Nomadic Fanatic

[Freightguy]

So, who out there is watching Nomadic Fanatic on YouTube?

YouTube Link

This guy is living fulltime and doing a great job at capturing it on video.

[Moderator]

This thread is dealing with a site, and has links to a site, that does not meet our 'no advertising' guidelines; therefore it is being closed.

[I90west]

Francesca Knowles wrote:
So as it turns out, it IS about the money. Somebody evidently outed him to College financial aid folks, so now he's being looked at. No surprise there! I have to admit that the taxpayer side of me approves of such scrutiny.

Interestingly, he doesn't admit to having taken down the site- just makes some oblique references to having been "hacked". Puh-leeze. Sure managed to get it all back up lickety-split once all the scrubbed-up ducks were back in the row.

And speaking of duck-scrubbing:

A fellow on another channel did an interview with Eric back in February.

Weirdly, sometime in the last day or two that vid has been altered so that the bulk of the "interview" is GONE-???? Now, except for a few seconds at the beginning and end, it's just the channel owner, Chris, talking about himself. With a link to ol' Nomadic Fanatic's resurrected site onscreen the whole time. Makes Chris the poor schmo look like an idiot!

Anybody have a clue as to what that might be about? Was there something in that interview that NF needed to hide, or what???

Francesca,

I think from Eric's perspective it's mostly about the realization that he never should have revealed so many personal details about himself to the general public in the first place. Not because he really did anything wrong but because he left himself vulnerable to unwarranted attacks in the process. The video he posted explains what was hacked and how the information gained from that attack was used in an attempt to damage his reputation, derail (at least temporarily) his educational plans and how it even harmed some of his other friends and family members. His references to being hacked are both specific and direct. There's nothing "oblique" about them.

Eric never stated or implied that anyone but him was responsible for shutting down his YT channel. Others may have wondered if that's what happened but he doesn't have to specifically respond to every ridiculous theory someone else proposes. When you shut down a channel it doesn't all get instantly deleted off of the YT servers. It's all still sitting there waiting to be instantly reactivated for at least a few days before it truly gets purged. Besides, if you listen to what he actually says, it's pretty obvious that he shut it down himself and why he did it.

The Van Life interview on the Chris Travels channel and on the Nomadic Fanatic channel are identical except for the additional lead-in that Chris added to the instance he has posted on his channel. As far as I can tell, these are not newly "altered" versions of the interview. They still have the same original upload dates and Eric appears on camera in both instances of the video (in the scene where he and Chris are having lunch together at a diner). That video is consistent with another interview video he did with a full time van dweller named "Chad". He edits out the parts where he's asking a question and just pieces together the responses. It's a pretty commonly used technique for interviews that are meant to be incorporated later into a documentary film. Acclaimed documentary film maker Ken Burns uses it a lot. For example, see his "New York" documentary series.

Eric freely admits that he's bending some rules when he "boondocks" his RV overnight in places you're not supposed to. Chris Penn and at least a dozen others have YT videos showing the same thing. The thing they all emphasize is that you shouldn't make it obvious to others that you're inside; that you shouldn't push things by staying two, three days or longer in the same place and that you should always be respectful of your surroundings (e.g., don't run the generator at 3 am, don't park your RV in a neighborhood where its presence is likely to cause security concerns for residents or businesses, and so on.) But otherwise, chances are often good that no one will mess with you if you're not causing a problem for anyone and aren't drawing attention to yourself. Following the exact letter of the law at every opportunity is certainly admirable. But I'd be willing to bet that most people who've ever come back to find their parking meter has expired but haven't gotten a ticket don't put any more coins in the meter to cover the additional time and I doubt anyone has ever turned themselves into the local police for speeding or running a stop sign when no one else was around to bust 'em for it. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Also, one of Eric's earlier videos is specifically devoted to explaining why he felt it was economically advantageous to take out loans and enroll in school at that point in his life rather than continue working dead-end, part-time jobs that pay only minimum wage or don't provide a steady number of hours. He's preparing himself to eventually make a better income and bear a larger portion of the tax burden. He's only borrowing money from the taxpayers that *must* be paid back. I've seen small business owners use their SBA loans to help them afford the cost of buying motorcycles, boats, new siding for their homes -- all sorts of stuff -- then discharge it all through bankruptcy and start over under a new corporation name. You can't do it forever but you can get away with it for a while. Government subsidized student loans, on the other hand, have lifetime limits on award amounts and they're directly tied to academic performance and achievement. They can't be discharged through bankruptcy either. I wish the private business sector were as closely scrutinized and held to account as college students like Eric are.

