https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0F-IHwgC-Q
The prosecution's argument hinges largely on the fact that when the 24-hour mark on the clamato post was reached, despite the post clearly only having 27 points, the total vote count was 29 upvotes and 2 downvotes. According to @Polsaker, the 29 upvotes are all that were needed, the downvotes do not offset the results, and the total vote count means NOTHING.
This is an inherently flawed argument. For one, the official post uses the terminology 'upphuk', a phrase which I coined in the hot sauce video all those years ago. Me being the one who originated the phrase, I reserve the right to define it, and its definition is the TOTAL VOTE COUNT on a post, which is displayed between the upvote and downvote buttons.
Additionally, as you can see in the post title, there is an arrow specifically pointing in the direction of that number. If we were counting the upvotes alone, the arrow would have needed to point the other direction.
Finally, I would like to cite precedent from another shitpost of mine, the tide pod enema challenge. In this post, I promised to shove 27 tide pods up my ass if and only if the post were to reach that many upvotes. Though I did not use the terminology 'upphuk' in this case, and though the post itself did not reach 27 individual upvotes, the comment section very clearly supports the case that the results rely on total vote counts rather than individual upvotes. If you scroll down, you'll find a comment by @smallpond in which the user became concerned for my well being and chose to downvote the post to prevent me from doing the challenge.
I consider this a pretty open and shut case. We won, and will not be drinking the clamato juice.
We won people. Do I need to bust out the Wookie Defence? This is how you make me bust out the Wookie Defence.