reputational harm while also violating more boundaries than she has complained about. This disproportionate escalation was a move to displace her accountability in favor of a sensationalistic exposure. For Asher in particular,  it was deeply personal and traumatizing that someone who allegedly knew us closely for years would resort to this kind of public distortion and muckraking.  An experience that was on par with the effect Kerzner's cancellation video also had on him. This time, I also felt the effects at her ghoulish display.

By labeling Asher as a “stalker,”  Kerzner sets up a dynamic in which any response confirms the charge and silence leaves the accusation to stand.

1- Mental Health Stigma

Kerzner quickly shift from verifiable disputes to a generalized portrait of mental instability.

• “unchecked mental illness leads to explosion after explosion online”
• “he was not doing the work to MANAGE his BPD”
• “using it as an excuse to give into delusions, paranoia, and rage”
• “a series of provably false paranoid delusions”
• “buzzsaw of crazy”
• “He’s also accusing me of ‘mental health stigma’…”
• “I heard the recordings of him screaming. HOURS of recordings.”

Kerzner's language and statements exhibit mental-health stigma, and not specifically because they speak of mental health conditions, but in the manner in which these conditions are framed. A manner Asher has been pointing out for the last 16 months. A potential source of Kerzner's frustration.

Stigma occurs when a mental health condition is used to reduce a person’s credibility, agency, or moral standing instead of describing or understanding their experience. Phrases such as “Unchecked mental illness,” “delusions, paranoia, and rage,” or framing behavior as the inevitable product of a diagnosis demonstrate that the condition is being used as a the reduction of a person's character and conduct. It collapses the person into the diagnosis and ensures that any and all disagreements and clashes are seen as originating from the pathology instead of any legitimate grievances. This is the essence of mental health stigma.

It also serves to reinforce the stereotype that people with certain diagnoses are inherently irrational, volatile and otherwise unreliable. There is no nuance in Kerzner's framing. Especially egregious is her following pronouncement, despite being a  deeply unqualified individual who has neither the preparation, experience nor credentialing to make the following assertion: 

The only person behaving with arrogant certainty is Kerzner herself: she constantly asserts herself as knowing the true motivations, thoughts and emotions of everyone else —but will unleash fury if anyone reciprocates in kind. It is also beyond the pale that a woman who never completed a single degree and who has jumped from career to career after burning bridges in every sphere she has been in, pretends to have better judgement and be more qualified than the top-of-the-line respected neurologists who assessed Asher and who were with him on every step of the electro-convulsive treatment that was applied to him in order to treat  treatment-resistant, crippling depression . 

Yet Kerzner blames the repercussions of her own actions, the  discomfort of having to deal with people angry at her lies , on Electro-convulsive therapy and my husband's 'paranoid ideations', instantly painting some Tim Burton-esque chamber of psychological horrors as my husband's mental condition. 

Which is, incidentally, how KiwiFarm's trolls painted the news that my husband was undergoing ECT treatment.

The parallels in behavior only grow deeper and more disconcerting the closer you look. Kerzner's entire twitter tirade— which she has actively encouraged her server to ignore— and other such similar displays when she claims to be triggered or under a trauma response (and yet always strangely, eerily calculated and controlled) are not too dissimilar from the tactics of a lot of the denizens of that forum.

Whatever the case may be, it is my opinion that Liana Kerzner does not care for my husband as a person. I will even go so far to say that, as her pattern of behavior over the year clearly evidences, I don't know if she is capable of caring for people much at all unless they are of some utility to her.

2- Financial/Professional Misconduct

• “your husband took the money then didn’t do the work”
• “$400 US dollars, plus an additional monthly fee… to put more money into your household finances”
• “you cut off my services with no notice, and you did it out of spite”
• “the two of you are in constant financial holes”
• “I had to beg for mercy… I’d be out thousands”
• “paid thousands in advance… still weeks late”

A good amount of these allegations are subjects I have already tackled, since she liberally spoke of them to her Discord server before she made this Twitter thread— therefore, I was already aware of what Kerzner was alleging for quite some time. Her allegations are not presented as disputes to be examined but they are arrayed strategically to recast the entire relationship as one of obligation.

What began, in practice, as informal help between friends is now presented a quasi-contractual arrangement in which she is the benefactor and we are the failing recipients. These are geared to accumulate moral weight—a move Kerzner repeated yet again in her It's Not Therapy Episode Are You Secretly An A**hole? where she stated the following:

"​Be aware of somebody's done for you, especially multiple times in the past, the people I was saying that I dropped for just being too combative, including with me. I'd bailed them out of things financially numerous times. You know, they were loans that tended to get forgotten about. And I knew at the time they probably weren't loans.

They really had no way to pay me back. But my thought was, you know, I've bailed them out of multiple scrapes. The tune of a few thousand dollars each and they couldn't do things for me that I was asking because all of a sudden I was being unreasonable and mean. Nah, no one in their right mind puts up with that. Right. That's a shining example of entitlement."

Aside from, yet again, claiming that this episode was not about us (to her Patreon and Bluesky audiences), Kerzner crossed multiple ethical boundaries with that episode. She deliberately tried to 'make an example' of us on her radio show. Since she controls the narrative, there is no counter-narrative that can be presented to the same audience and is therefore presenting her version as an authoritative account of events. So much for journalistic integrity. It is important to note that when we tagged her directly in social media to confront her on her lies in January of 2025, Kerzner did not respond to us but blocked us instead and responded to the public, speaking —as it were— to the gallery:

It was clear from the very beginning that Kerzner prioritized avoiding any direct public confrontation with us because neither her image nor her narrative could possibly survive. That's why it was important that she tell her server members 'do not engage' multiple times, including a repetition of this admonition the day before she unleashed her tirade on Twitter , along with another gross misrepresentation of events:

We will return to the threat allegations momentarily. What is important to note is that Kerzner's siloing of information and her aggressive usurping of other people's narratives serve the purpose of destroying any counter-narratives after she has stripped away any context that contradict her.

I have already enumerated the copious amount of free work I performed for Kerzner in service of her channel and her friends' projects, labor that would be priced monetarily at not inconsiderable sums. These are facts she has erased from history in order to create an image of impoverished dependency and financial struggles— laying aside that a large part of those came from the closure of my longtime-employer coinciding with the wrecked post-COVID work market, and an onslaught of debt associated with sudden health problems the likes of which bankrupt a large number of Americans nowadays.

 Kerzner's egocentric benefactress act mentioning multiple scrapes and financial holes leaves out other relevant elements of self disclosure, such as the facts that:

• By Liana Kerzner's own admissions,  of which I have record and documentation in my files , she and her husband are constantly experiencing financial upheavals caused by Steven Kerzner's incompetent financial management and a constant accrual of debts. This played a factor in the sale of their previous home, according to Kerzner, and their need to move into a much smaller home.
• Kerzner has frequently begged her Patreon community to help her afford items such as a $200 headset, or funds towards purchasing a new laptop.
• Kerzner has hidden and covered up the fact that (according to her) her husband took $3000 that he ​should not have had access to​ from the Kickstarter funds associated with Song of Sparklemuffin .
• In the past, I myself offered to help Kerzner with what resources I may have had at the time, when she was anticipating a hardship:

The above screenshot is one such example. As Kerzner has already potentially broken NDA to her server by informing them that she got fired from this project for "not being a team player", I am not obligated to keep that secret. And, incidentally, here you have another example of Kerzner alleging that a male spouse that she was in conflict with was an abuser.

Kerzner cashing in now on obligations for allegedly-friendly help carries the ominous atmosphere of strings attached that were always intended to be there. What's more, anything Asher and I ever did for Kerzner has been erased in her ledger— including the fact that we stood by her when she felt the Sierra alumni repudiated her, and we consciously distanced ourselves from a community of people who were very willing, open and supportive of our ideas because we considered Liana had been treated unjustly. The closure of Asher's nascent philosophy group happened due to Kerzner entering into direct conflict with one of its members and, although Asher was angry about his effort capsizing so abruptly because of her, we nevertheless stood by her.

In yet another example of mercenary asymmetry, Kerzner expects and demands gratitude, but is incapable of reciprocating it herself.

I also need to add that, unlike Kerzner, I have never been fired from a position throughout my entire work history— neither from my day job nor from any production I was in. Even when I was let go from my church side-job, it was due to endowments drying up and the positions of staff soloists being done away with altogether. Perhaps mentioning such a thing may be seen as petty under these circumstances, but I believe that after enduring Kerzner's self-aggrandizing narrative, I may allow myself a minuscule amount of pettiness.

I will close this section on financial accusations with an interesting screenshot of Kerzner stating things about two of her critics. It is interesting to note that now that we know what we know about Liana and Steven Kerzner— if what Liana Kerzner said to me was true— then what Kerzner says here about Emily Schooley and Crawley... I will let you draw your own conclusions.

