[M. Bison]

Then your server goes down and suddenly the conspiracies are flying around.

There's no conspiracy here. Your member, [WTF] backwards [DEV], did in fact DoS attack these servers.

If you're too skeptical to admit it then you're either biased and ignorant, or a liar.

Why, out of nowhere, would backwards join our server, say absolutely nothing, play for about a minute, and then sit in spec for the next 2 minutes? This happens after a heated argument with WT-F. Suddenly, a DoS attack materializes while he's in spec and knocks out the server. Furthermore, the source of the attack conveniently leads back to him. It was early morning and the only people playing at the time were friends, clanmates, and myself.

So let's reasonably think about this:

What's a more likely explanation?

1. (random attacker 1) A random attacker decides to blame backwards for an attack and sets up a gameserver masquerading as backwards' on 01/04/2015, long before the Kill4 servers are setup on 01/23/2015, and conveniently attacks while both communities are in a dispute and backwards is playing on the Kill4 server.

   ---

   
   
2. (random attack 2) A random attacker decides to blame backwards for an attack and notices that backwards runs a server. He's aware of a heated dispute between both communities. He waits until backwards decides to randomly join the rival server (which may never happen) and suddenly attacks.

   ---

   
   
3. (the inside job) The servers are conveniently hit by a DoS attack while backwards is playing. I notice he's playing and decide that either he's responsible for the attack or that I want to discredit WT-F by framing him. I make a thread full of forged/fake evidence at the expense of my reputation.

   ---

   
   
4. (he's actually guilty) backwards is aware of the ongoing dispute and checks up on Kill4. He decides to DoS the server with his own server because it's readily available. He doesn't bother to mask it because it doesn't matter, we're too retarded to check, or his provider does egress filtering.
   

I'll admit #3 "the inside job" is plausible, but there's an easy way to discredit it. If anyone believes this is what happened, I could always have my provider disclose the origin of this specific attack. Let me know if anyone wants to do this and I'll inform them i'm okay with them divulging the client information. If you won't believe my provider either then you're too much of a skeptic to matter.