Enjoy.

[Rob Necronomicon]

"post 518"

I was actually thinking we should have a '518' RPG game jam. We should use this absolute drivel of a thread to actually do something creative.

'Space Freighter 518' was the name of an infamous cursed ship that made their crew experience a horrific 'time loop' over and over again.

But 518 was eventually decommissioned and its scrap was used to make another ship. Unfortunately, the same vile entity still resides in the 'bones' of 518, and eventually, the crew starts experiencing these horrific time loops and starts driving the crew bat shit crazy and they start killing each other.

Can the players survive??

"Salvum me fac ab inferno"

[Zak S]

It's hilarious that Zak expects everyone...

"Everyone" is never the target audience. I don't expect you (for example) to do anything that a good, smart person would do.

A good, smart person would look at this:

\
Your statement (as quoted) appears to be intended to say that Mike recommends that you speak with a lawyer and then signs the papers.

Here's the exact quote from me, precisely:

Mike said he "recommended" you not sign them unless you've talked to a lawyer and understand it, etc. (The scope is also limited to affidavits and contracts not "any legal papers")

That doesn't match what you said at all.

Mike's quote ( "...I do not recommend anyone sign any affadavit [sic] or contract without first consulting legal representation to understand the full scope of what is written and any ramifications." ) also doesn't match what Tubesock said, which was (unmodified quote)

Mike Evans, has even told people in the comments NOT to sign any legal papers offered by Zak.

Point fully addressed.

You both should each talk to a therapist about your desire to lie and distort information on the internet and, if you understand the risks, undergo treatment.

No further claim from either of you can be trusted since you just had what you said disproved in the thread in black-and-white and aren't addressing it.  Since it's such a clear demonstration, this post demonstrating your dishonesty should be a helpful reference point in any further conversation where you attempt to present your ideas as relevant.

And be like "Oh, those guys aren't honest".

That's all I need.

[Garry G]

The thing about Zak is that everything he posts makes him sound like a manipulative, coercive person who is really into gaslighting. He may be the sweetest bloke in the world in real life but his online presence ticks every box.

[Zak S]

The thing about Zak is that everything he posts makes him sound like a manipulative, coercive person who is really into gaslighting. He may be the sweetest bloke in the world in real life but his online presence ticks every box.

No, "ticking every box" for gaslighting, coercion and manipulation would require being caught being dishonest and trying to gloss over it, the way the people here were caught:

\
Your statement (as quoted) appears to be intended to say that Mike recommends that you speak with a lawyer and then signs the papers.

Here's the exact quote from me, precisely:

Mike said he "recommended" you not sign them unless you've talked to a lawyer and understand it, etc. (The scope is also limited to affidavits and contracts not "any legal papers")

That doesn't match what you said at all.

Mike's quote ( "...I do not recommend anyone sign any affadavit [sic] or contract without first consulting legal representation to understand the full scope of what is written and any ramifications." ) also doesn't match what Tubesock said, which was (unmodified quote)

Mike Evans, has even told people in the comments NOT to sign any legal papers offered by Zak.

Point fully addressed.

You both should each talk to a therapist about your desire to lie and distort information on the internet and, if you understand the risks, undergo treatment.

No further claim from either of you can be trusted since you just had what you said disproved in the thread in black-and-white and aren't addressing it.  Since it's such a clear demonstration, this post demonstrating your dishonesty should be a helpful reference point in any further conversation where you attempt to present your ideas as relevant.

...and keep trying to change the subject.

[deadDMwalking]

Who's trying to change the subject?  Garry G?

The only subject I'm here to talk about is how you're an asshole.  Spamming Post 518 is just more proof of it.  It doesn't say what you want it to say, other people (who are not me) tell you it doesn't say what you want it to say, and it's just more proof that you're an immature asshole that has no ability to ignore people not liking you. 

Now, it seems that at the root of it, you just can't believe that you're unlikeable.  If everyone is calling you an asshole and 'you're not a dick' (your words) how could people just be so wrong all the time?  I mean, maybe it's because you've never said you're good at talking to absolute morons (that earned you a bunch of those brownie points. 

But if you want the subject to be 'is deadDMwalking scrupulously honest at all times, even to his detriment, excepting when literal Nazis are asking if he's hiding Jews in his basement' and the answer is 'no'.  If the waitress asks me if I like my food I'll usually say yes, even if it isn't very good.  I just don't like to complain if it can't change anything and it's more trouble for me to send it back.  So when I make it a point of coming here and being VERY HONEST with you, even when I don't have to, it's because it either seems to serve the greater good (warning people about you) or because I'm just not mean to people and you're a nice safe target for releasing some vitriol on because you, of all the people I encounter, actually deserve it. 

But even if I were being dishonest about this (I'm not), I'm still NOT THE ONLY ONE who thinks that Zak S. is an asshole. 

I know a lot of people on the rpgsite have been banned from RPG.net, so maybe this doesn't carry much weight with them, but I don't know any of the people there and I can tell they've recognized the same behaviors I've called you on (in case it matters, this came up as I am reviewing all the bullshit you spewed on the Gaming Den). 