[smacdiesel]

Sad is the fact his reputation is destroyed from here out, I'm sure not everything was true but their will always be a cloud of suspicion. Whoever went after him lied about him having child and committing a felony years back, don't understand why people have to be so vindictive.

[Francesca_Knowl]

So as it turns out, it IS about the money. Somebody evidently outed him to College financial aid folks, so now he's being looked at. No surprise there! I have to admit that the taxpayer side of me approves of such scrutiny.

Interestingly, he doesn't admit to having taken down the site- just makes some oblique references to having been "hacked". Puh-leeze. Sure managed to get it all back up lickety-split once all the scrubbed-up ducks were back in the row.

And speaking of duck-scrubbing:

A fellow on another channel did an interview with Eric back in February.

Weirdly, sometime in the last day or two that vid has been altered so that the bulk of the "interview" is GONE-???? Now, except for a few seconds at the beginning and end, it's just the channel owner, Chris, talking about himself. With a link to ol' Nomadic Fanatic's resurrected site onscreen the whole time. Makes Chris the poor schmo look like an idiot!

Anybody have a clue as to what that might be about? Was there something in that interview that NF needed to hide, or what???

[I90west]

Yes his old channel is back. He also created a separate YT channel to explain what happened.

Probably some good lessons to be learned from this for other RV dwellers (or really anyone) who aren't careful about protecting their online accounts and making sure to review their videos to ensure they're not revealing anything that a malicious person could use to cause grief.

[JonesKid]

Just saw a new youtube video from Nomadic Fanatic. His old youtube site is back.

[path1]

I'm located a bit north of him. I saw one of his vid's with his roofing leak big time and sent him e-mail on how to get it dried out and fixed. Also asked him what was the big deal about stealth. Just staying where it's legal.

No response, so no big surprise on current events taking place.

[I90west]

Hi Francesca,

I was specifically referring to the rewards for the film campaign which, as you showed, all indicate an "estimated delivery" of August 2014. That would be consistent with my statement about him having "until September" to make good on them.

As far as the film credits, I think most people figure that those would not be "delivered" until the post production of the film itself is completed and subsequently screened (which the Indiegogo page indicates will happen in late September).

I can see how people might assume the film would be posted on Youtube (though not necessarily on his Youtube channel) but I don't see anywhere that he stated in the Indiegogo page itself where exactly it would be screened. I have other friends who've done crowd-funded film projects and they use both Youtube and Vimeo pretty much interchangeably (even simultaneously) to get the widest audience possible. While the difference might seem subtle to some, there are good reasons why one might want to keep a documentary film posted separately from a Youtube channel, though it would certainly make sense to still promote the film through the Youtube channel, if that channel still exists.

When you contribute to a project on the big crowd-funding sites I think you have to provide an e-mail address along the way (if not directly then via the payment handling entity, e.g., Amazon payments) where you can receive notifications about the status of your contribution, the project and any promised rewards. They're not dependent on contributors having access to a specific Youtube channel to know what's going on. At least, that's my understanding.

[Francesca_Knowl]

I90west wrote:

As far as the promised mugs, hats, etc., he has until September to make good on that stuff. As such, I think some folks are being quite premature in their assumptions about what Eric will or won't follow through on by basing all their speculation on the shutdown of his (free) online RV related content.

