Something is afoot at the Jerkle-K
Over the course of this past week, Jeremy Hambly, otherwise known as , has been outed for allegedly flagging down his rivals, the Kino Casino.
As a person who has made the same mistake in the past, I can understand what he is going through. While these issues are not to be ignored, one thing has stood out to me that is even more egregious than flagging down your competitors.
Jeremy Hambly has 2.01 million subscribers on YouTube for just this one main channel. His other secondary channels range in the hundreds of thousands of subscribers, but his flagship is undeniably TheQuartering.
One thing Jeremy understands is Fair Use. His entire channel is built on it; he watches other videos and provides commentary. It is an established business model used by thousands of creators. But when you look at his recent performance metrics, something seems... off.
According to Social Blade, he is pulling in an average of 1,068,333 views per day over the past two weeks. However, when you look at his long-form uploads, they are averaging only 45,000 to 55,000 views per video. Some of his core political commentary videos are struggling to break even 30,000 views.
So, where are the other million-plus daily views coming from?
The answer is Short-form content. TheQuartering has been flooding his channel with just as many Shorts as long-form videos. These clips are getting significantly more traction and mileage than his standard commentary.
What is the "special sauce" driving this engagement? In my opinion, it is Freebooting.
Jeremy starts by asking, "What are the oranges for?" and then plays the original video in its entirety without providing a single word of further commentary, critique, or education. This is effectively "piracy with a face-cam."
The original footage comes from a channel called (460k subscribers), an offshoot of , which has over 5.6 million subscribers. The original video, "Cooking yummy wash pork with orange recipe," has over 1.5 million views on TikTok.
TheQuartering’s freebooted version pulled 123,000 views in less than 24 hours. By re-uploading her work with his own branding and a "Subscribe" button, he is siphoning engagement and revenue away from the original artist.
The data breakdown is stark: his Shorts average approximately 250,000 views each. In just the last 7 days, his Shorts generated roughly 7.5 million views. In the current 2026 algorithm, roughly 74% of Shorts views come from non-subscribers. His top freebooted Short outperformed his original political commentary by over 7,200%.
While his main channel has 2.01 million subscribers, his actual growth rate is stagnant. These millions of views aren't building a loyal core; they are just keeping a declining brand on algorithm life support.
What makes this even more baffling is that on his Quartering News TikTok, he actually provides ongoing commentary over his clips. So, is the YouTube strategy pure laziness, or a blatant attempt to exploit the "Wild West" of 2026 copyright loopholes?
One thing is certain: you can’t claim to be a champion of "free speech" while using flagging as a weapon and other people's creativity as a shield. At some point, the grift runs dry, and you're just another gatekeeper desperately clinging to a house of cards that's already starting to fold.
Want to publish your own Article?
Upgrade to Premium