In a recent turn of events, Gleb “Funn1k” Lipatnikov, a name once synonymous with high-level professional Dota 2 play, has reportedly been blacklisted from an internet cafe in Dublin, Ireland. The unwelcome development came to light via a concerned employee`s post on a popular online forum, painting a picture of a former esport icon struggling with public conduct.
The allegations detail a pattern of disruptive behavior that escalated beyond mere inconvenience. According to the cafe employee, Funn1k treated the establishment as his personal domain. This included trivial but frustrating actions like setting passwords on public computers and leaving personal belongings strewn across chairs, effectively claiming them. More concerningly, his behavior reportedly extended to actively bothering other patrons, attempting to coax them into casino visits. The situation reached a critical point when, in a recent appearance, Lipatnikov is said to have engaged in a tirade of insults and threats. The employee`s plea, voiced publicly, suggested a genuine concern for Funn1k`s well-being, hoping family or friends might intervene before the city, as they put it, “eats him alive.”
This incident, while seemingly localized to a single internet cafe, resonates with a broader pattern of controversial actions attributed to Lipatnikov. Just this past May, Funn1k made headlines for an entirely different, yet similarly perplexing, announcement. He declared the formation of a “guild” whose explicit purpose was to deliberately disrupt games when matched with specific prominent esports figures. Among the reported targets were esteemed players such as Danil “Dendi” Ishutin, Illya “ALOHADANCE” Korobkin, and Egor “Nightfall” Grigorenko.
The contrast between Funn1k`s past achievements as a respected professional player and his recent public conduct is stark, if not a little ironic. Once celebrated for his strategic prowess in the digital arena, he now finds himself in a public dispute over basic decorum in a physical one. This string of events raises questions not only about personal responsibility in public spaces but also about the pressures and transitions former esports professionals may face post-career. It serves as a reminder that the spotlight, even when dimmed, continues to illuminate public figures, and conduct, both online and offline, remains subject to scrutiny.