The merchandise-only percs promised in the first (successful) campaign were due in May.
If they were delivered as promised and on time that should reassure at least those folks who expect only merchandise.

The latest campaign's promised (in August) percs are not limited to mugs and hats. What do you have to say to those folks promised the following "credit" in the next film, which they were given to understand would be widely published beginning with and especially on Youtube?

[Wanderlust3]

Wanderlust3, I agree that for the most part, he was a personable guy, but you must have missed the video when he announced that he turned off comments. He was hostile and rude to everyone.

Overall, I agree with your assessment. I don't think he's a scammer, just a dude with issues who couldn't take the abuse anymore. I can see where he may have been constantly deleting things. It may have been better had he just ignored all of the comments, as many on Youtube do. I know that's easier said than done.

[I90west]

Wanderlust3 wrote:
. . . I never saw anything negative in the comments that would warrant such a dramatic/angry reaction . . .

I'd never considered the angle of the unreported income when it comes to his financial aid. Could that have come to light, making Eric flee?

Wanderlust3: I think the reason you might not have seen the rude comments was because he was deleting them (so others didn't also have to wade through them). He would occasionally post his interactions with some of those trolls on his Facebook page instead. But we obviously have to agree to disagree on whether Eric was ever "hostile" or "rude" to his viewers. It's a purely subjective thing but I would offer that it seems a bit odd that someone so hostile and rude would amass over 10,000 subscribers on a channel like his in less than 8 months.

Everyone benefits from the government (i.e., everyone benefits from everyone else who pays taxes). Those who pay less still benefits from roads, bridges, sewers, etc. No one (to my knowledge), no matter how much tax they pay, has ever paid for an entire Interstate highway, an entire hydroelectric dam or an entire stealth fighter all by themselves. Everyone pays something, even if they pay no income tax. Even the poor pay sales tax in most states (including WA) on non-food items and it's usually only the middle to upper income folks who actually save all their receipts in order to deduct the portion of sales tax you're allowed to deduct from your income tax liability because taking the standard deduction usually works out better for lower income filers.

That said, while the IRS does require most crowd-funding income to be reported as a source of income, the law is still somewhat gray on what the tax liability should be for funds that have been received (and actually spent) to cover the costs of certain types of projects or activities. I am not a tax lawyer but I would guess (based on how other IRS tax deductions and credits usually work) that you'd have to show the expenses have a direct relationship to an allowable tax deduction or credit and there are usually limits on how much you can deduct. In Eric's case, (because he'd be taking his "home" with him) I'm not sure how he'd be able to show that the amount he spends on food while traveling to make the documentary would be significantly greater than what he'd spend if he weren't engaged in that activity. I'm not saying there isn't a way to show it or that it wouldn't be at least slightly greater, but I can't think of a good way to show that to the IRS unless he can somehow tie it to his educational requirements in some way (people do get academic credit for doing far more bizarre things than what he'd be doing). Similarly, he might only be able to deduct the amount spent on gas and propane above and beyond what he normally spends (which would necessitate pretty thorough record keeping practices, both past and present).

In any event, Eric has stated in his earlier videos that he used to go work for a temp agency for a week or two and then live off those funds for the next few weeks, then go do some more temp work and so on. Obviously that might be a lot more difficult to pull off while attending graduate school but as long he gets the loans to cover him he will have to pay them back eventually (they take your income tax refunds to pay them if you're in default). It's one of the few debts (like child support) that you cannot discharge at all through bankruptcy, ever. So, in a way, he's no more "living off the government" than any small business startup that relies on an SBA loan to get their business off the ground (except SBA loans CAN be discharged through bankruptcy).

As far as the promised mugs, hats, etc., he has until September to make good on that stuff. As such, I think some folks are being quite premature in their assumptions about what Eric will or won't follow through on by basing all their speculation on the shutdown of his (free) online RV related content. I don't really picture Eric as the type of guy who's going to go all sovereign citizen/mountain man on us just to skate out of his obligation to make good on his student loans and a few coffee mugs.

