The moral of this thread, and many others like this (beyond Kyle's sensible points), is that it was a terrible mistake letting theatre kids control anything in the hobby, and once the consequences of letting them do so became clear in the 1990s, it was an even worse mistake letting them back in once old-school gaming took off. Learn your lessons: theatre kids bring drama, mental illness, and terrible ideologies. Keep them out of your hobbies.

Quote from: BlueWave on December 21, 2024, 05:31:23 PM

Quote from: Zak S on December 19, 2024, 01:19:02 PMZak noises

Since Zak is refusing to engage with anything that is being said I will address my statements to the general public.

I've engaged with everything and people keep acting irritated that I do, so that's a lie.

Quotehe is the only person to have been caught making false claims

A claim by a person that something's false is not evidence it is false.

A taped confession is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GJAJNbF2Tg

QuoteZak exhibits a host of narcissitic personality traits,

A non-shrink who can't even spell narcissistic is disagreeing with actual shrinks.

QuoteI, nor anyone else knows what Cam Banks has to do with the fact Zak made 11 false statements as determined by the California Superior Court on his 2019 blogpost.

If you do not know then I will repeat again:




So, whatever you think is "evidence"--isn't.

Quote~Pornography
The consumption of Pornography can at best be viewed as similar to an opioid, with a host of undesirable effects on the brain, libido, social life, sense of beauty and relationships of the consoomer...The stigma against this business and its perpetrators is not only correct, it should be stronger.

Bringing this in as if it meant something completely invalidates anything you could say. Also "consumer" has a "u".

It's a hobby, people come to it because it's what it is, a niche where you don't have to be strictly educated or qualified for it. Which maybe is not a good thing, but that's how it is.

Quote from: Melan on Today at 05:11:32 AMthat it was a terrible mistake letting theatre kids control anything in the hobby, and once the consequences of letting them do so became clear in the 1990s, it was an even worse mistake letting them back in once old-school gaming took off. Learn your lessons: theatre kids bring drama, mental illness, and terrible ideologies. Keep them out of your hobbies.

Theatre kids like who? Somehow I never made the connection between 90s hobby and theatre.

Quote from: Melan on Today at 05:11:32 AMtheatre kids

This is a guy who definitely has no idea who he's talking about.

I'm still interested. Maybe not in the ideologies part, but the theatre bit I'd like to know.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 12:29:33 PMThis started because the front page has people falsely claiming people who want the book have to "say nice things about me" or the work.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:48:36 PMThe text doesn't say anyone's supposed to make any specific comments. The entire "contract" with people who want the book is laid out in what you posted and that is clear in the post. There isn't any clause saying "you will receive further instructions on what to say"

The title of this thread asks a question, specifically to Zak.
In this quote, Zak answers that question.
Nothing more is relevant here.
The thread can die.

Quote from: GnosticGoblin on Today at 06:14:07 AM

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 12:29:33 PMThis started because the front page has people falsely claiming people who want the book have to "say nice things about me" or the work.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:48:36 PMThe text doesn't say anyone's supposed to make any specific comments. The entire "contract" with people who want the book is laid out in what you posted and that is clear in the post. There isn't any clause saying "you will receive further instructions on what to say"

The title of this thread asks a question, specifically to Zak.
In this quote, Zak answers that question.
Nothing more is relevant here.
The thread can die.

Woah!  A newb with <60 posts who apparently joined just to verbally fellate Zak has now declared the thread to be over.  Funny, I thought Pundit ran this message board.  When he's bored with the commentary, I'm sure he'll close it (or just let it fade).  As long as the thread continues to spawn on-topic posts, he'll probably leave it open (and whether or not Zak is believable in his assertions or qualified to judge misinformation both seem to be relevant to the original topic).  It's his site.

So, opinion noted (and discarded)...

I thought we weren't allowed to talk about porn because it was "off topic."

Anyway, I am all for someone building a community of people that are open minded and make the scene better---rather having it filled with misinformation. Zak's work has won awards. That's a fact. He has a new book that people are paying $1000 for. That's a fact. He seems to be engaging in discussion here and answering questions. That's a fact. He's prevailed in his court cases. That's fact. The new book looks great!

 

I still didn't find a theatre connection while waiting for a reply to my question - all I found was that Gary, apparently, was the coproducer on the D&D cartoon... which is cool, I guess... but too far of a connection - Frank Welker was in that one, and he hangs out with some actors who play D&D these days, really seems far from "letting them control the hobby".