3 - Abuse/Harassment Allegations

• “This dude went after MULTIPLE trans women”
• “encouraged their followers to report him”
• “you start pushing buttons… hit them right where it hurts the most”
• “​Trying to silence me isn't going to work. I'm allowed to talk about my own life."
• “​Or you can actually just stay quiet for a change, the way you're trying to silence me."

I have already addressed a good amount of these allegations— including Kerzner's dishonest cherry-picking to try to double down on the transphobe narrative. There is nothing new here, except an attempt to try to make a narrative stick by virtue of repeating it multiple times.

Contrary to Kerzner's assertions, we are not trying to silence her. At no point have we stated that she needs to be silent. What we  have said is that she needs to stop lying about us, and that we will respond until she stops doing so. If she sees this as us telling her she should not speak at all, then perhaps she should reflect on why she would assume so.

Kerzner has been, in fact, the only person in this situation who has tried to actively silence others, as will be seen in the next chapter titled Legal Intimidation.

4. Privacy / Ethical Accusations

• “dumping private conversations into the public view”
• “gross violation of boundaries”
• “you let screenshots of private conversations fall into the hands of…”
• “you were threatening to publish a full takedown piece”

I have already pointed out Kerzner's own gross violation of boundaries, all of which were initiated by her, and that resulted in us publishing information to set the record straight. We never have performed a disclosure that was not directly related to a lie or false narrative by Kerzner that needed to be disproven.​ 

Kerzner is sure to accuse Asher of yet another gross violation of boundaries because he is publishing the entirety of their communications over the five years that they were friends.  But I must remind you that this move by him is not a move that shows lack of impulse control, but it is a direct response to the following statement by Kerzner on October 31st, 2025:

"People will hound you to the ends of the earth sometimes, but it's still a choice. And, you know, the fact that I still believe that being harassed by these people is better than having to deal with them, you know, daily or weekly says a lot about how bad the daily or weekly treatment was, right?"
— Liana Kerzner,  Being Understood... and Other Stories (Feedback Friday)

Allow me to "unpack it for you" as it is commonly said in streamer parlance:  with that statement, Liana Kerzner accused Asher of being abusive to her throughout their friendship on a daily or weekly basis . What is Asher supposed to do? If he were to simply state "No, I wasn't," no-one would believe it because Kerzner's reputational smear has already rendered him not credible.

If he is to demonstrate that he was not abusive to her, then, he  has to publish the entirety of the record, even vulnerable parts that do not make him look great at times (something Kerzner never does for herself.) You will notice this is, yet, another example of a  double bind trap Kerzner has set up, because there is no possible defense that Asher can take without being condemned either as a liar or as a violator.

However, there is a very simple solution to that. As Kerzner likes to peddle ver-simplistic guru bromides from her show on throw pillows, mugs and assorted bric-a-brac, I will formulate an actual principle that is tied to the Stoic virtue of Justice, and one that cannot really be argued against (standby for promotional mugs and throw pillows on RedBubble):

This is not the only falsehood Kerzner has stated about our friendship, shocked at you must be by now to hear that. On June 8th 2023, when Pat Robertson passed away, I posted a clip of Klaus Nomi's famous rendition of Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead. Pat Robertson was a man who dedicated his life towards the hatred of many different people, and he had a direct impact on my life. As one of the architects responsible for the setup of the Defense of Marriage Act, he bore direct responsibility for tens of thousands of same-sex couples not being able to marry, and many binational same-sex couples being stuck in immigration limbo, since their marriages would not be recognized for immigration petitions the same way heterosexual marriages were. Not until DOMA was overturned.

I have no remorse in expressing a certain amount of joy at the passing of someone who destroyed so many lives.

Her server, apparently, discussed this in the midst of Kerzner's character assassination of us in January of 2025:

Allow me to show you the behind-the-scenes arguments about that, which took place in our joint chat with our mutual friend:

That was it. That was the entirety of the arguments. Namely,  they never happened . At risk of sounding like Jonathan Frakes in Beyond Belief , Kerzner made them up. Neither I nor Asher were approached by Kerzner about this, and one must glance in awe-struck wonder at Liana Kerzner uttering "I have never known them NOT to be in conflict with someone" in an accusatory tone with a straight face, in full knowledge of her history. Especially if you go onto my social media profile and compare the rate at which I enter into arguments with others (quite low) versus how often she contentiously engages with people in her comments section (quite frequent).

Kerzner and I engaged in arguments against trolls belonging to the ComicsGate, Manosphere and similar movements on Twitter, something that increased in frequency as Twitter spiraled further and further down, but it was an activity she already engaged in prodigiously before we were even friends. As per usual (by now), the portrayals of people that she presents to her audience are usually a complete fabrication, and quite reputationally damaging.

If 'dumping chats' is a gross violation of privacy and boundaries condemned by Kerzner, though, it is not a practice with which she is unfamiliar:

This video was posted on Liana's TikTok account for her events company, New World Events. New World Events was formed,  according to Kerzner , as a result of an issue with another events-hosting company that she was working with. The truth of the matter is unclear, though Kerzner has leveled serious accusations at the company including mistreatment and, as I recall, sexual harassment of one male actor. I am not one to diminish the seriousness of issues such as sexual harassment... however, since this  is Kerzner who is involved in this matter and is the self-appointed reporter of events, I must confess that I cannot truly know what, if anything, is true about her accusations, considering that all of the accusations she has leveled against us are false, or massive distortions as we have proven so far.

Whatever the truth of events, Kerzner saw fit to publish this conversation in order to back her story up... although the logs she released are not complete and are curated, so we don't have the full story. Considering that this is exactly what she has done with other conflicts, and that I can now verify that those conflicts did not pan out as she herself has reported, we can only stand back and wonder  what isn't being told in this story. In any case, Kerzner and Megan split off and formed New World Events as a business venture for event hosting. 

Interestingly enough, their first planned event involved an Unbirthday Ball featuring an opera singer dressed as the Cheshire Cat and a Wonderland theme. I do not think any of these details were accidental. At the same time, I was also composing an operetta featuring the Wonderland characters to benefit the American Cancer Society through an event in Second Life. As it so happens, Kerzner was unable to sell enough tickets to justify running the event and the Unbirthday Ball was canceled in February of 2025. I was fortunate enough to have an attendance of about two hundred people for the operetta, which was well-received.

New World Events has yet to schedule any further events or make any appearances. For all intents and purposes, its social media channels are dead and neither they nor the webpage have been updated since February of 2025 after one failed event. It is ironic, then, that Kerzner should have criticized my husband for several of the unsuccessful business ventures that he abandoned in discouragement while standing on her own mound of venture corpses.

Regarding Kerzner's claim that we 'let' screenshots fall into the hands of her stalkers? We will examine  that claim in the section titled Liana Kerzner's Critics, because there are a  lot of irregularities and suspicious circumstances happening with those accounts that merit further examination.

5. Credibility / Truth Claims 

• “They keep getting caught saying things that aren’t true”
• “caught telling more lies to try to cover up”
• “you two had to… tell lies about me”
• “He’s been lying to you… He lied to me too”

I have already addressed a good amount of these allegations in the pages leading to this particular one— including Kerzner's dishonest cherry-picking to try to double down on the transphobic narrative. There is nothing new here, except an attempt to try to make a narrative stick by virtue of repeating it multiple times. That is something Kerzner does quite often, and someone with her alleged communications background is aware of the Illusory Truth Effect  (the Repeated Lie, or repeating a falsehood with confidence often enough that people tend to accept it as true), so it is impossible after all this time —and all the evidence seen across all of these cases— to extend any benefit of the doubt to her.

Contrary to Kerzner's assertions, we are not trying to silence her. At no point have we stated that she needs to be silent. What we  have said is that she needs to stop lying about us, and that we will respond until she stops doing so. If she sees this as us telling her she should not speak at all, then perhaps she should reflect on why she would assume so.

Kerzner has been, in fact, the only person in this situation who has tried to actively silence others, as will be seen in the next chapter titled Legal Intimidation.

Contributing to this, of course, is also the image Kerzner has painted of me and my partner in my server. During a particular time in which we were trying to goad "Mario" (see the section about anonymous messages) into revealing more of his idiosyncratic writing for easy identification of the individual, Asher responded to his accusations that we only 'clung' to Liana because of her alleged celebrity status. Asher responded with a message that he knew would infuriate "Mario" into writing more, and it did. The response was an intentionally provocative post where Asher stated that we had little need for Kerzner's celebrity, as we knew our own share of such individuals— Kerzner only met Lori Cole because of my friendship with her (an introduction I regret making, and for which I don't think I can apologize enough to the people involved). 

