Zak Smith is Accused of Abuse

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:47 pm

There are a lot of Shitmuffinisms on display in his rebuttal. There's even a point where he denies saying something, and in the same paragraph says that even if he did say it it was totally fine and just a reference to something.

Truly Shitmuffin is the person Shitmuffin always showed himself to be.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:44 pm

There are...

Keeping in mind that he is trying to sound sympathetic, a careful reading is...frightening.

Diving right in, one of Shitmuffin's first comments is:

all the stories attached to every old photo and book and game and bandage and prescription bottle I had to carefully pack up and put away when she left

Just before the end, he includes a text without other context or response. It says "I don't think there's any need to fight about anything. I'm not mad at you. I'm not angry Zak. Maybe you won't understand that. The only thing I'm concerned about is will you let me come by and pack up my stuff over the next few days."

To me, it sounds like he didn't have to pack that stuff up - he didn't allow her to do so. Using that quote as a defense of his character is bizarre. Clearly he has power over her (her stuff) and one couldn't expect that she could be 100% honest. If he included further texts that allowed her to get her stuff, MAYBE we could be more charitable, but that's really strange.

Of course, when I refer to “everyone”, I’m not talking about ...

Shitmuffin goes on to specifically call out three specific people who he claims couldn't know anything while then pointing out other people who would have to know. Like, if 10 people COULD have seen it, and 3 people DID see it, I would assume that it happened when the 3 people happened to see it and not everyone was paying attention/it didn't happen all the time, etc. Like, most people who are abused have a person or people in their life that the abuse doesn't happen around. If a parent is abusing a child, they usually don't do it when grandma can see; grandma can say she never saw abuse, but it doesn't mean the abuse didn't happen. Like obviously it means it didn't happen when she could see it. He's trying to prove a negative (it never happened because I never saw it) while other people are asserting that it did happen (it happened because I saw it). Like, even in his own posts here he is very clear that if something happens even once, it counts. Almost 1/5 of his response is someone else responding on his behalf - and one of the allegations is that he used Mandy's name to defend himself earlier.

If Mandy was abused, then Zak is an abuser. If someone that is close to Zak is defending him, there is always the chance that it is as much because they are being abused/used as it is that they are independently bringing this forward. Spending a lot of time saying he didn't PHYSICALLY abuse her but saying nothing about verbal abuse is also an interesting choice.

Since Zak says 'Connie knew us best', I wonder how he would respond if her story ever changed. I'm guessing he would accuse her of having an ulterior motive at that point. Immediately following Michelle's own defense, he adds more words that are supposed to be from her - just ask her! I hear Zak saying 'Mandy has personality issues', not Connie saying 'Michelle has personality issues'. Even if that is true, I'm not sure what it is supposed to mean.

He also adds Charlotte's words to his defense. When you take out direct quotes and what he says other people would say or did say according to him (hearsay, which he actually calls out as something that shouldn't be considered), you're not left with much.

He does also admit that he choked and slapped Hannah in broad daylight 'out of the blue', but that he thought it was appropriate at the time. He thinks it is okay because they had a sexual relationship later. In the #MeToo era, I've read a number of accounts where a woman had sex AFTER she was raped - here's a New York Times response from a number of women sharing exactly that.

Mandy published her attack with the obvious intent to hurt me and turn people away from me.

I think that Shitmuffin's narcissism is showing.

Mandy wrote: What I want to convey is my grief. And my shame. There is so much of it. I think when women come forward to talk about their abusers people strip them of their grief. And I am not okay. And I should be angry but I can’t be because the shame is too great. Because the abuse had me taking responsibility for everything and it’s very difficult to stop that after all these years. Everything was always my fault, the problem was me--but it wasn’t.

There are certainly going to be a lot of people that take Zak's side. We're going to hear about how he could have gotten sex from any number of willing people, so why would he use power to force sex? We're going to hear about how the victim should have said something before, during, or immediately after. We're going to hear the same things we always hear but I at least am hopeful that our culture is changing - someone like Mandy would have kept silent a decade ago. I hope that despite the attacks that she'll receive, other women are inspired/empowered to continue to share their own experiences.

Pseudo Stupidity · Post by **Pseudo Stupidity** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:58 pm

Even at a glance it's fucking bizarre that he started with saying " She is the very last person in the world who needs any more pain than she’s already been subjected to," and then went on to say the following:

She's literally incapable of living a normal life

She is spiteful enough to try to destroy somebody for...what? He never says why.