When people claim Zak Smith argues in bad faith, this is exactly what they're talking about. So let's avoid the personal insults and accusations and focus on his rhetoric.

Quote from: BadApple on December 15, 2024, 11:53:25 AM

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 11:41:17 AM

Quote from: BadApple on December 15, 2024, 11:25:02 AMYou took money for work and then refused to deliver.  You confirmed that you did this here in another thread.  Just because the victim in this issue chose not to pursue you over your breach of contract, you are not absolved of it. 

He (Alex Macris) did a bad thing, I chose to stop working with him. On moral and ethical grounds--he platformed a transphobic guy and I told him I didn't want to work with him any more.

You had the moral and ethical responsibility to return money you were paid if you chose to withdraw from the contract.

Apparently it's acceptable to breach a contract if the other party does something you consider immoral or takes no action opposing it.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 01:53:05 PM

Quote from: Garry G on December 15, 2024, 01:47:41 PMI'm clearly not going to buy it as the person trying to sell it to me has just called me stupid.

It's not for sale, dude.

Like: you can't buy it (unless you drop 1000$ which I didn't think you would)

Apparently offering a book in exchange for $1000 is not selling it.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:09:10 PM

Quote from: GnomeWorks on December 15, 2024, 05:04:10 PMPundit didn't fucking claim that you said people had to say nice things about whatever work you shit out, you fucking buffoon. He was pointing out that by engaging in this kind of idiocy, people are going to assume that whenever someone says something positive about your shit they're doing it because they're sucking up to you and want free shit.

As the text contains no transaction re: the exchange of "saying nice things" for "free shit" that is inaccurate and Pundit was negligent at best.

Apparently he doesn't consider trading goods and services to be transactional.

Quote from: Zak S on December 20, 2024, 04:20:56 PMMy text is a complete business proposal "Hi people: if you do x, I do y" like a contract, it lays out terms.

Apparently he considers it like a contract, which is transactional.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:09:10 PMPlus that's clearly how people construed what he said.

Apparently he now speaks for everyone and their interpretation is what determines the truth of a statement.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:09:10 PMPlus he used the word "brigading" which is inaccurate. Joining a website (whether you are urged to or not) and posting whatever you want on whatever topic is not brigading.

Apparently he forgot the part about encouraging people to take specific actions on forums he's banned on, literally for exactly these kinds of actions.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 05:18:38 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on December 15, 2024, 05:14:05 PMI did not say that "people who want the book have to say nice things about you or the work".

What I said was that people who now say nice things will be under a shadow of doubt by others as to whether they are doing it under compulsion of some offer.

If this is what you are claiming your post meant then this is what you are claiming your post meant.

My claim about what your post meant is different.

Apparently personal interpretation triumphs the writer's intent even after clarification.

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 06:18:50 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on December 15, 2024, 06:11:19 PMIf they repeatedly intentionally derail threads as a hostile action

Vague.

Apparently he's confused by the lack of definitions.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 15, 2024, 07:25:52 PM

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 07:01:45 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 15, 2024, 06:38:14 PM

Quote from: Zak S on December 15, 2024, 06:18:50 PMAnd none of this has to do with misinformation, the biggest problem.

The best way to solve this problem is to not be part of it yourself.  So, stop misinforming people as to what my post said.  Which I note you haven't corrected, so you must be comfortable with inaccuracies when they are committed by you...

We disagree about the content of your post.

No, you are misrepresenting the content of my post, because you made an error (and are apparently incapable of admitting so).  You were not mentioned in my post.  This is not an "interpretation;" it is a fact.  This dissembling on your part invalidates your entire stated purpose here of "correcting misinformation," since you are unwilling to admit when you have been the purveyor of it.

Apparently it's not misrepresentation as long as you disagree with the content of a post.

Quote from: Zak S on December 18, 2024, 01:18:21 PM

Quote from: BlueWave on December 18, 2024, 01:11:30 PMI repeat, page 37 to 38, 11 of Zaks statements were found to be false.

Quote"The Court's Finding that Smith's February 13 facebook post contains False Statements, as identified above, does not end the inquiry. To qualify as libel, the statement must "expose [] [the plaintiff] [] to hatred, contempt, ridicule ,obliquy, or...cause [] [plaintiff] to be shunned or avoided, or...ha[ve] a tendency to injure plaintiff in his occupation."

