shellypundao || blackpink || coyg
Malaysia
Joined October 2025
- Tweets13.1K
- Following117
- Followers2.6K
- Likes50.8K
Pinned Tweet
I really don’t like how y’all took “taking accountability” and turned it into a completely different thing when it comes to Shelly. She admitted that her mistake was not communicating with Pundao and apologized for hurting her, but people keep conveniently leaving out the context she explained in her livestream.
Her mom was the one who contacted her ex and wanted him around, and Shelly herself was clearly uncomfortable with that situation. That is literally why she asked her friend to come along on the vacation with her because she did NOT want to be alone around that man. And honestly, can we acknowledge how difficult it must have been to communicate about something like this when it involved her own mother? It wasn’t simply a matter of “just tell your girlfriend.” She was dealing with a complicated family situation involving someone she was uncomfortable with, while also having to navigate her relationship with her mom. She still acknowledged that she should have communicated better, apologized to Pundao, and took responsibility for that.
But somehow “I failed to communicate with my girlfriend about a complicated situation involving my mom and my ex” has been twisted into “Shelly cheated” and treated like an established fact. You can be angry at her. You can think she should have communicated sooner. You can think she handled the situation badly. Those are all fair criticisms.
What isn’t fair is taking the worst possible interpretation of the situation, presenting it as fact, and then using “accountability” as an excuse to endlessly drag, witch-hunt and harass her even after she has apologized, faced consequences and stepped away. Accountability is supposed to address what someone actually did wrong. It is not a lifetime sentence where people get to keep inventing things to punish them for. At some point, it stops being accountability and becomes harassment.
narmi retweeted
I think you’re quite funny. Leave the kids alone
Before you do anything, use your brain and think it through clearly. I’ve already put up with it once. Do not take advantage of kid's kindness. Don't try to hurt the kids!There are people who know what you’ve done🙃And don't make your intentions so obvious
#shellybenda #shellypundao #pundao
well said
When looking back at the sequence of events that has unfolded up to this point, it is clear that there are several points where the information conflicts with itself. That is likely one of the main reasons why fans have begun to question the situation.
Before I explain my own perspective, there is one important premise that needs to be established first: Shelly and Pundao were in a romantic relationship. However, I want to make it clear that whether they are still in a relationship now is not relevant to the point I am making here.
In Shelly’s first statement, she clearly referred to that person as her “ex-partner.” She maintained the same position when she later addressed the matter during her livestream.
If that is the case, why did MME choose to specifically use and emphasize the term “overlapping relationships” in its official announcement?
And why did the company tell fans that Pundao was the one who decided to discontinue their future activities as a pair?
This leads to another contradiction.
If Pundao truly informed the company that very same day that she could no longer continue working with Shelly, why did she later tell reporters at her next scheduled appearance that she had learned about the situation at the same time as the fans and had still not received a clear explanation from Shelly?
If Pundao had not yet heard Shelly’s explanation, does it really make sense that within just 76 minutes, she had already decided to end their activities as a CP?
Would it not have been more natural for her to first hear a clear explanation from the other person, take time to process the situation and organize her thoughts, and only then decide what position she wanted to take?
Personally, I am not particularly interested in what intentions MME may have had in handling this situation.
Because regardless of their intentions, it does not change the fact that the decisions they made and the way they handled the situation were wrong.
What I cannot understand, as a consumer, is how I am supposed to view the behavior of a CEO whose company is supposed to protect its artists, yet leaves both of its own artists exposed to public attacks and pressure while acting as if none of it is the management’s responsibility.
I also do not understand how we are supposed to interpret the behavior of an employee who appears to repeatedly undermine the image of artists under their own company.
And there are still far too many unanswered questions.
Why is Pundao’s November schedule completely empty?
Does the company intend to give Shelly another work schedule at all?
Why did the company choose this particular timing to plan Pundao’s solo fan meeting?
And regarding that fan meeting, did the company actually discuss the event properly and directly with the artist herself?
As the head of a company, I hope you take the time to reflect on whether you are truly carrying out your responsibilities and handling your work appropriately.
And as an individual, and as an adult, I also hope you take a moment to ask yourself whether you are truly fulfilling your role in a responsible and proper way.
22
461
narmi retweeted
When looking back at the sequence of events that has unfolded up to this point, it is clear that there are several points where the information conflicts with itself. That is likely one of the main reasons why fans have begun to question the situation.
