Enjoy.

[deadDMwalking]

I missed four pages, but 'missed' is a strong word. I know that most people aren't going to be willing to read 47+ pages to be sure that the conversation is about what they think it is, so Zak has a strong incentive to keep posting until the absolute amount of assholery becomes sufficiently massive that it collapses into a singularity from which there is no escaping. 

So I'll offer my summary of the last four pages. 

Zak continues to be an asshole.  He specifically engages in the behaviors that people say makes him an asshole.  This includes restating someone's position inaccurately and pretending that the ONLY POSSIBLE inference is his own. He also continues to post the same thing over and over claiming it says something that other people don't agree it means.  He again has tried to define the terms of the debate where several people have been told that EVEN POSTING ON THIS FORUM makes them a troll unless they stand up for Zak and try to argue against points that other people made (because you have a moral imperative to address something that someone else says that makes Zak look bad apparently). 

And apparently Zak doesn't make much money anymore because nobody wants to work with him.  He apparently thinks that is because people have lied about him on the internet, and nobody that dislikes him has come to that decision based solely on their own interaction with Zak. 

Well, Zak, I'm a counterpoint.  I think you're an asshole because of the things you do and say.  I've documented it extensively in this thread.  I've explained my reasons, I've quoted you exhibiting specific behaviors and the closest you've come to 'addressing' them is to say that I'm a troll so they don't deserve any response. 

But like Tubesock Army pointed out 4 pages ago, I don't need to tell people that if they had a functioning brain they could ONLY POSSIBLY AGREE WITH ME.  I actually believe people have functioning brains so they're able to look at your behavior in this thread - you know 'setting the record straight' and come to a reasonable position based on what they think it takes to be an asshole.  So here's your shovel.  I know you can't resist and you're going to keep digging.  And we go far enough, eventually this thread will be the #1 result for 'Zak S., asshole'. 

It hasn't even made it to the first page of results, yet...   

[Rob Necronomicon]

He specifically engages in the behaviors that people say makes him an asshole.

Indeed... It's truly quite fascinating, I nearly have to read this thread from behind the couch.

Now if you look at Venger and the way he deals with people it's the complete opposite (unless someone is a real asshole). So Venger will always have a loyal base of fans because he's a nice guy and would certainly be open to criticism and would even try and respond without being abrasive. And I've seen him do it on YT and other forums even when some folks have been very nasty indeed.

I've certainly defended Venger on multiple occasions despite me being an old lefty and our political views not being aligned at all (not that he needs my help, btw). I can only say that every time we've spoken he's been nothing but a gent. So I like the guy.

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar (IMO).





 

[Zak S]

So I'll offer my summary of the last four pages. 

Your summaries of peoples' posts are objectively, provably not reliable:

\
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.

[Zak S]

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar (IMO).

If the object were to catch flies then your claims would make sense.

The object here is to go "Dear anyone lurking, don't believe these flies."

[Tubesock Army]

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar (IMO).

Unfortunately for Zak, he's a douche.

Your summaries of peoples' posts are objectively, provably not reliable:

As you have repeatedly proven, neither are yours.

[Zak S]

Your summaries of peoples' posts are objectively, provably not reliable:

As you have repeatedly proven, neither are yours.

You don't have to rely on my summary, here's proof you're dishonest:

\
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.

[deadDMwalking]

You know that's your summary of what you claim is people being dishonest? 

You know, the one that people have specifically mentioned doesn't seem to say what you think it does? 

You know, the one where someone said 'Mike didn't recommend people sign papers' and you said 'prove he said that', and you've tried to use that as a gotcha because 'I never said he told people NOT to sign the papers'.  Even though the only reason it would have made sense for people to mention it is that you implied (in your brain-damaged and not as easily parsed way that you think can only be interpreted in a single way) was wrong. 

Of course, that's just an example of you completely moving the goal-posts so apparently we were never even discussing what we thought we were discussing. 

Which is why I've been insistent that we don't move from the one point that I'm very confident in and that I believe should be the crux of the conversation: Zak, you're an asshole. 

It's fun to keep pointing that out in new and interesting ways, using new examples and quotes of you engaging in exactly the type of behavior that people generally agree marks an asshole.  But the reason it is so ENJOYABLE is because you are so oblivious to how many own-goals you've scored.  I'm pretty sure Tubesock Army referred to you as Pavlov's Fucking Dog, and he's so right - you pathologically can't change your behaviors so again and again and again we just set you up and let you dunk on yourself.  And I keep thinking surely you've got to realize what you're doing and at least stop scoring points for us, and you don't.  It is so crazy and ridiculous - it's like a butter sculpture - there are far more serious artforms out there, but it's still impressive that someone puts this much effort into something so meaningless. 

Beautiful! 

[Zak S]

...stop scoring points for us,

If you think there's "points" to be "scored" that pretty much proves you are a troll and you're not reliable.

Misinformation has to be fact-checked.  It's a moral imperative, not a game or contest. You can't "win" doing volunteer work at the community center.

You know that's your summary of what you claim is people being dishonest? 

Anyone reading this can just check, here it is:

\
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.

[sombodystolemyname]

I can't help but wonder if this mysterious white knighting noob is a Zak sockpuppet.

Maybe not, but Zak does have a history of both defending and attacking himself with sock accounts.

Not a sock puppet.

[HappyDaze]

I can't help but wonder if this mysterious white knighting noob is a Zak sockpuppet.

Maybe not, but Zak does have a history of both defending and attacking himself with sock accounts.

Not a sock puppet.

Of course, that's what I would expect a sock puppet to say...

[sombodystolemyname]

I can't help but wonder if this mysterious white knighting noob is a Zak sockpuppet.

Maybe not, but Zak does have a history of both defending and attacking himself with sock accounts.

Not a sock puppet.

Of course, that's what I would expect a sock puppet to say...

I think a sock puppet would come up with something better to say personally...

[DocJones]

I googled him as well and the second entry was https://www.fredericksfreisergallery.com/artists/zak-smith.  Looked pretty positive to me.  So saying that none of it paints him in a positive light doesn't seen right.

That's hideous.

[HappyDaze]

I can't help but wonder if this mysterious white knighting noob is a Zak sockpuppet.

Maybe not, but Zak does have a history of both defending and attacking himself with sock accounts.

Not a sock puppet.

Of course, that's what I would expect a sock puppet to say...

I think a sock puppet would come up with something better to say personally...

I'll yield to your more intimate experiences with the subject matter.

[Zak S]

I can't help but wonder if this mysterious white knighting noob is a Zak sockpuppet.

Maybe not, but Zak does have a history of both defending and attacking himself with sock accounts.

Not a sock puppet.

Of course, that's what I would expect a sock puppet to say...

I think a sock puppet would come up with something better to say personally...

I'll yield to your more intimate experiences with the subject matter.

Claiming their experiences are "more intimate" is a claim that this person is a sock puppet.

Are you willing to stand by that claim and hold yourself accountable if it's disproved?

[Tubesock Army]

Hey, gang, did you know Zak's Wikipedia page was at one time locked by admins due to... wait for it... "sockpuppeting"