To many people, “grifter” just means “person with followers for whom I have a raging hate boner.”The point is obviously to bankrupt Patreon. It doesn't matter if the claims for arbitration are meritorious or not, Patreon has to cough up millions against opex, of course that's the goal. You won't find those involved in the case saying this explicitly because that would give patreon a potential argument against them, but that's clearly the goal.
Adhesion contracts tend to be presumptively lawful but that is not an ironclad defense against getting told your contracts are fucked and unenforceable for various reasons because you can still run afoul even if you put it down in writing. Like this is basic shit, it's just in most cases it never makes it to a point of the contract being scrutinized by a judge because the cost of getting it there in the first place is prohibitive to the parties who would seek relief. The dice tend to be weighted in favor of the party who made the contract, but that's no guarantee, especially if you keep changing the contract directly in response to people attempting to follow your contracts.
Mostly though all this whining about grifting is kinda odd because the only parties likely to get jack shit are everyone's lawyers, it's not unlikely that the bears lose on arb, and even if they win patreon will probably have to shutter due to losing Mastercard and not getting the arb fees aspect reversed. Nobody makes money except the lawyers and patreon goes down. Explain in detail where the grift is because I don't see it.
This looks to me more like a bunch of people losing money to fuck over a very specific totem of silicon valley tech.