While Asher's ruse worked perfectly (it produced prodigious amounts of textual evidence, some of it can be seen in the video), Kerzner seized upon it on her server and took the opportunity to provide the following commentary:

Kerzner freely allows the notion that I am a mythomaniac and a narcissist (this is the same person who made two episodes of her radio shows cautioning people against diagnosing others with narcissism, incidentally). This is despite Kerzner knowing the things we've stated are true.

Kerzner contradicts herself directly to anyone paying attention to what she says, and her history. Her server is conditioned to question nothing, so it is not surprising that they didn't point out that Kerzner had never made any public callout posts or videos about Gail Simone, despite Kerzner telling her server several times that Gail Simone bullied her at the behest of a mob of her fans. 

Instead of a brave public stand, she essentially whispers attacks about Gail Simone's sanity and abusiveness outside of the wider public eye. 

This attitude is also somewhat contradictory when you compare it to Kerzner's expectations regarding people who she feels should be indebted to her in gratitude. After all, the majority of comic book fans outside of Canada may only be aware of Liana Kerzner's existence because of her DC comics namesake created by Gail Simone. By Kerzner's own modeled standards, since she has implied we should be silent and grateful to her regardless of what her actions may have been now, doesn't that also carry over to her relationship with Simone?

Kerzner constantly accuses others of lying, none as often as those who dare to criticize her and confront her in public.  It is not without some reasonable optimism that I expect that by this point in the document, after so many pages, you have been able to see firsthand evidence of Liana Kerzner not telling the truth. 

While some instances may be waved away as 'misremembrances', the vast majority of the material in these documents cannot be classified as such unless one is willing to put forth the argument that Liana Kerzner does not, in fact, have a functioning memory. It is simply not feasible.

Kerzner's complaint, and her lawer's, about the 'invasion of privacy' will be seen a few sections after this one. 

Kerzner doubles down on the narrative that I have already rectified earlier in the accountability section. By now, I have demonstrated that Kerzner has laid the blame for the entirety of the delays at Asher's feet and our domestic situation, while whitewashing her own situation and her role in her part of the delays. This is a patently dishonest framing, and demonstrates that, as my husband put it in his own words, Kerzner "pointed to the crazy person in the room and said 'It's all his fault.'" 

In her statements, there is no mention of Steven Joel Kezner's yelling and screaming at Liana, his own meltdowns and 'tantrums' (as Kerzner would describe them), his endangerment of their animals through neglect, and his financial irresponsibility and malfeasance (vis a vis her own allegations regarding the Kickstarter funds). It creates the image of Kerzner as our perfect victim: a long-suffering project manager surrounded by incompetents, a brave and courageous woman full of integrity and honesty.

It is, perhaps, the only elaborate and complete fiction that she was able to finish in regards to Song of Sparklemuffin, as her own writing duties were never completed.

I have taken responsibility and owned my own emotional mismanagement of my domestic crises and how that affected my productivity. Liana Kerzner has not. And, I guarantee to the reader that despite the evidence I have shown (and the copious evidence I have not shown, believing what I have shown to be sufficient to prove my point) she will never do so. I believe it is impossible for Liana Kerzner to admit to anything that will be damaging to her social image or which cannot be employed to its benefit at some point. At most, I expect her to try to recontextualize all the proof of her untruths and misrepresentations as some episode or other, driven by fear, anger, or anything else that may serve as an exonerating factor.

As I have already demonstrated in the opening section of this website, online pseudonyms are not anonymized, especially when the pseudonym in question has belonged to an individual for more than twenty years and is also, for example, their registered DBA and the name under which the majority of their creative output exists. The fact that we were identified by third parties within a day of the cancellation video's publication proves my point regarding identifiability.

What is especially astonishing due to the amount of logical leaps is her assertion that we knew we were lying, so therefore we made... a video that showed our faces. And that, if what Kerzner is saying is truly damaging to our reputation, we would... stay silent and hide.

This is an innovative inversion of logic, because it suggests that people who speak the truth do not speak out, and people who are innocent hide away in the shadows. 

This is the logical extension of her "walk away" advice that she doles out to people in interpersonal conflicts. This stance, and these implications, make no sense until you realize that they're not in place to benefit the victim.

6. Sexual / Social Degradation & Humiliation 

• “yiffing with other men far too young for him” and similar claims
• “furry kink game you were suddenly obsessed with”
  
• Similar other claims

The function of these peppered tidbits is very clear:  Make the target appears ridiculous so that even weak claims feel plausible. Kerzner, an alleged 'non-normie' employs normative shame and societal pressure attempting to cast shame on our lifestyle. I have already observed —and it is not unknown— that we are non-monogamous. As far the 'other men far too young for him', the difference between my age and my friends in question was roughly that of nine years— the exact same age between Liana and Steven Joel Kerzner.

Even more to the point, however: none of these accusations have anything substantial to do with the delays, but it is clearly Kerzner trying to bring something embarrassing up in order to cause a social injury, reputational smear, and it was clear she was reaching for every arrow in her quiver to get us to back down.

We didn't, for several reasons. The primary one is that Liana Kerzner's image as a non-conforming 'non-normie' weirdo doesn't really exist... and I suspect that a large part of the Liana Kerzner people think they know simply doesn't exist at all. What beats right underneath the surface —and this is my personal opinion— is that of a deeply normative, extremely  resentful woman for whom social standing, status, celebrity and wealth are a constant source of resentment and frustration because, contrary to what she often says, she craves external validation. 

She has some very  slight deviations from normativity, but as someone who has watched her navigate large social events in person I can attest she is nowhere near as socially awkward as she claims to be. However, and in my opinion, she has never managed to leverage her light quirks into a marketable mainstream Quirky Girl personality like Felicia Day and others have done successfully, which remains a source of the bitterness that someone (most likely Poppy) recently observed in her. That observation, incidentally, rankled her so much that she had to make a video about it (Is Bitterness All Bad? on 11/19/25 which contradicts Letting Go Of Bitterness from 6/8/22.)

If Kerzner were not, at her very heart, an extremely normative person, and as someone whose delays were caused by her own tumultuous domestic life with her husband, what was the point of those particular details being aired without also making a clean breast about her own domestic issues? Or what was the purpose of her Bluesky tirade that was deployed at the same time as her Twitter tirade, in which she phrases our relationship in a way that deligitimizes the fact that we are married, treating us instead as co-habitants...

And what was the purpose of making an observation about the size of our apartment?

Kerzner's pretense of anonymity doesn't work — we have seen exactly how she identifies her targets to her audience — so she cannot hide behind that claim. And even if it were an attempt at anonymizing,  mentioning the size of our apartment actually provides more identifiable details . This is one of the things that Vagabond picked up on, and which clearly troubled him because it didn't make sense if you operate from the point of view that Kerzner's goals were the anonymity of her subjects. However, as Vagabond found out, it is not wise to afford Kerzner the benefit of the doubt.  

It really is rather incredible what Kerzner does with people's identities, and how ready her cult-like community is to accept pronouncements about someone who until recently was in their midst and did not exhibit any of the behavior she imputes upon them at a later date. Such as this reply from Liana to Naomi P. Pouru when talking about us:

This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Liana Kerzner doesn't actually know furries, and that she is ultimately a normative wolf in sheep's clothing. Most furries are not, in fact, 'quiet' about being furries. Kerzner appears perpetually stuck in the internet of the 1990s, and decidedly not on the individualist side. All of her attempts to smear and degrade people she has conflicts with fall on the same register as the trolls from the 90s —and even Kiwifarms— who believe in 'social correction' through bullying and humiliation. 

Otherwise she would know that the era of Furries being quiet about who they are was over a long time ago. How much so?
Well, some friends and opera singer colleagues (yes, friends) of mine who competed on Spain's Got Talent would know:

The arguments about ... toning down my furriness didn't happen, either. I find it absolutely ridiculous that Kerzner even tried to float that notion by her server when roughly half of the entire cast of characters of the game were furries. But perhaps not as ridiculous as the fact that they readily believed it.

As for antagonizing people? As I have mentioned before, the majority were trolls from ComicsGate and other such fronts. Antagonisms that she participated on... and already was participating on  before we met her . We have ample proof of this in her archived public tweets from twitter.

And now, perhaps, you understand why Kerzner demanded that Asher delete the archive he had of her public twitter posts— because Kerzner constantly relies on people forgetting what she does, or not being aware of it, in order to rewrite her past and her image.

Needless to say, the entirety of Liana Kerzner's public twitter history is going to go live, so that she may not be able to lie about us magically changing her into a contentious online person (as she has already tried to do in several episodes) and blame us for activities she was taking part in long before she met us. If her community were observant, they'd notice she is doing it still to this day in her comments section...

None of this, incidentally, is illegal; It is all material acquired publicly. If Kerzner objects to its existence, then perhaps she should have acted differently, or perhaps she ought to stop reframing situations dishonestly in order to benefit herself at the expense of others.