Just so we're clear, this is the result of a staff decision and not something I'm doing on my own.

Nor is it because of your opinions! Discussion is RPGnet's anti-drug, and for that it needs a beautiful rainbow of viewpoints. This is because you are consistently toxic to that discussion.

You serially derail sexism threads with bad-faith arguments. You insist that nobody can ever make generalizations about anything ever (even when they're not), then post generalizations. You pull out arguments that boil down to "words don't mean things" like that's ever been constructive outside the philosophy forum. You're passive-aggressive and occasionally condescending, you post anecdotes as facts, you tell people that things can't be sexist because you know ~females~ who would disagree. You're convinced that you're always right and refuse to consider otherwise, or at least that's the only explanation I can think of for why you keep making up strawmen to dismiss people who disagree with you (cf. the pass-agg "stop assuming all women are alike!" business, asserting that feminist game bloggers and others who disagree with you must be "conservative", every time you say "Tipper Gore" ever). You don't take anything that isn't agreement for an answer, and will argue in circles about it instead of making the positive contributions you could be until you get bored or someone makes you stop.

These things happen a lot! The Numenera thread is by no means the only one, and the post I've chosen as an infraction is just an example: Insisting that this one monster is Definitely Sexist because it doesn't meet an arbitrary definition of sexism you came up with, asserting that anyone who disagrees has to produce scientific studies about elfgames (that work with your definition of sexism) which have been mysteriously absent from your sexism thread derailing posts up to and also beyond this point, waving around your G+ followers as an army of faceless posters who totally have your back on this, and passive-aggressively insinuating that people who disagree think all women are alike, are the real sexists and need to do their research. That is the kind of un-chill posting we are talking about here.

Like I said, that opinion rainbow is something we should totally reach for, and it's nice to have people to break up the steamroller threads we get every once in a while, but for that to work we need people to elevate the discussion instead of bringing a hamster wheel keyboard powered by sophistry-flavoured energy drinks to aggravate everyone until it's shut down. We have plenty of other posters who can bring that discourse to the table without bringing along all that other stuff, and you have most of the rest of the internet to have this discussion in.

We would topic ban you from sexism chat, but a lot of this applies to the other discussions you typically have here and we have tried explaining things enough times that it is probably best to just skip that.

Sorry, but it is time to take a Zak sabbath. Appeals to the admins.

But hey, if you want to make a thread about how I'm a liar and a poopy head, you go right ahead. 

[Zak S]

Lol you just quoted Ettin--the guy who got successfully sued for lying.

He had to take back what he said, pay me, and admit I didn't commit any abuses at all.

That's like saying "See Donald Trump agrees with me!".

It doesn't say what you want it to say...

As I said, I am comfortable with people reading this thread looking at the post where you were proven immediately and decisively to be dishonest and deciding that for themselves.

Here it is in case they missed it:

\
Your statement (as quoted) appears to be intended to say that Mike recommends that you speak with a lawyer and then signs the papers.

Here's the exact quote from me, precisely:

Mike said he "recommended" you not sign them unless you've talked to a lawyer and understand it, etc. (The scope is also limited to affidavits and contracts not "any legal papers")

That doesn't match what you said at all.

Mike's quote ( "...I do not recommend anyone sign any affadavit [sic] or contract without first consulting legal representation to understand the full scope of what is written and any ramifications." ) also doesn't match what Tubesock said, which was (unmodified quote)

Mike Evans, has even told people in the comments NOT to sign any legal papers offered by Zak.

Point fully addressed.

You both should each talk to a therapist about your desire to lie and distort information on the internet and, if you understand the risks, undergo treatment.

No further claim from either of you can be trusted since you just had what you said disproved in the thread in black-and-white and aren't addressing it.  Since it's such a clear demonstration, this post demonstrating your dishonesty should be a helpful reference point in any further conversation where you attempt to present your ideas as relevant.

[Tubesock Army]

Lol you just quoted Ettin--the guy who got successfully sued for lying.

He had to take back what he said, pay me, and admit I didn't commit any abuses at all.

That's like saying "See Donald Trump agrees with me!".

It doesn't say what you want it to say...

As I said, I am comfortable with people reading this thread looking at the post where you were proven immediately and decisively to be dishonest and deciding that for themselves.

Here it is in case they missed it:

\
Your statement (as quoted) appears to be intended to say that Mike recommends that you speak with a lawyer and then signs the papers.

Here's the exact quote from me, precisely:

Mike said he "recommended" you not sign them unless you've talked to a lawyer and understand it, etc. (The scope is also limited to affidavits and contracts not "any legal papers")

That doesn't match what you said at all.

Mike's quote ( "...I do not recommend anyone sign any affadavit [sic] or contract without first consulting legal representation to understand the full scope of what is written and any ramifications." ) also doesn't match what Tubesock said, which was (unmodified quote)

Mike Evans, has even told people in the comments NOT to sign any legal papers offered by Zak.

Point fully addressed.

You both should each talk to a therapist about your desire to lie and distort information on the internet and, if you understand the risks, undergo treatment.