That she WAS "wonderful and smart and beautiful and fierce and sharp" (obviously she's not anymore, nobody who dislikes Shitmuffin or does things he doesn't like can have positive qualities. They are cancelled and shouldn't be helped if they get hit by a car)

She has personality issues

She assaulted him

She mocks other women based on their looks

She was "extremely aggressive" about pursuing people sexually

She is a liar

Oh, and he added an addendum of people who are all attacking Mandy. But hey, he wants her to find peace and he thinks she is literally the last person in the world who deserves pain! The sort of peace and protection from pain that only a sustained campaign of online harassment can provide. What a nice guy, that shitmuffin.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:45 pm

Definitely a joke to see him post "I believe women"

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:54 pm

FrankTrollman wrote: Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:26 pm
The thing I find weird and creepy about shitmuffin's insistence on defending 'his girls' is that the person who keeps bringing those women into arguments is... Shitmuffin. Go ahead and go back throughout this thread and try to count the number of times shitmuffin attempts to get people to shift the conversation to those women or even to contact those women directly and involve them in the argument. It's a lot.

In short, shitmuffin has been pleading and cajoling people to pretty please attack those women throughout this entire conversation. And apparently were anyone to take that bait, he'd go into white knight mode and think himself virtuous for defending 'his girls' from whatever slings and arrows he had baited people into aiming at them.

It's just really creepy. I understand that there are reasons to use a possessive and a diminutive to describe a free adult. But when combined with a blatant internet tough guy strategy of attempting to create insults to that person he can 'defend' them from, it sure looks abusive from here.

-Username17

I usually really like being proved right and being allowed to say I told you so. I genuinely am not enjoying this particular vindication.

-Username17

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Sat Feb 16, 2019 11:27 am

So what did this dude contribute to 5e

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:10 pm

OgreBattle wrote:So what did this dude contribute to 5e

Part of the fifth edition marketing push was a direct outreach to various "Old School Revival" people. So chuweros like RPGPundit and shitmuffin were publicly courted as "consultants."

These people didn't actually write anything in the books. They were merely contacted by representatives of Wizards of the Coast and asked to share their concerns and ideas with Mike Mearls over a series of emails and/or phone calls.

To the best of my knowledge, there's no evidence that shitmuffin or RPGPundit or any of those assholes had any real effect on the contents of 5th edition. There isn't a lot of contents to 5th edition, and it mostly appears to have been written in a hurry right at the end. People like shitmuffin had sessions where Mike Mearls "listened" to them in an effort to get them to give the edition a thumb's up before it actually launched.

The problem here is that while marketing is marketing, obviously Mike Mearls got to choose whose ass to blow smoke up for marketing reasons. Like, there are a lot of fucking nerds in the world. He could have called some Magic pros like Luis Scott Vargas or some film stars who are nerds like Vin Diesel or web comics people like the Penny Arcade folks. Here's who they chose to credit as "additional consultation provided by":

Jeff Grubb
Kenneth Hite
Kevin Kulp
Robin Laws
S. John Ross
RPGPundit
Vincent Venturella
Zak S.

It's a weird list. And it's a short list. Several of those people are known for their work on Rules-Lites and more than one of those people are noted for having problematic relationships with women. Also there isn't even a single token female in the entire group, which in retrospect is more than a little bit creepy.

-Username17

Wiseman · Post by **Wiseman** » Sun Feb 17, 2019 4:32 am

Pseudo Stupidity wrote:There are a lot of Shitmuffinisms on display in his rebuttal. There's even a point where he denies saying something, and in the same paragraph says that even if he did say it it was totally fine and just a reference to something.

Truly Shitmuffin is the person Shitmuffin always showed himself to be.

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did...

You deserved it.

Dogbert · Post by **Dogbert** » Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:03 am

So, seemingly the dnd Beyond's version of the PHB got edited yesterday and the whole paragraph of consultant credits was removed.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:56 am

Somehow I'm not surprised...

How the fuck does the D&D division handle this kind of shit so much fucking worse than the Magic division, which already only handles it at a general "passable, but eyerolly" level.

Dogbert · Post by **Dogbert** » Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:46 am

Prak wrote:How the fuck does the D&D division handle this kind of shit so much fucking worse than the Magic division

Mike Mearls.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Tue Feb 19, 2019 8:27 pm

WotC has released a statement about Zak Smith.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Feb 19, 2019 9:54 pm

Flaccid doesn't even begin to describe that statement.