7. Control / Coercion / Behavioral

• “The smart thing to do now is stop”
• “you can actually just stay quiet for a change”
• “Stop watching my damned content”

Kerzner's framing across these messages is a reification of her regular stance, although she never truly codifies it as explicitly as she does here. Namely, the message that is constantly hammered is that Kerzner is free to publish inaccurate or false narratives about other individuals, identifying them either directly or by inference or insinuation (complemented by private priming as to the identities in question), and that the targeted party is expected to respond only in kind. That is, that they are never allowed to break the game cycle of vague inferential posts and mentions, where  spotlighting identities as an 'open secret' is acceptable. 

It is implied that one should never do anything so vulgar as to name names and draw attention to the mechanisms at play, the mechanisms that allow for an indefinite farming of grievances and social sympathy farming. The kind of mechanism that allows Kerzner to trail unresolved conflicts for more than a decade, frequently refreshed in cycles by both parties, yet never reaching any resolution.

Those who would break those rules and name the game being played should, then, say nothing. Kerzner has said multiple times that the only thing someone should do in conflict is walk away— advice that she never follows when it is applied to herself, only to others, as she will frequently mention people and continue to encourage narrative engagement.  Anyone who is anathema to this kind of pantomime is heavily encouraged by Kerzner to remain silent and disengage— to be silenced in the same way that she accuses others of trying to silence her. 

8. Legal / Defamation

• “There’s no way you’ll make a defamation claim stick because you identified yourself”
• “I tried to protect you”
• “You called attention to yourself”
  
• “these things are not about you”
  
• “you see yourself in (an anonymous story)”
  
• “I never even used your husband’s real name”
  
• “I let this nonsense run for an entire year”
  
• “I kept these details out… to spare you dignity”
  

Kerzner's approach in these messages seems to reframe the narrative in order to make reputational harm appear self-inflicted.  Any deleterious effect to our reputations, Kerzner implies, comes from us identifying ourselves, or so the claim goes.

We will get to that claim in a moment. But I also wanted to spend a brief amount of time on the other thing she addresses here.

Since Kerzner has decided to speak on this subject in this particular manner, I believe it is my duty now to examine the alternate reality.  There is, indeed, an alternate reality at play, but it is not the one that Kerzner is implying to her server:

Before I proceed, I need to emphasize one element of this that should have disquieted her community. It, of course, did not, uncritical as they are in their thinking. Kerzner confessed to a room of one hundred users that she had, essentially, willfully lied to someone to 'let them feel important' by saying something she didn't mean.

Yet her audience has not for one moment reflected upon the implications of this. It signals that Liana Kerzner is the kind of person whose word cannot be trusted. How can you believe anything she tells you is the truth, instead of what she thinks you want to hear? 

Since Kerzner is treating the circumstances in which I suggested she could meet Richard
 Garriott with such cavalier disdain, I am absolutely under no obligation to spare her feelings. The only censoring I will make of the screenshots will be to protect the identity of others. The red rectangle refers to the woman I have nicknamed "D" from the PAX incident.​ 

After the PAX incident and the Summer Daze Kickstarter had finished, Liana was not in a good place, emotionally. Or, at least, that is what she told me at the time.

Preparations were being made for the 30th anniversary bash of the Ultima Dragons. Five years earlier, I had attended the 25th reunion where the Dragons rented a ballroom at the Disneyland Hotel and, essentially, turned it into a mini-con. Dragons from all over the world were in attendance, along Starr Long, Mike Nystul,  Dr. Cat, Richard Garriott. I was one of the musical performers during the events, and Asher and I had the good fortune to chat with Richard (Lord British) for a while about design. Asher talked at length with Dr. Cat (Origin alumni and also co-creator of Furcadia, the longest-running MMO.) Aside from a day of events at the hotel, there were also excursions into Disneyland as a group with Garriott et al. All in all, it was a wonderful experience and a lot of fun.

Seeing Liana in —according to her— such a bad spot, I mentioned that the 25th anniversary bash had been a very positive experience for us and that she should consider joining us for the 30th. Kerzner has often bemoaned that when she interviewed Richard Garriott for her coverage of Tabula Rasa, she 'completely fangirled' over him and considers it one of the worst interviews she has ever given.

With that in mind, and with the bad taste that she had with Pax and — foolishly believing her interpretation of people and events regarding PAX— I suggested that coming to the Dragons' 30th anniversary could be a good palate cleanser with a positive experience. And, if Richard planned to attend (and he had indicated he'd be interested in coming for the 30th as well), then she would have the chance to speak to one of her heroes in a more relaxed setting than an interview. This is something I suggested since she had felt so deeply betrayed by the events at PAX that she swore off ever playing any Quest for Glory games ever again. Or, at least, that is what she said at the time:

And now you have the full context of the 'alternate timeline' that Kerzner has so derisively mocked, and that she employed to imply that I am a mythomaniac and a narcissist. 

Liana Kerzner turned a moment where I was trying to provide encouragement and genuine support, as a friend,  in the face of her suffering (was it real? How can I be certain of that now?) and has twisted it into an instrument of mockery directed at me.

This is what she does.

Sadly, the 30th anniversary had to be canceled due to the ongoing pandemic. The only positive that I can think of is that, since the bash didn't happen, I was not responsible for yet again for introducing Liana Kerzner to another community where she might have been the source of another rupture.

Now, insofar as Kerzner claiming that we identified ourselves, I have proof that from the very beginning, I was not planning to make any public statements, as I said to my private Discord server:

There were several backers of the game in my server (a handful of backers are friends of mine), so they had seen the Kickstarter announcement earlier that morning. Even almost an hour later, when we were made aware that Liana dropped a youtube video, my resolve stayed the same:

As you can see, after witnessing what she did to Asher firsthand and seeing the incredible twist in the narrative in the announcement statement, I was already aware of what seemed to be Kerzner's motivations. Time has proven me correct. And still, Asher and I remained silent. It must have rankled Kerzner, since 21 days later the following happened:

Kerzner has claimed that we can't keep our story straight about who blocked whom. Fortunately, there is ample documentation that proves otherwise, and there is ample documentation that proves her claims that we 'jumped up and down' the very next day are false. As well as her claims that nobody identified us prior to the period when we did start speaking up, as I demonstrated in the opening section to the claims.  

Throughout this website I have shown how Kerzner signals to her audience regarding the identity of her rhetorical targets, how she creates narratives that do not match documented reality, and how readily she usurps people's narratives in order to overlay them with her own— a much more self-serving and aggrandizing narrative, woven at the expense of her targets. We do not "see ourselves" in "unrelated" stories that "aren't about us", we can correctly identify her indexical targeting. As can every single one of her targets. 

Kerzner claims to have "protected" my husband and "spared his dignity.'

This is how Liana Kerzner spares the dignity of her targets:

9. Doxing Her Lawyer

• "Doxing the lawyer who sent you the papers is a dumb move."
• "He doxed my lawyer to try to get me to destroy evidence that proves he's lying."
• “I tried to protect you”
• "you sent a message to my radio show's contact form that was identical to the one you sent to my lawyer."
•  "you keep naming me, and saying things that are provably false, which is why you have to talk to my lawyer."

Contrary to what Kerzner writes, we are currently under no obligation to speak to her lawyer, Doctor Mark Bourrie, ​as his communications were marked ‘without prejudice’ and were, in my experience, misleading and intimidating.​ The contents are discussed in the section titled ‘Legal Intimidation’, but for the time being I want to focus exclusively on this claim by Kerzner.  Kerzner's bizarre claim that Asher is trying to get her to destroy evidence will be addressed under the Legal Intimidation section.

As you will see in the Legal Intimidation section, Kerzner engaged Dr. Bourrie to send these messages to us. ​I addressed several related claims earlier, including how we were identified by third parties and my connection to my professional moniker in the opening section, and I will address the remaining points below. 

As explained further below, my husband published the letters we received from Kerzner's lawyer.

Because the letters included his business address, Kerzner has alleged that this constituted ‘doxing’ of her lawyer. Subsequently, Bourrie himself sent the following email to Asher:

The Law Society of Ontario directory is a primary public resource where information about licensed legal professionals can be found. Licensed lawyers must maintain a valid practice address with the Law Society, which is displayed in this directory, and which is a matter of public record.

A search of the LSO's public directory renders all of Bourrie's public and legally-available information, ​including his Law Society Number, business address, and registered phone number— roughly the same information that appeared on the letters. 

The same information can be seen in Bourrie's LawyerFriday entry, and it is not the only resource that bears this information.

Under Canadian common law, invasion of privacy generally involves an intentional intrusion into private affairs or the disclosure of genuinely private information. In this case, Bourrie was acting in a professional capacity and used his publicly listed business address and phone number. Based on this, there was no disclosure of private information.