Before I explain my own perspective, there is one important premise that needs to be established first: Shelly and Pundao were in a romantic relationship. However, I want to make it clear that whether they are still in a relationship now is not relevant to the point I am making here.
In Shelly’s first statement, she clearly referred to that person as her “ex-partner.” She maintained the same position when she later addressed the matter during her livestream.
If that is the case, why did MME choose to specifically use and emphasize the term “overlapping relationships” in its official announcement?
And why did the company tell fans that Pundao was the one who decided to discontinue their future activities as a pair?
This leads to another contradiction.
If Pundao truly informed the company that very same day that she could no longer continue working with Shelly, why did she later tell reporters at her next scheduled appearance that she had learned about the situation at the same time as the fans and had still not received a clear explanation from Shelly?
If Pundao had not yet heard Shelly’s explanation, does it really make sense that within just 76 minutes, she had already decided to end their activities as a CP?
Would it not have been more natural for her to first hear a clear explanation from the other person, take time to process the situation and organize her thoughts, and only then decide what position she wanted to take?
Personally, I am not particularly interested in what intentions MME may have had in handling this situation.
Because regardless of their intentions, it does not change the fact that the decisions they made and the way they handled the situation were wrong.
What I cannot understand, as a consumer, is how I am supposed to view the behavior of a CEO whose company is supposed to protect its artists, yet leaves both of its own artists exposed to public attacks and pressure while acting as if none of it is the management’s responsibility.
I also do not understand how we are supposed to interpret the behavior of an employee who appears to repeatedly undermine the image of artists under their own company.
And there are still far too many unanswered questions.
Why is Pundao’s November schedule completely empty?
Does the company intend to give Shelly another work schedule at all?
Why did the company choose this particular timing to plan Pundao’s solo fan meeting?
And regarding that fan meeting, did the company actually discuss the event properly and directly with the artist herself?
As the head of a company, I hope you take the time to reflect on whether you are truly carrying out your responsibilities and handling your work appropriately.
And as an individual, and as an adult, I also hope you take a moment to ask yourself whether you are truly fulfilling your role in a responsible and proper way.
narmi retweeted
The contradictions between the two statements cannot be explained away as “different perspectives.”
The company's explanation is that Shelly's statement was written from her personal perspective, while the company's official announcement was based on the evidence it had gathered and the information provided by Shelly.
But first, let's establish one important rule: according to company requirements, any official clarification or public statement issued by an artist must first be reviewed and approved by the company.
In her October 10 post, Pundao explicitly stated that she had published her message without the company's permission. This further supports the existence of such an approval requirement.
Now, let's go back to the two statements released on October 1.
The company has never claimed that Shelly's clarification that day was published without authorization. This suggests that Shelly's statement had been reviewed and approved by the company before being made public.
Yet just **76 minutes later**, the company released its own official announcement, and the two statements contained major contradictions on a crucial issue.
The company's announcement introduced a key characterization: **“overlapping relationships.”** This became the central justification for Shelly's suspension and the termination of the ShellyPundao professional partnership.
However, Shelly's clarification, which had supposedly already received company approval, **never once mentioned “overlapping relationships.”**
If both statements were based on information provided by Shelly, and the only difference was their respective perspectives, then such a crucial characterization should not simply disappear from one statement and suddenly appear in the other.
This strongly suggests that **the company added the term “overlapping relationships” on its own and came to that conclusion without Shelly confirming it.**
So the question is: **Why did the company do this?**
Was it simply because management was incompetent?
Or, as previously speculated, had the company intended to separate ShellyPundao from the very beginning, and this unexpected incident happened to provide the perfect opportunity?
Could Shelly's initial statement have been a trap deliberately designed by the company?
So what exactly does the company mean by **“different perspectives”?**
Shelly's perspective was to clarify the facts, while the company's perspective was to declare its own artist guilty?
We're talking about the exact same incident. Shelly's statement made no mention of “overlapping relationships,” yet the company rushed to introduce this characterization, one serious enough to destroy her reputation, and then left her to face the overwhelming public backlash and abuse on her own.
**Is this what you call “different perspectives”? Or is it simply that, in your eyes, the artist's perspective doesn't matter at all, and the only version that matters is the one the company wants the public to believe?**
**Are you supposed to be protecting your artists, or sacrificing them?**
