No, Cassidy Does Not Exist.

Comments · 844

• WH

  @Whispurer · 2 weeks ago

  Me when my kid dies publicly in a hospital and I manage to gaslight the state of Utah into putting him on missing posters

  403

• CO

  @CosmicStarVA · 2 weeks ago (edited)

  I&apos;m having a hard time following any of what this video claims, all of it just kinda sounds like &quot;never ever believe what the series tells you.&quot;<br><br>First you got the Logbook. The puzzle is of finding a character&apos;s name, the only hints being them going &quot;MY NAME.&quot; It just makes no sense to look at that and go &quot;clearly we use this to find a completely different character&apos;s name.&quot; If your reasoning towards that is that Faded also asks &quot;what was your name,&quot; couldn&apos;t the reasoning of trying to figure out who Faded is talking to also work? There&apos;s also Page 31 which basically just has an illustration of Happiest day, an image of the Puppet giving a small child a layered Cake with the words &quot;Happiest Day&quot; on the top of the page.<br><br>Next is The Fourth Closet. While Cassidy may not be possessing Golden Freddy, its still pretty obvious you have Cassidy as an MCI victim. <br><br>Then there&apos;s the MCI in general. The only evidence you have towards CC being Golden Freddy is the MCI being retconned. This is an incredibly bold take, but also one that kinda just ignores the entirety of the series. There&apos;s never any effort to go back and make it clear the MCI was retconned (if anything, sometimes the MCI has more children instead of less). Through all the novels, short stories, guidebooks, movies, games, and other basic spinoff materiel, none of them ever make the MCI any less than 5 missing children who were lured away by Afton. (The DBD collab even says the 5 spirits are his victims, this is something directly made with Scott). You also have many instances of the MCI being in 1985, a year the Crying Child would never be around for. Then theres the biggest elephant in the room being the MCI happening at Freddy&apos;s and not Fredbear&apos;s. If you don&apos;t want to believe the mountain of evidence stating the MCI happened in 1985, there&apos;s no explanation for how CC could possibly see an event that occurred at a place that only existed after Fredbear&apos;s closed. It makes no sense to claim &quot;The MCI was retconned&quot; when the series never supports anything close to that idea.<br><br>With Happiest Day, I do think the layout is interesting. However, I don&apos;t think it has anything to do with CC. With all the contradictions I previously brought up, the MCI has no reason to be associated with Fredbears. Chances are it could just be a random hallway. Or alternatively, its Freddy&apos;s. Interestingly enough, the Into the Pit game layout is the exact same as Happiest Day, and it just so happens to be about the MCI. There&apos;s also the Logbook page I mentioned with a girl being shown as the Happiest Day receiver pretty clearly. <br><br>Overall, this just is not convincing. All this theory really says is &quot;ignore 1985, ignore any spinoff materiel, ignore the consistency of the MCI, never listen to anything the series says.&quot; All this seems to do is make Golden Freddy way more convoluted and put Crying Child in the place of a pre-established character. Claiming that character is actually the non-important one, even though they persist long after Crying Child&apos;s first and only appearance within the games. <br>It really just feels like a want for Crying Child to be relevant again after 11 years of being mia. He&apos;s not in any spinoffs, any collabs, any novels. He only has a handfull of references. He just doesn&apos;t seem important at all.

  685

• ET

  @ethans9379 · 2 weeks ago

  On the one hand, I’m not convinced that Cassidy was meant to be bite victim. The Logbook was definitely a mess. On the other hand, I never really felt that strongly about GoldenDuo, so I could definitely see there being an alternative to that

  400

• TU

  @tuxedocark · 2 weeks ago (edited)

  Was really hoping this to be more convincing, but having a really confusing explanation for the word search (why the hell did faded put MY NAME on the gravestone) and ignoring the foxy grid seems like a bit of an incomplete takeaway.<br><br>I was also hoping for an argument as to why Bite Victim is somehow included in the missing children lineup when he was definitely not missing, but that didn’t exactly happen. It was mainly using Happiest Day to assert that he’s included in a list of kids that don’t share his circumstance, even though the disparity is a big factor in why people still believe in fanon Cassidy (also the idea that Cassidy is the receiver is based on the stitchwraith parallel, where Jake uses his memory to help Andrew pass on, though this early in the series I can see that parallel as not as convincing). There have been five <b>missing</b> kids as the main focus of the series since the first game’s newspapers, and it’s not really that convincing to blankly say “they’ve been retconned” which, if we are going with that, doesn’t really fit the description of the retcon that Scott gave before fnaf 6. Feels like arguing that Charlie was the first missing kid or one of the missing kids is more convincing.<br><br>Frankly, I’m open to this interpretation of Cassidy, but I just think this as a standalone vid wasn’t particularly ironclad. If it’s true I think Scott has maybe made the worst storytelling mistake in this entire franchise by not properly steering us away from this interpretation for years. More years have passed between now and the logbook giving us this interpretation and the logbooks original release in relation to when the franchise first started.<br>Hopefully SB2 and FW2 (maybe) gives us more to work with. <br>To be clear most of this critique is because I don’t really think someone who already believed in fanon Cassidy is going to be convinced by this video with how kind of simply the arguments are presented and the assumptions made to get there. They feel kind of underdeveloped. I’ll watch your other related vids to maybe get a better understanding on how you view the series.