We published the letters because of the tone and content of the communications we received, including unprofessional statements such as “​I don't care about your motivation. I am a lawyer, not your life coach,” as well as repeated instances in which my husband was misgendered. These factors contributed to our decision to make the correspondence public.

In my view, the use of legal threats in this situation is consistent with conduct described elsewhere in this document and even allegations from third parties about Kerzner's litigousness. This includes the incident referenced in the PAX-related documentation, where legal action was raised in response to D's sibling speaking to me. 

Liana Kerzner has, in multiple instances, referred to individuals who oppose her or who have longstanding grievances with her as “stalkers.” This characterization is dangerous because it criminalizes the mere act of watching her content.

We have demonstrated in the pages of this site that we have more than a reasonable motivation to watch what Liana Kerzner says on her shows and videos:  Even before we started speaking out publicly, she was making episodes about us . As Song Eretson expressed herself, there is an element of dread that becomes part of the background radiation of your life when someone with a sizable platform is speaking lies about you. On a neurodivergent individual, especially a vulnerable and at-risk one, the psychological pressure can be unbearable. Kerzner presents the fact that she is being watched by people she has lied about as 'Hatewatching' and incontrovertible proof that they are 'stalkers.'

This is a situation that requires yet another throw-pillow phrase:

The KiwiFarm incident that was initiated in on June 12th, 2024 by the KiwiFarm user Shaneequa— identified by us as Giancarlo Vanzzini and this identity was later, begrudgingly, confirmed by Liana Kerzner herself as you have seen above. 

On June 10th, Asher published a blog post by the title of "Determinism." It was a candid first-person reflection on turning 41, feeling unhappy with how his life has unfolded, and wrestling with the concept of determinism.  In the blog post, he defines determinism broadly as the idea that elements such as upbringing, class, genetics, culture, systems, or fate can set people’s paths on a certain course, and explores how it can be emotionally appealing as a way to absolve blame and avoid responsibility. 

In his writing, Asher criticizes how the notion of determinism can be weaponized by the privileged, and how it can both excuse exploitation and strip individuals of agency even to the point of reducing moral accountability.  Asher confessed regrets about stalled opportunities and abandoned projects, strained or severed friendships linked to recurring behavioral patterns and ongoing mental‑health struggles explicitly connected to his Borderline Personality Disorder. He explores the particulars of a truly  small‑town upbringing and pressures associated with family and class environment. 

Asher cautions against the notion that just because you believe you know where someone comes from, that you then also have some insight into who they are and where they will end up. Among the many examples that he brings up, he briefly discusses a traumatic sexual childhood experience, pointing out to the reader that people who see him as a 'goody two-shoes' often would never consider that as a possibility in his background. Asher points out that it shows how easy it is to conflate origin stories (upbringing, trauma, diagnosis, etc) with deterministic destinies. He llustrates two harms of that assumption, an external harm which reduces people to predictable products of circumstance and an internal one, which encourages resignation, self‑fulfilling behavior and the surrendering of moral agency. Asher rails against collapsing context into fate and to preserve humane curiosity  and the possibility of change. Then, he enumerates some of the projects that he has lined up in order to start exploring these possibilities. However one might want to read it, to Asher this was a self pep talk with a view to the future and moving away from the regrets from his past.

On May 22nd, 2023, I terminated my business relationship with Giancarlo Vanzzini due to the inappropriate comments he had made towards my husband on Twitter. From that point on, Vanzzini — in his 'troll' account— focused almost exclusively on Asher, trying to upset him and harass him. He was having very little success, until Asher published his essay on determinism a year later. 

Vanzzini, in his guise as KiwiFarm's 'Shaneequa' (pretending to be a black woman), excerpted the section where Asher spoke obliquely about the traumatic event and then asked the following leading questions on the KiwiFarms thread where he posted it (Poppy and Zena's thread, which had also prominently featured Liana Kerzner on several installments due to her association with, and defense of, Poppy Diabolique):

Vanzzini's intent is very transparent in this. As someone who is deeply submerged in troll culture, and KiwiFarmer culture specifically, he knows precisely what to feed and what to emphasize in order to garner a mob. I will remind you that Vanzzini is a writer with a published novel to his name, so his pantomime of linguistic confusion is something that is carefully rehearsed. Not too long after that, his fellow trolls picked up the cue and were labeling Asher a pedophile.

Out of an essay of 7,507 words, they reduced the entire subject of the essay to a 70-word excerpt, and invented a victim and a scenario (such as Joshua Moon providing his own hallucination of what happened in his Mad At The Internet episode... based on nothing that existed in the text, but his own historically fertile imagination as an 8channer). Asher has, actually, apologized for the wording of the section in question, acknowledging that he was trying to be as non-descriptive as possible so as not to provide more details than necessary out of consideration for the other person, and that he could have employed better phrasing. 

Nevertheless, it requires either an enormous level of illiteracy... or intentional malice to read what KiwiFarmers read into it, and to reduce the entire breadth and purpose of the essay into just that point— and to misinterpret it in such a way. 

It is, in fact, the same way that Liana Kerzner has interpreted it to her community, misrepresenting the event, as well as adding elements that were not in Asher's article. Kerzner was essentially perpetuating a KiwiFarms narrative that, only a few months, she had opposed and criticized.

Kerzner never asked Asher to delete 'the comment', incidentally— a lie that will be evident in Asher's archive once the archive for that month and year is published. Liana Kerzner has a tendency to either invent or hallucinate events that did not happen— such as the many behind-the-scene arguments she alleges happened but did not, in fact, happen at all. Likewise, she apparently also hallucinates making demands that people refuse by virtue of not complying with the demands that weren't made.

She claimed Asher 'refused to comply' with committing to a course of action, when Asher did in fact offer a course of action and all Kerzner responded with was 'blah blah blah'. Kerzner claims to have demanded Asher remove that line from his article... she did not.

But Asher is not unique in this regard. Other people have also experienced living in Liana Kerzner's alternate timeline. Blogger Bruce Forsythe recounts one such similar experience where Kerzner, apparently, claims a demand was refused... a demand that was never uttered by her. 

I am not familiar with Forsyth, and it appears that his conservative views would probably clash with mine, but nevertheless I think it is important to highlight the common experience in dealing with Liana Kerzner's particular field of distortion when it comes to reality. Whatever objections I may have regarding Forsyth's own political views, someone should not be lambasted for not complying with a request that was never made. From the posted discussion, it is clear that Kerzner never made the request.

Another instance of Kerzner bolstering the false narrative from KiwiFarms is in her exchange with Poppy Diabolique's friend, Annie (the 'Virtuous Pedophile.') Following a disagreement with Asher, Annie was emailed a collection of Asher's posts to her contact email (which Annie, part of Poppy's community, described as 'schizoid posting' in yet another example of the toxicity of these so-called mental health advocacy-adjacent communities.) The modus operandi was, essentially, that of Cseke, who was trailing Asher and, we are pretty sure, sent impersonating emails to anyone he interacted with who had an online submission form like Kerzner's (Annie, it just so happens, has one such form on her website.) It was such an amateur copy-paste of Asher's thread that it still had Annie's username included in the text.

Kerzner, who is associated with this individual, jumped in to perpetuate a KiwiFarmer narrative that she herself had opposed only a few months earlier. What is worse, however, is that she added a further distorsion:

In fact, all of these individuals who complain Asher's writing is 'incomprehensible' because it is so lengthy are all, without a single exception, guilty of similar —if not worse— infractions. 

Annie's essays are an exercise in the art of Faulknerian perambulation. And one has to wonder about the possibility of a time-traveling  Jorge Luis Borges coming up with the title of  The Garden of Forking Paths after perusing one of Kerzner's fory-five-minute-long, tangent-ridden, meandering and self-contradictory episode transcripts. Kerzner herself has criticized Asher (and me) for lengthy Bluesky threads in answer to something she has said, yet she herself has perpetrated threads that, at times, are much longer.  In fact, the only time these individuals seem to be incapable of understanding anything longer than a tweet seems to be when they need to wield that trusty old mental health stigma in order to imply the other individual is 'unhinged.' At which point, their brains seem to dry up and speak from the position that being unable to process more than a short paragraph is the universal human condition.

For example, here we have Liana, talking about Asher's writing style:

And yet here we have Liana Kerzner, a year earlier, praising Asher's writing style on his erotic stories, comparing his writing to J.D. Salinger:

What happened? How did Asher's writing go from Salinger to 'incomprehensible' and Kindergarten rassberries? Did Liana Kerzner suffer a drastic cognitive decline? Was she rendered unable to understand complex writing? Her response to Asher's blog posts and twitter responses were also equally laudatory in the past, as will be seen in Asher's archive.

Well, the way I see it, and in my personal opinion, there are only two possible explanations. 

