Post Verdict Dispute Discussion: Jeremy Young - Arcade - Donkey Kong - Points [Hammer Allowed] - Player: Billy L Mitchell - Score: 1,062,800

  1. 11-19-2020, 04:17 PM
    I heard Billy tried to claim on a recent stream that TG pulled its counter-suit.
  2. 11-19-2020, 04:23 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by FBX View Post
    I heard Billy tried to claim on a recent stream that TG pulled its counter-suit.
    i wish i could remember the word for word i just remember my impression. he seemed to think that TG appealing the anti-slapp would automatically get everything else thrown out. logic being if the antislapp loss was overthrown, everything else would go, therefore skip ahead and remove it all. i know i know, mitchell logic
    Lode Runner Champion
  3. 11-19-2020, 05:24 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    i wish i could remember the word for word i just remember my impression. he seemed to think that TG appealing the anti-slapp would automatically get everything else thrown out. logic being if the antislapp loss was overthrown, everything else would go, therefore skip ahead and remove it all. i know i know, mitchell logic
    I think the term is "moot" eg. With TG's decision to appeal the anti-SLAPP ruling, it's cross-appeal is moot. There's a legal doctrine of mootness, but I can't explain it! I think it boils down to the fact that since TG has appealed the original anti-SLAPP ruling, the decision to proceed with a cross-appeal of that same decision must wait until the appeal is resolved. There's a hearing on TG's cross-appeal scheduled for December 12, so I can report on the outcome of that date once it's posted on the lacourt.org website - or anyone else that comes across the news at that time.

    But yes, I think Mitchell is giving the development a bit of that Mitchell spin we've all come to love. Pulling the cross-suit might suggest that TG is "walking away from it" but it's really now an issuing of timing - the cross=appeal is now part of the court record, and the principals cited within it can possibly use the extra time to reflect if they wish to continue proceeding lock-step with Mitchell.
    Last edited by The Evener; 11-19-2020 at 08:03 PM.
  4. 11-19-2020, 07:54 PM
    For once I can see where the logic could make sense, but since I'm no expert in law I couldn't tell you whether he was right or wrong. I don't know if this is right, but what I assume this appeal will do though is that it will actually give TG's evidence more weight. I'll ask around tomorrow.

    But anyway... I found something really interesting. While trying to look up that instance where Todd overruled a referee's decision I found an article that went in detail about one of BM's interviews with East Side Dave.
    As we all know, one of the major claims is that he only does live performances and has played in front of crowds. He talked about how people recorded it and cheered him on in that interview, but I also found something he says later which contradicts that. The line in question is, "It doesn't matter what it is [Twin Galaxies] decide because I can simply continue what I'm doing and resubmit more scores, only this time I guess I would do it in front of people when the time comes. Then we might have another group of people who might complain about it. And if they do, we'll simply get this much more media coverage again."


    You'll hear it at at 44:29

    The key part here is "this time" as that suggests such didn't happen before. He earlier claimed in the interview that people used their cell phones to record him during his 2010 WR despite nothing about such ever reaching the light of day, yet by these words he implies his scores were done in a less public situation at best.

    There are a few other things to talk about seeing that this was before the dispute was resolved though.
    In that first part I have a feeling he was talking out of his ass saying he still planned to submit scores. It sounded like he didn't expect to be banned. It's ironic how amicable he acted about this before TG ruled against him. "I'll just move on and keep doing my thing." That sounds perfectly reasonable and fine. I could speculate many different theories behind his motives, but let's focus on the simplest possibility: he's a liar. Judging by his actions afterwards, it's clear that he wasn't willing to move on. Maybe if he wasn't banned, but I just wish he would own up to it already. Also, he says his son encouraged him to stream on Twitch, which kinda makes it seem this impression of self-motivation failed to pan out the way he claimed it would.
    The last part plays in hand with the call David Race recorded. He tries so hard to play ignorant of how cheating is possible on Donkey Kong. He thinks the differences between using MAME and a PCB is something arbitrary, that without a camera it's impossible to tell whether a game is legitimate or not. It was impossible back then, but that changed two years ago. In both the interview and the call, he thinks the people that have formed together will just find a reason to cry foul even if he does it legit (Hey, Datagod. Your friend is partaking in loserthink!). To be fair though, people are complaining about his new scores. Anybody here can acknowledge that he was close to the scores he once had, even if he didn't match the pace seen in his old performances. Ersatz's article explains that the problem here has nothing to do with cheating. It's that he's claims he did the exact score when he was actually a bit off. It greatly disappoints me that Mr. Mitchell would lie about competitive achievements like I did when I was 8, especially when the proof is easy to see.
    As for that final sentence, I will speak what has likely been on many people's minds.

