Enjoy.

[I HATE THE DEMIURGE I HATE THE DEMIURGE]

Why are you even doing that? Post the links and let us have a laugh at Zak the Loser's expense.

[Zak S]

My question, does that sound like anyone posting on this thread?   

You're still not doing the dinner table thing:

You go into a room, yell that someone's an asshole, then when asked why you decided that, you treat people like that's the offense.

I understand this is normal to you here but that doesn't make it ok.

Zak,

It's totally okay if you don't remember conversations that we've been part of.  For the sake of MY CONVENIENCE, would you be willing to explain what you think should happen to someone who lies?

1. A lie is claimed.
2. The person either goes "Ok I lied" or gives some other explanation (like "I made a mistake" or "I . Either way: they address the claim, so long as it's made by someone else who is also following the rules (you can't claim protection from a code you won't follow).
3. If the explanation is not satisfactory to the person who made the claim they say why, including providing proof. (Burden of proof is on the accuser.)
4. If the lie is proved at that point, the original person apologizes. That's it. It's over.
5. If there's no apology, then everyone reading takes steps to create significant negative feedback for them, enough that it discourages them from doing so in the future. They should also--by whatever means they can--work to prevent them from making statements that accuse anyone else (even by implication) of anything until they receive enough therapy to realize they should apologize.

Specifically it was a situation where you said 'I would not do that' and then later you said 'I would do exactly that'. 

I don't know what the instance is but based solely on this description it could easily be a situation where I changed my mind. In order for there to be a lie you'd have to prove a lot more.

Additionally, I'm willing to provide links to other people providing evidence of times that you have lied - specifically an instance where a former friend and professional colleague catches you impersonating someone else.

Burden of proof is on you. Claiming something is proof is not the same as proof.

Colleagues have accused me of nearly everything under the sun.

Finally, I'm willing to provide citations where you have demanded specific rules in an argument (ie, every comment must specifically refer to the intended audience, rather than assume that it refers specifically to the author) but then immediately proceeded to ignore the rule you demanded so you claimed things as 'universal' when they applied specifically to you. 

Provide it.

[Zak S]

My question, does that sound like anyone posting on this thread?   

You're still not doing the dinner table thing:

You go into a room, yell that someone's an asshole, then when asked why you decided that, you treat people like that's the offense.

I understand this is normal to you here but that doesn't make it ok.

Zak,

It's totally okay if you don't remember conversations that we've been part of.  For the sake of MY CONVENIENCE, would you be willing to explain what you think should happen to someone who lies?  If you'll do me that favor, I'm willing to quote a specific instance where you said one thing, then later said the opposite.  Specifically it was a situation where you said 'I would not do that' and then later you said 'I would do exactly that'.  Additionally, I'm willing to provide links to other people providing evidence of times that you have lied - specifically an instance where a former friend and professional colleague catches you impersonating someone else.  Finally, I'm willing to provide citations where you have demanded specific rules in an argument (ie, every comment must specifically refer to the intended audience, rather than assume that it refers specifically to the author) but then immediately proceeded to ignore the rule you demanded so you claimed things as 'universal' when they applied specifically to you. 

I don't want to mischaracterize your position on people who lie.  I remember it being very harsh - something to the effect of 'they should no longer be permitted to participate in society'.  But I know how much you like having a chance to clarify your positions and I don't want to be accused of lying because I didn't bother to find the specific quote I had in mind.

Also, it's important to note:

I am sure I can disprove any claim you make that I'm not following my own rules.

However, I am also sure: you won't acknowledge it when I do that--and probably won't acknowledge any piece of information that disproves something you say. Unless you agree to do that, you're not playing on an even field and your victim owes you nothing.

[Tubesock Army]

I am Zak's complete lack of self-awareness.

[Zak S]

I am Zak's complete lack of self-awareness.

If you think you have a legitimate complaint you're free to post what that is and give proof.

"You refuse to talk like me" isn't one.

[Ghostmaker]

As much of an ass as Zak is (and you are an ass, Zak, don't even fuckin' start), I think the worm is definitely turning against people lobbing questionable accusations willy-nilly.