One is that Liana Kerzner is a utilitarian human being who doesn't believe anything that she says and, instead, peppers compliments to people she finds useful or out of whom she wishes to obtain something, or with whom she needs to maintain a cordial relationship. In this scenario, she dispenses compliments she doesn't really believe "to let them feel important" that the woman who was vaguely relevant in the Canadian television circuit fourteen years ago liked something that they made. 

The second possibility, and one that is just as likely, is that Kerzner recognizes in Asher someone who is a real threat to her. Not a threat in the physical or criminal sense, but a threat to the integrity of the careful fiction she has been building for years, the fiction of who Liana Kerzner is. Asher is articulate, thorough, and —yes— he can be overly wordy at times, but no more so than Kerzner on one of her tangents, which last forty to forty-five minutes on average but have sometimes known to go into the hour mark. Asher is also a lot more perceptive than any of the critics Kerzner has gone up against, and she  really started getting nervous when Asher was able to piece Vanzzini's KiwiFarmer identity together with astonishing speed.

And for all her dismissiveness in speaking about his detective skills to her forum, let us not forget that  Liana Kerzner immediately pounced upon Asher suggesting that Emily Schooley was cornholierthanthou , considering his judgement solid enough to make a public twitter post about it. So the documented history says one thing — and it isn't consistent with Kerzner's portrayal. 

In my opinion, and this is (of course) purely speculative  based on the evidence at hand and which you yourselves have seen by now,  Kerzner needed to discredit Asher's capabilities . Liana Kerzner needed Asher to be reframed in the public as 'incomprehensible', unhinged, and perhaps even a  pedophile . That was the purpose of her exchange with Annie, to paint him not just a potential pedophile, but also a mentally confused, incomprehensible and deceitful pedophile.

Why? Well, the answer is very simple:

Would you be likely to believe someone like that?

Especially, say, if they have a reason to give your online presence the same level of scrutiny as, say, the KiwiFarmer who tried to smear them as a pedophile? Especially if there was something you don't want them to discover... but if they do, you need to ensure no-one would believe such an 'unhinged' individual?

We return to this claim briefly. I have already addressed the situation with Giancarlo Vanzzini, of course, but Kerzner is clearly covering her tracks on a much wider scale. The only 'work relationship' Asher and Liana ever had was that Asher was Liana's web host. 

Therefore, I find this justification to be rather interesting. I am not entirely sure what 'work purpose' divulging the mental health history of Mitchell Jura to Asher actually accomplished. 

For fear of appearing too personal, I am going to say that by this point I wish Liana Kerzner would actually take Asher and me at our words. When I say I never make a claim I can't back up (which I have said multiple times throughout this ordeal), I mean it. Kerzner claims she doesn't trash former clients on her server.

Here is Liana Kerzner trashing a former LianaKares client who, by all indications, may have an abusive mother or at least a mother with anger management problems:

Kerzner's lack of training and lack of qualifications is especially painful in this instance. If the individual has an abusive parent, spotlighting how afraid they seem to be of them is guaranteed to send them into a defensive position. This is basic psychology 101. This was a situation that, just like Mitchell Jura, Kerzner seems to have botched spectacularly, but nevertheless becomes someone she is turning into an example.

Song Eretson, as we have established in the project timeline, was a LianaKares client. Song spoke of having a controlling and abusive mother. After Kerzner ejected Song and made a Youtube video excoriating her, she was liberally mocking her and Song's personal story about abuse, on her server, glossing over the fact that abusive environments are often very touch-and-go situations and mutable. I can neither confirm nor deny that Song's mother was abusive, and it's not our place to do so... however, Kerzner casting doubt on Song's claims because the mother was 'very polite'...

I don't really have the words to fully articulate all the many ways in which this is plain wrong, and dangerous. If you don't see the abuse, it doesn't mean it's not happening. Kerzner, an alleged advocate, should know better, and it is deeply unethical that she should dare say what she says.

Liana Kerzner has accused a former client of fabricating evidence of her abuse. Let that rest with you for a moment. 

If Song were a Canadian citizen, there is some likelihood that this would be actionable.

Below, we can see Liana Kerzner singling out Mitchell Jura to her server about their dispute:

And here we have Liana mocking another LianaKares client who signed up, but didn't want to discuss mental health topics... which, in and of itself, should have been a sign to anyone with enough training. Kerzner, however, was a lot more interested in being personally offended by the client's affect and attitude, and intent on 'putting up a wall' to teach him a lesson. 

After the predictable outcome, Kerzner then mocked the client to her Discord server because "he got emotionally abusive then ran to his mother who called me at damn near 11 pm yesterday."

You have already seen how Kerzner has claimed Asher was 'emotionally abusive' with her during the 'Very Ugly Fight', only to find nothing of the sort. It is pretty safe to assume that this scenario was very similar to that, consider Kerzner's history by now. Liana went so far as to mock this client on her radio show, as well.

Kerzner's misconduct doesn't extend merely to her server. For example, as Asher's Telegram records show, Kerzner shared screenshots of a private client phone conversation (first screenshot here). A client who was in her server at the time (Giant Enemy Crab.) Kerzner is also very liberal in describing her clients' personal detail to friends, as shown here. Considering Kerzner's recent statement of confidentiality clauses in her LianaKares contracts, the record shows that those contracts are perfunctory at best, as Kerzner sees herself at freedom to discuss personal information with friends. It is very likely that this pattern is prevalent even today, and that it is likely Kerzner continues to share client information with —but not limited to— friends such as Aileyn, Bobby Calloway, and Per Bjorgenson.

Kerzner is right in one aspect, though: She should be losing business, with this pattern of behavior. 

However, the fact that she isn't is rather easily explained if we consider the proposition that, if we look at the way that Saige, Audrey and Esther describe Poppy Diabolique's server,  Liana Kerzner's community shows strong parallels in its cult-like elements. You can see it at work in the monopolizing of information— where Kerzner discourages others to engage outside of the bubble, commands the narrative and presents a single side as the authoritative narrative while ensuring all potential dissenters are rebranded and recast as unstable, trolls, KiwiFarmers or other deplorables. You can see it in the toxic models of behavior that echo High School lunchroom hierarchies with Kerzner, Aileyn and Calloway as the instigators of gossip, reputational distortion and mockery.  You can see it at work in the zealous and aggressive way in which Aileyn and Per perform their moderation duties, policing behavior in an almost totalitarian fashion, treating the asking of inconsequential questions as actual abuse. 

In a cult-like environment, there is a distinction drawn between the 'good' followers and the 'bad' followers— the ones who lose status, are cast out, are unworthy. Being one of the 'good ones' means having the outlook that what happened to the 'bad ones' could never, ever happen to you.  Clearly, those others were bad people, they deserved it. And they, and their stories of trauma or suffering, or their idiosyncratic ways, deserve to be mocked in unison with the community, thus strengthening the bonds. 

The LianaKares/LianaRama community is, essentially, Mean Girls meets mental health influencer culture, and it is not good.

We could list more examples, but by this point I believe we have established our ability to back up our claims, and the credibility Liana Kerzner desperately wants you to believe we don't have. 

As of 4/8/2026, Liana Kerzner is still making videos in which she references us with very specific markers. In her episode When To Refuse To Engage, Kerzner makes the following references:

"So, if someone says, ‘No, I want to hear it.’ And then they can't take it. Dignity of risk, man. I mean, okay, we did it their way. They're having adult tantrum now. I'm out. You know… we choose where to put our energy and where to put our time. And that that's why I mean that's my line. You know, I'm willing to engage and then go, ‘All right, well, if you don't believe me, then see you.’ And they freak out and they stalk me and it's really annoying."

"The problem is that there are some people out there who just have surfed through life pontificating about how they want to be treated like a grown-up and they want people to say difficult things to them and they don't want to be shielded from things, but it's all bullshit."

This is a direct reference to Kerzner's interpretation of the 'Very Ugly Fight,' in which her version of events consists of her laying some sort of truth on Asher, and then Asher having an 'adult tantrum.' In the episode Confronting Adult Tantrums (timestamped), Kerzner engaged in one of her ugly, mocking pantomimes more befitting a Jerry Springer episode than the channel of a peer counselor/mental health advocate. In the midst of her grotesque display, Kerzner uttered cues such as "tantrum and abuse their online form tantrum" that indicated that the person she was portraying was Asher— as she has falsely accused him of 'vandalizing her intake form.'

Notice that Kerzner has rewritten the narrative to imply that we 'freaked out' and are 'stalking' her because she delivered some hard truth that we didn't want to hear.

Liana Kerzner was abusive and cruel towards my husband, mocked his father's intelligence, worldview, and suicide, and never apologized for anything outside of a cowardly "I miscalculated." Then she proceeded to lie about the situation and the reasons for the delays on her Youtube channel.

That is why we take objection to Kerzner. We don't 'stalk' her, either, we criticize her.