  241

• CH

  @chocman5719 · 2 weeks ago (edited)

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VGfxf5jCl4&amp;t=1456">24:16</a> minutes of a theory that holds water by saying &quot;Ignore everything the games/other media tells you after fnaf 4&quot; 🥀

  247

• SM

  @SmthIswr · 2 weeks ago

  “Cassidy believers are just trying to shoehorn in an unnecessary extra victim, but also there might be a 6th secret kid who’s the TOYSNHK that has nothing to do with Cassidy at all!”<br><br>Dude.

  99

• GA

  @Gacha_Melons · 2 weeks ago (edited)

  I own the Security Logbook, and an important detail that I feel no one brings up is the fact that page 29 (which is altered to say 52 - THE FIRST TIME A NUMBER IS CHANGED) the faded text draws an arrow pointing to the changed number saying &quot;My Name&quot;.<br><br>This is a bit hard to see because it is right alongside the drawing Michael makes of him on his water skee resort, but this is direct confirmation that the altered numbers are directly explaining Faded Texts name - and NOT altered text itself.<br><br>This is actually the first time Faded Text says &quot;MY NAME&quot; as well, only deepening the connection to the altered numbers, and thus, that Faded Text is the one named Cassidy.<br><br>(Note: I&apos;ve watched your other videos and I&apos;ve enjoyed most of them, I&apos;m not trying to hate - it&apos;s just I&apos;ve seen this missed detail show up in many theories, such as Dual Process Theories FNaF Timeline)

  175

• ZO

  @ZorusPSerif · 2 weeks ago

  Now the response to &quot;Do you still have dreams?&quot; being &quot;I&apos;m scared&quot; makes sense because the spirit in question responding is a scared child And sometimes children&apos;s responses are not always straightforward And so, when you ask, &quot;Do you still have dreams?&quot; for the crying child, it may bring up nightmares, thus scaring him So it does make sense You just have to think about it a little more

  5

• SN

  @Snt1_ · 2 weeks ago

  Im sorry but saying the number of children in the MCI was retconned is crazy talk.<br><br>Scott has claimed there has only been one actual retcon (before FNAF 6) and that it was pretty seamless. While the number of kids in the MCI being retconned would certainly be a retcon, it&apos;d also be anything but seamless

  94

• IN

  @intotheindie8821 · 2 weeks ago

  The only issue with Cassidy being the missing kid is FNaF 4’s ending including a flatline after a heart to heart, implying CC died in the hospital with both Michael and William there, not in/near any animatronic

  98

• I_

  @i_am_dbozo · 2 weeks ago

  All of the evidence is just ‘Don’t believe in the few things that the series tells you, just trust me.’<br><br>1. CassidyVictim relies on BV5th or Puppet5h, both of which have very bad problems with them. I don’t think Scott would retcon the MCI of all things, especially considering that there’s so much better candidates for the retcon, an example being WillConvicted. <br><br>2. The Logbook actually debunks this. All of the coordinates are on pages that say ‘MY NAME.’ By Faded. It wouldn’t make sense for ‘MY NAME’ to be written of the grave, by Faded just for the name to be Altered’s name.<br>Plus, if the Faded is Charlie, then what’s with all of the ‘MY NAME’ and ‘IT’S ME?’ There literally isn’t a single puzzle leading for the name of Faded to be Charlie. Plus, ‘IT’S ME’ is attributed to the main 5, especially Golden Freddy, it has absolutely nothing to do with the Puppet.<br><br>In the nicest way possible, this video/theory just has <i>really</i> bad evidence.

  7

• JA

  @jackismemeish · 2 weeks ago

  Fnaf lore is just pure head cannon. There’s a reason I don’t keep up with this shit anymore

  4