    I know I have been mentioned within Neo-Team Billy in the past regarding my activity here, so if any of your friends are reading this, Mr. Mitchell, let this be from me to you:
    If it wasn't already painstakingly obvious, you practically admitted yourself in the interview that you thrive on attention. The controversy indeed gives you press coverage, but the drug you put yourself on won't keep you high forever. It will run its course, and you will reach a point where it takes too much to keep you afloat. Overdose can have series effects, so tread carefully. When that time eventually comes all that negative attention you avoided over the decades will crash down on you in full force, and you will feel the pain this time when your misdeeds go bite you in the ass once more. Seeing that the recent court statements says things will take about 18 months, it's safe to say you have up until then before you need to start worrying. Enjoy it while it lasts. This is not a threat in case that wasn't clear by the way.
    There is nothing I hate more than a human being without integrity, and I am someone that would rather help people than put them down; to focus on the good over the bad. I hate it when I get mad at people, but sometimes I don't have a choice. I put you in your place on YouTube and you end up deleting your comments. Is your ego really that fragile? I admit I screwed up misattributing who provided the major evidence I was trying to hint at, but I sure as hell wasn't conveniently hiding anything like you constantly do, hypocrite; it was evidence you conveniently ignored and still do to this day. I wasn't going to play your game the same way Carlos had to when he was livid over your deception. My attempt to level with you was to see if you could change. I don't have all the answers, but that doesn't stop me from trying to figure them out anyway. Philosophy and logic are hobbies of mine outside of gaming. Sometimes, I wonder if that intimidates you.
    The punctuation and verbiage between the comments I received and what been shown in court line up from what I can gather, but if you want to deny that person on YouTube was you, I have another way to figure it out. It'd require some cooperation, however. If you really are innocent then you should have nothing to hide. Maybe I could talk to Casey about it if I haven't upset her. Whatever that may happen, just promise me: put up a good fight in court, and try to be a little more honest to the courtroom, your friends, and yourself. Your future will heavily depend on it.
    P.S.: Remember when I said you were conveniently holding back evidence? We are all still waiting for that "original tape" you speak of. The man you wanted to show it to yet later threatened to sue deserves it as much as the court. Is it still on its way in the mail even after two-and-a-half years? You might want to call the post office and check up on it.

    In closing, I just want to say that in case ESD's videos covering Mr. Mitchell's situation become inaccessible, don't fret. I got you covered. ;D
    Last edited by Streetwize; 11-20-2020 at 01:15 PM.
    Likes lexmark liked this post
  5. 11-19-2020, 10:25 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by The Evener View Post
    I think the term is "moot" eg. With TG's decision to appeal the anti-SLAPP ruling, it's cross-appeal is moot. There's a legal doctrine of mootness, but I can't explain it! I think it boils down to the fact that since TG has appealed the original anti-SLAPP ruling, the decision to proceed with a cross-appeal of that same decision must wait until the appeal is resolved. There's a hearing on TG's cross-appeal scheduled for December 12, so I can report on the outcome of that date once it's posted on the lacourt.org website - or anyone else that comes across the news at that time.

    But yes, I think Mitchell is giving the development a bit of that Mitchell spin we've all come to love. Pulling the cross-suit might suggest that TG is "walking away from it" but it's really now an issuing of timing - the cross=appeal is now part of the court record, and the principals cited within it can possibly use the extra time to reflect if they wish to continue proceeding lock-step with Mitchell.
    yes, this was his least stupid point for sure. not being a lawyer, it might have worked, though even though the premise wasnt stupid, ti was however argued in the most stupid way possible. did you read the lawyers explanation? again i'm personally not a lawyer so maybe theres something i'm missing. maybe the rules they have to abide by make the argument more difficult than i appreciate, but my god fucking stupid. i'm not surprised at all that the judge dismissed it.