By the standards of the Superior Court of California, Zak has made false claims and the rest of these thread dwellers have not. Now there might be reasons for those false claims, but conveniently, these can be ignored, as Zak himself has stated repeatedly that spreading misinformation is the same as lying and liars should not be believed.

If you abide by Zaks moral code, you have to act according to it and hold him and yourselves accountable. If not it is fake nonsense, rules for thee but not for me, and we should treat you as an invasive species. 

Here is the lawsuit again, just so that it is crystal clear what I am quoting, and what I am saying. The lawsuit concerns defamation, it is clear that in one instance out of 8, Vivka Grey did indeed commit defamation. But something is not automatically true because it is not defamation, as the paragraph indicates.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mnjjavkgiyken3wfu8vui/1936638092-1-43.pdf?rlkey=em24q9sa0tnhvhuuh2o2qyfgp&e=1&dl=0

Look, if whatever you think you found when your uninformed ass cherry-picked out of that case that I won, nobody who had any skin in the game found anything

Apparently it's OK to make false claims as long as you win and nobody cares.

In conclusion, his 'arguments' consist entirely of moving goalposts, vague definitions, lies by omission, and personal opinions. As for his goblins...

Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 18, 2024, 02:16:30 PMMany people don't understand how legal language and court processes work, and that can cause confusion. In legal terms, the phrase "false claim" doesn't mean someone is lying. Instead, it means the court has decided that a specific point isn't relevant to the case and won't be considered. The terms "true" and "false" in this context are just tools to decide which facts the court will focus on, not a judgment about whether something is honest or truthful.

As someone familiar with legal language I can conclusively say you're full of shit. Also who said making false claims was tantamount to lying?

Oh riiight.

Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 16, 2024, 03:25:42 PMMeanwhile, it is Zaks books which are selling for $1000 each and not yours.

Uh oh. I wonder how long it will take Zak to correct this misinformation.

Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 18, 2024, 05:23:52 PMSometimes people just want the negative attention because it is at least some attention. They don't know any other way to get it than to try to provoke people. All the trolls behave the same way. It's so predictable and so boring

The irony burns with the light of a thousand suns.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on Today at 08:49:29 PMWhen people claim Zak Smith argues in bad faith, this is exactly what they're talking about. So let's avoid the personal insults and accusations and focus on his rhetoric.

You just personally insulted me.

QuoteApparently it's acceptable to breach a contract if the other party does something you consider immoral or takes no action opposing it.

Depends on the action and the contract but, most importantly, Macrs did NOT respond "Do not break our contract, this causes x problem, lets' try to resolve this in another way"

He responded "Oh well"

It's fine to break a contract if the person agrees to.

QuoteApparently offering a book in exchange for $1000 is not selling it.

Again: the people who'd be exposed by my fans talking about it would not be the people who'd pay 1000$. Those ppl are from the initial mailing list.

QuoteApparently he doesn't consider trading goods and services to be transactional.

There was nothing about "saying nice things"--anything else is beside the point.

QuoteApparently he now speaks for everyone and their interpretation is what determines the truth of a statement.

I said "people" not all people.

If you go people have been to Disneyland the implication is not "all people".

QuoteApparently he forgot the part about encouraging people to take specific actions on forums he's banned on, literally for exactly these kinds of actions.

"specific actions" does not = brigading.

People ask others to take "specific actions" constantly.

QuoteApparently personal interpretation triumphs the writer's intent even after clarification.

You're falsely assuming the writer is being honest about their intent.

QuoteApparently he's confused by the lack of definitions.

Pointing out a bad actor's intentional failure of clarity does not equal confusion.

QuoteApparently it's not misrepresentation as long as you disagree with the content of a post.

Again for the 5th time:

Anyone reading who needs to know (almost no-one) can turn to page 1 and read the comment.

QuoteApparently it's OK to make false claims as long as you win and nobody cares.

I made no false claims, the fact someone said they were false isn't relevant.

Yawn.
No, really, it's all very interesting. Especially that bit where you explain how reading between the lines of a court case is somehow relevant to "join the jolly RPGsite community, get a big RPG book" situation that we're looking at.
(If you haven't gotten to that bit yet, then we're all looking forward to finally hearing it)
Also I think Zak accidentally invented videogame microtransactions, only it's not that micro. If you know what I'm trying to say.