No further claim from either of you can be trusted since you just had what you said disproved in the thread in black-and-white and aren't addressing it.  Since it's such a clear demonstration, this post demonstrating your dishonesty should be a helpful reference point in any further conversation where you attempt to present your ideas as relevant.

Somebody being forced by a government entity, under penalty of legal punishment, to say what you want them to is not really an admission. That's like saying the statements made by American GIs in the POW camps of Vietnam were actual "admissions" of wrongdoing, rather than statements elicited by torture and coercion. Ettin had no choice. I'd wager his opinion of you hasn't changed. I think you know that. I doubt anyone who sympathized with Ettin changed their minds after your "victory lap". Did anyone or anyplace unban/re-admit you? No? I didn't think so. Furthermore, I'd wager that your behavior is actually turning more people away from you than it is winning people over. If this is really about the "truth", as you claim, well, then, that shouldn't bother you. As for me, I'll keep posting at the forums you're banned from, attending Gen Con, and having a publisher's account on drivethrurpg, while you're crowing about what a great job you've done of clearing your name.

[Zak S]

"Your honor, many support my claim--Richard Nixon, Pinocchio..."

[Tubesock Army]

"post 518"

I was actually thinking we should have a '518' RPG game jam. We should use this absolute drivel of a thread to actually do something creative.

'Space Freighter 518' was the name of an infamous cursed ship that made their crew experience a horrific 'time loop' over and over again.

But 518 was eventually decommissioned and its scrap was used to make another ship. Unfortunately, the same vile entity still resides in the 'bones' of 518, and eventually, the crew starts experiencing these horrific time loops and starts driving the crew bat shit crazy and they start killing each other.

Can the players survive??

"Salvum me fac ab inferno"

This is a legit great idea.

[Zak S]

"...Peter Baelish, a genuine Lord of one of the great houses of Westeros has also given his support..."

[Zak S]

Ettin had no choice.

He had no proof.

[deadDMwalking]

I think this one is really pertinent. 

DSMatticus
For everyone watching at home, Zak S has gone full-on ad hominem. And I don't mean that in the sense that he is saying mean things about people on the internet, I mean that it is an actual argumentum ad hominem full-blown logical fallacy - he is attempting to discredit criticisms against him by digging up wholly irrelevant facts about the people making those criticisms.

Now, his ad hominem attacks are also fucking weird. He is claiming to have "won" any argument people walk away from, and his ad hominem of choice is "I have vanquished you already, begone!" Now, the fact is that Zak S is himself a gish galloping fuckwit and constantly tries to change the topic, and making one-sided demands that people engage him on all points or not be allowed to be engage him at all is deeply dishonest. You don't get to shit all over the walls and demand people clean it up for you before you admit you did something wrong. But also: I wonder if Zak S is really so fucking delusional that he thinks when people walk away from him it's because he's "won," as opposed to people getting fed up with his incorrigible stupidity and insufferable (and much undeserved) arrogance.

I'm pretty sure he's demonstrated that he does.  So I think it's important to continue making the point - Zak, you are an asshole.   


But here's one that's really damning.  All of your defenses are relativistic - despite the number of people (like me) and the many people I've quoted who call you a dick, an asshole, a cunt, a sociopath, a narcissist (or worse) - if we accept 'your opinion' about 'things' because 'it's your opinion, man and we're all unique', you'd also have to accept our opinion about things because we're all unique.  Here it is phrased better:

If we accepted that Zak S was right to claim that his dubious rulings were always perfect because he didn't notice any problem with them, we'd have to equally accept that PhoneLobster was right to claim that his rulings were horseshit because he did. Zak S' demand for an apology is based on the idea that he is right because relativism, but if you actually accepted that then everyone else would also be right! His very basis for demanding an apology would, if accepted as a valid premise, logically lead to the conclusion that no one had to apologize for anything. Of course, we don't accept his relativistic premises, which just makes his constant repetitive bleatings for apologies moar hilarious.
-Username17

I'd really like to thank you for your encouragement in this exercise.  I've been reading over some interesting posts that I missed the first time and my understanding of how big an asshole you are has increased exponentially.  I am better educated and more enlightened.

[Zak S]

You're doing it again. Trying to change the topic from the firm and provable ground "you lied" to whether some trolls like me or not.

...if we accept 'your opinion' about 'things' because 'it's your opinion, man and we're all unique', you'd also have to accept our opinion about things because we're all unique....

I already pointed it out pages and pages ago:

So just as someone saying something antisemitic and getting caught might say "You're unamerican!" because it's easier to be vague about what's "American" people who are caught lying say "You're an asshole" because it's way easier to endlessly be vague about who is and isn't an asshole.

You got caught not telling the truth.

Up there. In that post that got posted over and over again.

That's what's important.

[HappyDaze]

That's all I need.

Your mistake is believing that anyone on theRPGsite is here to fulfill the needs of anyone else.

[Zak S]

That's all I need.

Your mistake is believing that anyone on theRPGsite is here to fulfill the needs of anyone else.

A strange claim.

I never said the troll came here in order to prove he was dishonest.

Point is he did it. The post is above on this page.