[Wanderlust3]

I90West said:
"For the benefit of RV dwellers who currently are or may be considering drawing their primary or supplemental income through crowd-funding and/or Youtube revenue, would you be willing to share what sources you're referencing on the subject of being "obligated to continue creating" the related content or requirement to explain why they might want to close their channel?"

The issue is that he made promises re: the documentary, including mugs, hats, etc. While it was "crowd funding," people were getting something in return for the money. Isn't it fair for them to want to know that he's going to do what he promised?

It might not be illegal to just bail on the promises/obligations he made without explanation. Fine. But he hasn't gone about this in a good way. Of course people are going to question his motives.

[I90west]

patrickl11435 wrote:

After you take money from someone via crowdfunding you have an obligation to continue creating or at least tell people why you're not going to create anymore.

patrickl11435: For the benefit of RV dwellers who currently are or may be considering drawing their primary or supplemental income through crowd-funding and/or Youtube revenue, would you be willing to share what sources you're referencing on the subject of being "obligated to continue creating" the related content or requirement to explain why they might want to close their channel?

There are lots of other questions that arise to which you might also know the answer. For example:

Does it matter whether the income is derived through a wholly separate crowd-funding site? What if the income is derived from ads or product endorsements on one's Youtube channel? Is this "obligation" only tied to videos where the ads or product endorsements are closely related to travel or RV living or would this obligation also apply to videos where you recommend or advertise products or services that aren't really specific to people who live in RVs like home landscaping services or guitar amplifiers?

How does one determine why people are viewing one's channel? Do you have to take periodic polls of your viewers to know whether they're watching because they have the same or similar type of RV as yours, whether it's because they live in the same or similar climate as the one where you live most often or whether they're just interested in how a female deals with full time RV living versus how a male deals with it? What if something changes? Let's say you get a new or different type of RV? Do you have to include a link to the channel belonging to the guy who bought your old RV so people can continue to see how well that old RV holds up? Or, what if you get a sex change operation? Are you allowed to take down the videos relating to the "old you"?

What explanations are acceptable for closing down a channel entirely? For example, let's say you won the lottery and don't really need the income from the channel any longer. Would you have to tell the world that you just won the lottery (experts generally advise against this)? Or would you just keep creating content, pretending to live out of a 1983 Class C, even though you ~really~ live in a villa on the Sicilian coast?

How do the major media/content creator conglomerates handle this? If I want to see old re-runs of a TV show (assuming I bought at least some of the products that were advertised at the time it originally aired) then why aren't TV networks obligated to keep making the shows that *I* want to see still available, indefinitely, for free? I mean, it's not *my* fault that I didn't think to make copies of all those old shows when they were originally available, right?

I'm just glad we have an expert resource like yourself available to help me understand all this, especially since I'm planning on winning the lottery soon and wouldn't want to shirk any of my "obligations" when that happens.

[Wanderlust3]

I don't think Eric planned this all along. Him doing this the way he did makes him appear to be unstable (and irresponsible and immature,) though.

I do have to respectfully disagree with you, I90West. Eric was not always kind, gracious and or thankful about the donations he got. It became expected, in my opinion. The video he posted about removing comments really changed the way I viewed him. I understand removing comments, but he was hostile and rude to EVERYONE, including the people who supported him. I never saw anything negative in the comments that would warrant such a dramatic/angry reaction. I'd been a fan for a long time, but unsubscribed at that point, even though I knew I'd miss him and Jax.

I thought the same, Francesca. All around. He was living off the government and panhandling online. Not a self-made guy who is amazing with budgeting, etc., as he attempted to portray at times. He is going to grad school more to put off paying those student loans. It's not going to be pretty when that day comes.

I'd never considered the angle of the unreported income when it comes to his financial aid. Could that have come to light, making Eric flee? In doing so, he created a monster of speculation. It would have been better for him to keep the discussion going on one of his pages, a page he had some control over. Now there's nothing he's ever going to be able to do about the info out there.