I will refer you to H.L. Mencken's quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

Hold your nose if you have to, but don't ever forget the shitheads will happily stalk YOU after they collect Zak's scalp.

[Zak S]

As much of an ass as Zak is (and you are an ass, Zak, don't even fuckin' start),

Translaion "I, also, think calling people out for lying is bad."

[Tubesock Army]

As much of an ass as Zak is (and you are an ass, Zak, don't even fuckin' start), I think the worm is definitely turning against people lobbing questionable accusations willy-nilly.

I will refer you to H.L. Mencken's quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

Hold your nose if you have to, but don't ever forget the shitheads will happily stalk YOU after they collect Zak's scalp.

Worth noting that I haven't weighed in on Mandy's claims, as I am reserving judgement for the outcome of the court case. I'm only talking about Zak being, well, Zak. This has nothing to do with any SJW shit.

[deadDMwalking]

I was hoping you would make some of the comments about someone who 'lied' as you define it, even once, doesn't deserve even emergency medical care.  But just requiring an apology is much kinder. 

Specifically it was a situation where you said 'I would not do that' and then later you said 'I would do exactly that'. 

I don't know what the instance is but based solely on this description it could easily be a situation where I changed my mind. In order for there to be a lie you'd have to prove a lot more.

During a conversation regarding 'say yes' and asking for bonuses I said:

Sure, player A might say 'If I play a really stirring emotional passage on my ocarina can I get a bonus on my Diplomacy check', and we know Zak S will say yes.  And if player B says, 'if I stick my tongue down her throat and get her really hot, can I get a bonus on my Diplomacy check', and we know Zak S will say yes.

You responded:
Your fantasies about me are becoming increasingly bizarre.

In fact, you quoted me, so I know that you were responding to my comment. 

The very next day you said in response to a poster that asked about someone that wanted a diplomacy bonus without a musical instrument
Player B wants his character to be a diplomat, but not a musician.:
Zak S: Then there are a bajillion other things besides music this person can do to curry favor that would cost as much or less money and (in game and out) time to curry favor.
Source

In my interactions with Zak S, he has frequently instructed me to 'watch every single one of his videos' to avoid making a mistake about his actual position, despite having his direct quotes to tell me what they are.  While I think that's an unreasonable burden, in that vein, This Thread is fun - I explain why he is an asshole multiple times as I respond to his posts and comments. 

Additionally, I'm willing to provide links to other people providing evidence of times that you have lied - specifically an instance where a former friend and professional colleague catches you impersonating someone else.

Burden of proof is on you. Claiming something is proof is not the same as proof.

Colleagues have accused me of nearly everything under the sun.

False Machine

You think its reasonable, and in fact necessary, to not just un-follow people, but to block them, and not just disagree with them socially but to do what you can to stop them making money. This certainly extends to refusing to work with them in any way. How much further it might extend is unknown.

You would not survive the rules you impose on others.

You were caught lying and pretending to be someone else online.

Finally, I'm willing to provide citations where you have demanded specific rules in an argument (ie, every comment must specifically refer to the intended audience, rather than assume that it refers specifically to the author) but then immediately proceeded to ignore the rule you demanded so you claimed things as 'universal' when they applied specifically to you. 

Provide it.

This will have to wait until tomorrow, but there are several instances in the threads linked previously.  Apologies if the quotes didn't nest properly. 

[Zak S]

As much of an ass as Zak is (and you are an ass, Zak, don't even fuckin' start), I think the worm is definitely turning against people lobbing questionable accusations willy-nilly.

I will refer you to H.L. Mencken's quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

Hold your nose if you have to, but don't ever forget the shitheads will happily stalk YOU after they collect Zak's scalp.

Worth noting that I haven't weighed in on Mandy's claims, as I am reserving judgement for the outcome of the court case. I'm only talking about Zak being, well, Zak. This has nothing to do with any SJW shit.

And worth noting you haven't actually explained why you have beef beyond "Zak thinks lying is bad and that's bad"

[Zak S]

I was hoping you would make some of the comments about someone who 'lied' as you define it, even once, doesn't deserve even emergency medical care.  But just requiring an apology is much kinder. 