Kerzner's second jab at Asher is performed with very specific language— language that she employed with him when she claimed that (in one of her amazing feats of reading people's minds) all he wanted to do was 'pontificate' about his brilliance. 'Pontification' is an extremely rare word in Kerzner's vocabulary, whose Youtube videos often hit the 9th or 10th grade linguistic marker.  The rare moments in which she uses more elaborate words tend to be very intentional and tailored for a specific effect.  Out of 541 episodes on her youtube channel, the word only appears in six episodes total. And the verb is always applied exclusively to men.

"For me, the line is when I think someone is being disingenuous or cruel. And so, it's things like, look, when someone keeps accusing me of something, for instance, and it's intent driven, like they're saying I did something on purpose that I know damn well I didn't. And I say to them, look, you think that I accept that, but I know what's in my mind. And I know that wasn't on purpose. Was I obtuse? Yeah, my brain doesn't work normally. Sometimes I come at things from a different, you know, angle than other people. But there was no attempt to deliberately be anything mean. If that is not accepted, I'm done. There is no point in continuing with someone who insists that I have deliberately cruel intentions and am now lying about it. That that's pointless."

It appears to me that me telling Kerzner I had observed intentional cruelty inflicted a deep moral wound in her. For more than a year now she has (mis)quoted that and paraded it as the crowning jewel of her collection of grievances. And yet, however, although she is very quick to tell us that only se knows what's in her mind, she spends an  enormous amount of time telling everybody what is in everybody's minds. I also believe that many of the actions catalogued on this website show that Kerzner can be quite cruel. And her constant denial that she is incapable of being cruel only serves to ensure the repetition of the cycle. 

"And it is it is literally just that. I don't have patience for people who sit on their ass, stay at home all day, and complain while someone else is paying their bills. You know, I I just don't have uh And again, that is literal. I do not have patience for that. That is not a judgment on anything but my health bar in you know I in that area and it's really important to recognize that so you avoid unnecessary conflicts."

Once again, this can be correlated to the barb Kerzner threw in her server about Asher being so disabled that he hasn't worked in 10 years, and was so incapacitated that he could not file paperwork in time and was kicked off of Medicaid. It is in those off-the-cuff moments that more of the real Liana Kerzner is revealed, in my opinion. It is the Liana Kerzner who mocks the disabled— people like Asher or Mitchell Jura— for the entertainment of her public and server, who are too caught up in the emotion of the moment to take a step back and look at what is actually happening. Kerzner wields ableism, classism and normativity as a weapon, all the while she couches herself in paper-thin 'weirdness', and uses her diagnosis and condition as a prop behind which she can hide to escape all accountability.

In her video Mental Health Stigma — What It Is, And What It Isn't, an episode that Kerzner made after Asher pointed out she was using mental health stigma against him, Kerzner says the following:

"And so, okay, maybe they're in there. there's nothing to find. And if they, you know, they they keep suggesting they have dirt on me, but I know based on the fact that I've seen what they put out there, um, if they had anything really damaging, they'd have used it. These are not people that hold on to things. they it's just this running diarrhea of the keyboard." — Liana Kerzner,  9/24/2025

Once again, resorting to the mental health stigma trope of painting Asher as someone with no impulse control, Kerzner claims Asher could never have any incriminating evidence about her because of his 'diarrhea of the keyboard.' When Asher called this out as a direct barb at him, Kerzner included a response in her Twitter tirade:

Resisting the urge to ask whether the gaming mob was in the room with us at the time (Kerzner hasn't been beset by 'gaming mobs' proper since she got blackballed from the games journalism industry during the GamerGate days), ​I will simply point out that documented reality would like to disagree with Liana Kerzner, since at 11 am of the previous day she had said this to her Discord server regarding Asher:

From the language, structure and phrasing used in the Discord server and the Youtube channel, it is very clear that Kerzner was talking about Asher all along, portraying him in a very particular way. A stigma that she then leveraged further by implying he was seeing himself in things that weren't about him. A  calculated blow aimed at undermining his credibility and portraying him as delusional.

Another clear example of Liana Kerzner lying. And she lied about lying, so that's two for the price of one. And as Liana Kerzner says: two wrongs don't make a right.

I know it may do little to no avail to point out that, for having 'diarrhea of the keyboard', Asher and I have spent 17 months waiting for Kerzner to set the record straight. The very existence of this website proves that we are not the people Liana Kerzner wants you to believe we are.

In fact, as of 4/9/2026, Liana Kerzner continues to bait and engage. She repeatedly states to her audience that she doesn't 'engage', and yet it is not uncommon for her to bait her 'stalkers' with regular skeets such as this one, referring to Asher:

Asher's sole observation was that it was a strange and odd occurrence that, in recent months, the two episodes of her radio show that have been the most contentious and vitriolic towards us have not been uploaded to Youtube. Asher didn't make any accusations, he merely observed what seemed to be the start of a potential pattern. Kerzner, however, reframed the narrative to her benefit. Once again, wielding mental heath stigma to diminish someone.

Kerzner, in fact, is so desperate to smear Asher that she has tried to suggest that his reporting on the situation, including screenshots of the KiwiFarms threads is 'misogyny:'

Liana Kerzner, the Woman With Journalistic Integrity, who claims she was unjustly blackballed from gaming journalism because people claimed that reporting on GamerGate meant she agreed with them, is using the same kind of mentality and fallacious arguments against Asher. Her hypocrisy is truly boundless.

As I said in a statement replying to Kerzner's incredibly egocentric skeet, we do not wish to talk to her again. We consider her morally repugnant.

These skeets also prove Kerzner's continuous act of engagement and needling, where she (surprise surprise) yet again breaks her own alleged rules:

"​I personally don't want people fighting with the super creepy cyberstalkers online on my behalf, because they want attention — that's one of their major drivers. If they get all these people fighting with them, they get what they want and it encourages the behavior. Not that I don't appreciate the support, but I'd rather people didn't.

It's really amazing how some guys — one of whom is now one of the cyberstalkers — either got offended by that or ignored it. When I kept saying, "Please don't engage with Stalker Chan. Please don't give her more ammunition. It's not going to stop her. She wants you to splatter her name all over the internet. Please don't do it," he didn't listen," — Liana Kerzner, Traumatic Sports History And Other Stories

Kerzner urges people not to interact with 'Stalker Chan' and the other people she deems her 'stalkers'... while liberally engaging and baiting them herself.  Here is, for example, just a small sample of the times Kerzner mentions 'Stalker chan' on her twitter feed between July and August of 2024. I assure you that the totality of the times Kerzner has mentioned her in baiting messages over the years is astronomical.

Why would she do this? Especially since she has said over and over that 'engaging' with these alleged stalkers on the internet only 'gives them ammo' and only prolongs the engagement? 

By that statement, it would appear that Kerzner does not, in fact, oppose active engagement with the 'stalkers', she only opposes engagement that she directly is not in control of, a constant and never-resolving back-and-forth where she can constantly claim something 'riled her stalkers up' to her Youtube and Discord and garner sympathy for it.

Why should she do this?

Incidentally, in this episode, right after that quote, it is especially interesting how Kerzner lied about the 'vendetta' exchange to her public, inserting entire sections of dialogue that do not exist in the transcript:

"One of the things he turned on me for was telling him to delete the mass of my tweets and other online communications that he collected as some sort of takedown of her, which wasn't going to make a difference. She's just going to lie and say, "No, those accounts aren't me." Without law enforcement or a court, and even then she lies about that too. I appreciate the sentiment, but please delete that stuff. I don't give you permission to use it in a vendetta against somebody else. He got really mad at that, and that's part of what ended the friendship and turned him into another hater online. For some odd reason, he took real exception to me saying, "Please don't do that. This is not healthy."

I do think that some people are extremely ego-driven and transactional, and there's a particular rage in some men." — Liana Kerzner, idem

Let us do a quick refresher of how that exchange went in the 'Very Ugly Fight':

Liana Kerzner (21:32)
I'll make arrangements to shift my web services. Good luck to you.

Asher Wolfstein (21:33)
If you need help logging onto the portal just let me know.

Liana Kerzner (21:36)
Please delete any and all records you have amassed of my tweets or other communications. I do not consent to you using them in a vendetta.

Asher Wolfstein (21:37)
Why would I do that?

Liana Kerzner (21:38)
Nope. Pablo is giving me shit for something I said to you. This is unworkable.

Liana Kerzner (21:39)
You just said "I'm not Pablo" and then he fights your battles for you. THAT is why I need things on the record. I do NOT consent to any of this.

Asher Wolfstein (21:40)
No, seriously. Stop that. You don’t control everything and aren’t the arbiter of the truth. I have no idea what Pablo is doing. How can I go on a vendetta if we’re friends?

Liana Kerzner (21:42)
You're right, I don't control everything. But I do get to set boundaries and Pablo is clearly reading your screen so no conversation is going to stay between just us.

