The return of popular content creator Guy “Dr. Disrespect” Beahm has continued to spark discussion in the streaming community. There are, however, some fellow streamers standing on their stance against Beahm, including Nick “NICKMERCS” Kolcheff.
Kolcheff made a 17-minute reaction video to Beahm’s return stream, where the 33-year-old listened to the disgraced streamer’s full thoughts and point-of-view on the situation. When Beahm originally released his statement on the subject on social media, the FaZe Clan co-owner rebuked Beahm, showing heavy disapproval of his actions while also disconnecting himself from the streamer.
In the video, Beahm doubled down on his defense, stating none of his actions broke any laws and that there were no illegal actions found by authorities or Twitch staff. Beahm claimed he knows “the legal definition of sexting,” which is one of the major accusations leveled against him.
In Kolcheff’s eyes, however, this doesn’t excuse the fact that a husband and father admitted to sending inappropriate messages to an underage person.
“To me, this isn’t about legality,” Kolcheff said. “[He’s in his] late 30s, you got a kid, a wife, and you’re doing stuff like that? [With] my morals and my understanding of the situation, I firmly believe that he was wrong. I don’t care if he didn’t break any laws, I don’t care if a judge found him guilty or not, he admitted to it. We know enough that there was, at least, a conversation going on. We also know that he admitted cheating on his wife, [and] you can put two and two together.”
Kolcheff did agree that there are people on Twitch’s staff “that don’t make great decisions,” and believes there were people on staff that were plotting against Beahm and his eventual permanent ban from the platform. Even still, he maintained that he will not be associating himself with Beahm for the foreseeable future.
The FaZe co-owner also voiced his confusion on why Beahm won’t simply reveal the messages between him and the supposed minor, especially because he is backtracking from his original statement. If there truly was no suspicious activity happening, revealing the messages would absolve him of guilt, Kolcheff reasoned: “If he’s so adamant about them not being bad, then why don’t you show everyone?”