Well usually they don't apologize so the practical question:

What is done to prevent them from causing more harm?

While it's a useful question, in practice people here can't even agree lying is bad, so a moot discussion on this forum.

Specifically it was a situation where you said 'I would not do that' and then later you said 'I would do exactly that'.....And if player B says, 'if I stick my tongue down her throat and get her really hot, can I get a bonus on my Diplomacy check', and we know Zak S will say yes. [/i]

You responded:
Your fantasies about me are becoming increasingly bizarre.

In fact, you quoted me, so I know that you were responding to my comment. 

The very next day you said in response to a poster that asked about someone that wanted a diplomacy bonus without a musical instrument
Player B wants his character to be a diplomat, but not a musician.:
Zak S: Then there are a bajillion other things besides music this person can do to curry favor that would cost as much or less money and (in game and out) time to curry favor.
Source

This would appear to have nothing to do with anything.

You have a bizarre fantasy about tongues being shoved in throats.

This has fuck-all to do with any alleged lie I told.

You should, however, publicly admit that you were wrong to say "'if I stick my tongue down her throat and get her really hot, can I get a bonus on my Diplomacy check', and we know Zak S will say yes.
"

Since at no point did I claim that response would get that reaction to me and it would not, to this day.

False Machine

Yeah that's not proof.

That's Patrick claiming that happened.

It's addressed multiple times including in the video posted in this thread:

Patrick didn't actually check the comments made by the account to see if there was any kind of impersonation, he just said it. In fact, Ettin said a similar thing, then got sued and had to admit I committed no abuse of any kind--so not only is this not true, I prevailed in a court case on account of how not true it is.


https://jrients.blogspot.com/2022/07/three-hours-fifty-eight-minutes-and.html

This will have to wait until tomorrow, but there are several instances in the threads linked previously.  Apologies if the quotes didn't nest properly.

There are, objectively, no instances.

You just lied about a bunch of shit and got caught.

[I HATE THE DEMIURGE I HATE THE DEMIURGE]

You're wasting your time. You're Googling yourself silly, spending time formulating the argument, while the accused sex abuser just makes "snappy" one-line responses designed to get you to respond further. Accusations against him slide off like a water off a goose, unless you can pin him with a direct statement or question.

When talking to Zak S, the accused sexual offender just remember the attached image and just mentally super-impose his face on it:

And no, I'm not going to justify any claims that you're not an accused sex offender, Zak. Anybody can do a Google search and find out that your ex is counter-suing you for both defamation and sexual abuse.

[Tubesock Army]

As much of an ass as Zak is (and you are an ass, Zak, don't even fuckin' start), I think the worm is definitely turning against people lobbing questionable accusations willy-nilly.

I will refer you to H.L. Mencken's quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

Hold your nose if you have to, but don't ever forget the shitheads will happily stalk YOU after they collect Zak's scalp.

Worth noting that I haven't weighed in on Mandy's claims, as I am reserving judgement for the outcome of the court case. I'm only talking about Zak being, well, Zak. This has nothing to do with any SJW shit.

And worth noting you haven't actually explained why you have beef beyond "Zak thinks lying is bad and that's bad"

Actually, I have, just not to your satisfaction, or the artificial standards you've attempted to impose in order to control the narrative. But then, conforming to either of those things was never my goal.

[Zak S]

You're wasting your time. You're Googling yourself silly, spending time formulating the argument, while the accused sex abuser just makes "snappy" one-line responses designed to get you to respond further. Accusations against him slide off like a water off a goose, unless you can pin him with a direct statement or question.

When talking to Zak S, the accused sexual offender just remember the attached image and just mentally super-impose his face on it:

And no, I'm not going to justify any claims that you're not an accused sex offender, Zak. Anybody can do a Google search and find out that your ex is counter-suing you for both defamation and sexual abuse.

Burden of proof is on the accuser.

[Zak S]

Actually, I have, just not to your satisfaction, or the artificial standards you've attempted to impose in order to control the narrative.

You can't quote an instance of me doing something bad.