Count Arioch the 28th · Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:45 am

Not sure what more they could have done, it wasn't known what Zak did when he was hired. Expecting them to do more than this is retarded.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:17 am

Prak wrote:Flaccid doesn't even begin to describe that statement.

What would you want them to do besides what they've done so far?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:39 am

Realistically speaking? Own up to the fact that their golden boy Mearls handpicked two abrasive narcissists for osr cred and then literally forwarded criticism of Zak to him?

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:50 am

I haven't been here in ages really, but when I saw the news about shitmuffin, I figured I'd poke back in here and see what the Den's postmortem was.

Y'all handled it pretty damn maturely and comprehensively. I don't have anything really to add.

I hope the people he's hurt can heal. Sometimes it takes a *long* time to recover from abuse from a narcissist. I know that firsthand.

Also, I realized I miss gaming *and* you yahoos.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:31 am

Zak being an abrasive narcissist isn't exactly what he's being pilloried for. This seems like the kind of corporate response you would normally get over this kind of allegation. I wouldn't expect them to get personal with distancing themselves from him. At least not publicly.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:51 am

I would expect more of a "It turns out we're terrible judges of character, and looking back, we should have seen there were problems and warning signs. We are going to look into how we can be better about who we bring on for advice and who we basically endorse."

TheFlatline wrote:Also, I realized I miss gaming *and* you yahoos.

Dickhead

(Yes I'm just having fun here and reminding you why you missed us.)

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:12 am

MGuy wrote:Zak being an abrasive narcissist isn't exactly what he's being pilloried for.

It's not, but it is something they could have known about him when he was picked. I mean, technically they could have known there were allegations of abuse against him back then, because they're not new, but it was before we as a culture were believing women.

This seems like the kind of corporate response you would normally get over this kind of allegation. I wouldn't expect them to get personal with distancing themselves from him. At least not publicly.

No, but they should have. Just because I'm calling out their statement for being so flaccid, doesn't mean I'm surprised by it.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:09 pm

And the saga continues...

https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/a ... he_mearls/

https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.p ... ost1075771



As we know, all the D&D5e consultants' names were removed from D&D Beyond and the Basic Rules. In addition, WotC made a statement today that Zak Smith's name was being removed as a consultant from all future printed matter.



RPG Pundit is now threatening to release emails from Mike Mearls to reveal what was going on behind the scenes, but only if his name was removed. RPG Pundit said, "But if they should remove mine along with Zak's just to placate these f***ing Stalinists, there will be hell to pay. Starting with my pushing the nuclear button and publishing the Mearls Emails."



I don't know the ins and outs of the arrangement between WotC and Pundit (breech of NDA I am sure), but this is extremely distasteful, and seems to be 'peak Pundit' at his worst. I've seen WotC's writer's contract, and there are standard non-disclosures baked into the agreement. Knowing RPG Pundit is willing to blackmail a previous employer, I cannot imagine any publisher in their right mind could trust him whatsoever.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:33 pm

I'm sure that will turn out super well for him if Hasbro decides to step in.

Iduno · Post by **Iduno** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:59 pm

Koumei wrote:I would expect more of a "It turns out we're terrible judges of character, and looking back, we should have seen there were problems and warning signs. We are going to look into how we can be better about who we bring on for advice and who we basically endorse."

I would expect that, and not "he's just a beta tester, uh, and don't look into that claim." I mean, if Mearls is lying about how well you knew him, he's probably lying about not knowing (or having a good idea) what kind of person he was.

erik · Post by **erik** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:42 pm

That reddit thread is full of gold. I had more snickers than after I raid my kids’ Halloween hauls.

It seems super reasonable for WotC to stop listing all their consultants. The upside for using their *cough* prestige to lure in OSR players has long since expired, and clearly the downside to listing them just continues to deepen. Unless they are contractually obligated to list em hell or high water then yeah, take em down.

Currently consoling: Stalinists

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:55 pm

RPGPundit going the full Franco is something that surprised me more than it should have.

Right now, I just genuinely don't even know what his goals are. I mean, he doesn't want the man who was extremely credibly accused of abusing his girlfriend to be thrown under the bus by corporations that he did freelandce work for? And he's going to... what? Like, I don't even understand what the threat is supposed to be if that completely insane demand is not met. It won't be met, because fucking obviously, but what does RPGPundit think he can do to change that?

Like, shitmuffin and Pundit are completely radioactive at this point. The only question is how severely WotC distances themselves from them. Making a bigger stink just makes the company more determined to draw a firmer line between itself and them.

-Username17