Liana Kerzner (21:43)
I can't have a conversation with you with him speaking for you. It's leading to too much confusion and hurt. And counter to his claims, I do care about everyone's pain here.

Asher Wolfstein (21:44)
I tell Pablo about my conversations with you unless you tell me not to. I didn’t have any idea you didn’t want me to do that. You’ve never mentioned it, even when it’s happened before. I get to choose what I share with my husband. If this is a problem, then I won’t share with him without asking you first. I’ve really meant to disengage, but you keep engaging.

Asher Wolfstein (21:44)
And he doesn’t speak for me, any more than I’m your lapdog.

Liana Kerzner (21:45)
This is why I'm clearly saying what information I do not give you permission to use. Because if I don't clearly say don't do it, I have no one to blame but myself if you do.

Asher Wolfstein (21:45)
Ok. We’re on the same page then.

Liana Kerzner (21:45)
So are we clear?

Asher Wolfstein (21:45)
Yeah.

Two different stories: The documented evidence of the conversation, versus Kerzner's 'alternate reality,' if you will.  This is emblematic of her standard practice: obscure evidence, discourage her viewers and public from looking at what evidence is posted, and then supersede it with her own narrative— one that is always infinitely more flattering and lionizing.

Where was Asher's rageful response? Where were all the things that Kerzner claims to have said to him in regards to the 'vendetta'? It didn't happen. 

Do observe that she got very nervous when she realized I was watching the entire exchange.  Why would she want to silo the conversation? I can tell you why: so that when she told me he was 'full of rage', I would believe her.

Also notice how she gave us notice that she would vacate her web services in  October of 2024, and yet she was surprised when Asher suspended her  free hosting (unrelated to her still-active lifetime package) in  January of 2025?

Is anyone not noticing how much of her narrative constantly doesn't add up? Of course, to most people, it wouldn't, since Kerzner obscures whatever evidence she needs to obscure in order to make her claims appear plausible.

And if the only way that someone can set the record straight is to commit a 'violation of privacy'— that's a feature, not a bug, of her system.

By this point, it has become apparent that Liana Kerzner needs for us to be completely discredited. While she wielded  mental health stigma towards Asher, she has essentially tried to weave the narrative that  I lie all the time . She is portraying my ownership of my  own side of the delays, the mis-management of my emotional responses, as proof of my lying because it doesn't fit neatly with her narrative that Asher is to bear all responsibility:

Kerzner is not telling the truth, however. I have already pointed out that  Kerzner and I  bear responsibility for our delays, as some of them are entirely due to our mismanagement of our emotional responses and our communications with our respective spouses. This is something Kerzner has not owned, casting any and all blame and responsibility onto a single party, and I suspect she will never take full ownership of her own part in the delays. Just as I can predict that she will never address or own the lies, mischaracterizations and misrepresentations listed in this very extensive document in any way that is not ultimately self-serving and self-exonerating.

Kerzner has made the following claim about us, since we deleted our Telegram history with Liana Kerzner upon seeing the cancellation video on Youtube:

We were not 'covering our tracks' and we weren't 'being clever,' what we were doing was  removing access to us to an abuser . The moment we saw the content of the Youtube video, we immediately knew that Liana Kerzner was going to set up a narrative where we would be vilified and she would, essentially, be portrayed as the virtuous long-sufferer who had to put up with us.

Kerzner's actions since then are a testament of how accurate our instincts were in regards to what she was going to do. And, we now are confident in thinking this, what she has  consistently done in the past. Throughout the preceding pages I have shown how, at every turn, Liana Kerzner has sought to  usurp our narrative , how she has  distorted events ,  presented falsehoods in place of truth, and assured her audience that her version of events is the accurate one.  Without presenting proof .

This is because, as you can see, the proof and documentation tell a different story. It is also why she has repeatedly told viewers to  mistrust anyone who has significant amounts of evidence , which is nonsensical— if you operate from the good-faith approach that Kerzner would want to give  any evidence her full consideration.  This is, however, not the case, as has been proven by her actions. I fully expect her to wave away evidence with her standard claim of "they're lying" without ever providing the proof. Another stratagem she employs is to rephrase a statement or piece of evidence into meaning something else altogether, or making a different accusation than the one made by the accuser— at which point she will proceed to address or debunk an argument that was entirely of her own devising. A facsimile intended to divert from the core of the argument itself and carry the viewer into territory that she controls.

The truth of the matter is that we are not the people Liana Kerzner paints us as. And we are certainly not the 'stalkers' that she claims that we are. Despite her protestations that we have insulted her and name-called her, for example, you are not going to find a single instance of such an event in our timelines (including our backups). The furthest I have gone was to repeat the testimony of my friend Stuart (someone who is on the spectrum), who said that in his experience Liana Kerzner came across as a rageaholic in search of a point of contention over which to have a disagreement.  I did not ask the particulars of their argument, because I didn't have to— I could see the trademark general description of something I had seen with my own eyes.

Because Kerzner usually enters into conflict with neurodivergent individuals, often those who have extremely reactive emotional states, Kerzner is used to leveraging mental health stigma against them. Every week she will pepper references about these individuals in her videos, a tactic that all but ensures that these individuals will return and engage. They will understandably experience emotional reactions quite vividly. They will feel betrayed, and they will feel anguish and anxiety at seeing their stories distorted and changed by Liana Kerzner. Their responses will serve as fodder for further Youtube videos, and once they cross a certain line in their engagement intensity, they will graduate fully into being one of her 'stalkers.'

But why? Why does Liana Kerzner collect grievances and string them around her like treasured pearls?

It is my belief that the  why of this has already been answered. She said it in her own words in January of 2020:

It is my personal opinion that Liana Kerzner requires two things: a villain, and an audience. From her first rise to post-television prominence, every ascendancy into some section of popular consciousness has arisen from Kerzner experiencing a rejection and then entering into a prolonged, antagonistic relationship with multiple parties. Kerzner, I belive, draws validation from 'tanking' (as se has explained multiple times in gaming terms), and then receive positive reinforcement from her audience regarding her virtue and allyship, even in the face of those who do not understand her. But her behavior is far more aggroing than it is tanking. 

Without someone attacking her, Liana's content wouldn't nearly be as exciting as when she hints to her audience about all of the people calling her names, coming after her, etcetera. From an objective perspective, her mental health content and insight are extremely limited and superfluous, and there are afar better prepared and credible individuals on Youtube tackling many of these topics. 

It must be why we have been so incredibly frustrating to her, because we don't fit the usual pattern of the people she freely and irresponsibly likes to label 'stalkers.' Despite our critiques of her, we have not descended to her level and resorted to insults and name-calling.

And Kerzner  really wants you to call her names. In fact,  there is one word that you can call her that gives her more pleasure than she is willing to admit, but which is evident when she discusses it:

The word "bitch."

We can tell that Kerzner is truly and thoroughly rankled by our refusal to employ this word —and others— when discussing her in public. So much so that, after  a year, Kerzner had to essentially try to create an alternate reality in which my saying that she was intentionally cruel was a 'fancy thesaurus way' of calling her a bitch:

Incidentally, I don't know if you caught this, with all of the many different things going on at the same time— but Liana Kerzner gleefully and gladly called D a 'crazy bitch.' Because rules and standards apply to everyone— except to Liana Kerzner. By her own standards, she exhibits internalized deeply-rooted misogyny. 

I do not think Liana Kerzner is a bitch. If I were to lower myself to her level and use her vocabulary, I would simply have to state that I think she is a manipulative, lying, toxic. potentially dangerous and hypocritical asshole. 

Being a 'bitch' would, actually, be preferable. I have several female friends who call themselves 'bad bitches,' and they are infinitely better —and far healthier— to deal with than Liana Kerzner.

It is my personal opinion that the ugliness that seeps through in moments like this one, and the  many, many, many moments in which she mocks her detractors and victims, is a glimpse of the true Liana Kerzner. It is exactly the glimpse that I saw when she behaved so abusively to my husband, and the glimpse that exists behind the prolonged sixteen-month campaign to, essentially, erase us and erect villains in our place that she can employ as props to the psychodrama she sets up for her audience.

This is why she has never required email verification on her website form, in my opinion: whomever is sending the 'nastygrams' impersonating us is  useful to Kerzner, because he provides her with something we readily refuse.

Admittedly, it is very possible that without the form, random accounts on social media will continue to send her messages, and she will accuse them of being us— at which point we will, yet again, have to resort to legal measures. Nevertheless, I have shown now a long litany of false accusations from Kerzner, along with lies and misrepresentations. We will not allow her to erase us , and we will not allow her to silence our voices. 

And we most certainly will not allow her to leverage further false accusations against us. After all, in her own words: A false accusation is a form of abuse.

And this is why I have stated that Liana Kerzner is an abuser.