    i wanna put some softeners on my mockery. i'll ask any of you this, "can you defend billys case any better"? Hes in an absurd position. so in that context, if your goal is to win (as opposed to your goal being to find the truth), its a very difficult proposition. perhaps, considering how hard it is to win a non-winnable scenario, maybe it wasnt as stupid as we think?
    Lode Runner Champion
  6. 11-20-2020, 01:31 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    considering how hard it is to win a non-winnable scenario, maybe it wasnt as stupid as we think?
    It's NOT an "unwinnable scenario". Just show the court how to make an arcade recording look like MAME and you're a winner.


    john

    .
    Likes Streetwize, The Evener, Snowflake liked this post
  7. 11-20-2020, 02:01 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by grinder2112 View Post
    Thanks for that information and analysis. Truly, you've been a student of this dispute and I've learned several nuanced bits from your write-ups. I appreciate your efforts. There's really no reason you would care what I think on this, but I hope I can make a constructive criticism and have it received in the spirit it was given.

    Name-calling Mitchell's lawyer is childish and diminishes the quality of your rhetoric.

    Ok, that said, I'm not admonishing you to change tactics. I'm just hoping my read might be of some use. Thanks again for your efforts.
    Howdy, Grinder! Thanks for reading, and for your contributions always. And thank you for the constructive and reasonable feedback, and for being willing to voice it.

    I could probably write a few thousands words on the topic (have you noticed I like to write?), but I'll try to keep it brief.

    In some respects, I think you're correct. But I also think there's room for some fun at the opposition's expense. I said elsewhere that no one wants this Billy saga to end more than the people committed to covering it week in and week out, and I mean it. We've all had to listen to this dude lie and lie and lie, and when we disprove his crap he just ignores the proof, or moves the goalposts, or changes the subject, or pretends it never happened. Admittedly, that gets a bit frustrating. There are opportunities through this for bits of catharsis for the people following it - not so much individual or personal catharsis, as I wouldn't put my impulsive desires over what I believe to be most constructive for everyone - but communal catharsis. It's good that people are willing to be on the record to say Billy "lied" and that he "cheated" (rather than hiding behind safe phrasing with words like "alleged" and "accused"). And, I believe, in a different way, it's good for people to use nicknames like "Silly B****ell", "Mr. Cheater", "Mr. Mullet", "Number Two", or for certain ancillary characters, "Todd Fraudgers", "Trifarce", "Square Johns", or "Greasy Gibbons".

    On a totally unrelated note, here's that picture again:

    Name:  2020-11-19 h - Picture - 1.jpg
Views: 172
Size:  36.3 KB

    We absolutely should be taking the p*ss out of this gang of chucklef*cks. We deserve to, we have the right to, and I think when done correctly, it actually does help. (Though humor can be a tricky thing to execute correctly, and can backfire when done poorly.) The facts are the facts, but we're all human. No one wants to be on the side that's only being mocked and never dishing it out.

    To be clear, not everyone who believes Billy's lies is deserving of full-on mockery. Sure, some people are shameless shills and bootlickers, and some people know they're lying and misrepresenting but choose to do it anyway, but many are just casual observers who don't know what's what. I get why some people are (to be frank) suckered by Billy - Hell, before I found out he was a cheater, I used to be a fan of his! Billy is quite confident and assertive, and people respond positively to that. (That, by the way, is another good reason to heave some rhetorical tomatoes his way.) Some people have only heard one side, and some others simply haven't thought the matter through. I would happily converse with any of them and respectfully lay out the position. Things I've written, like the "Evidence against" post over at Donkey Kong Forum, are geared toward that crowd. For posts like that, I avoid stuff like nicknames, instead drawing humor from other sources (mostly straight from the ridiculousness of Billy's arguments). But with a court update like this, which doesn't even deal with any evidence, and which I only posted to the TG thread and deep in a DKF thread, I'll tend to assume it's just friendlies reading it. And I hope to make it an enjoyable read.

    Hahaha, I could really explore the topic more, but I'll skip the rest. To be clear, I don't think you're "wrong" per se, and I think it is absolutely a good question to ask, just that I don't entirely agree. That said, if the feedback I get is predominantly "Don't call that greasy shill of a lawyer nicknames, even though we all know he's a soulless slimeball who probably gets a kick out of evicting families on Christmas and who probably spends his free time watching family movies and rooting for the bad guys," sure, I'd be willing to forego it. I am not more important than the cause. But if response is mixed or better, I will probably continue.

    Now, if your criticism is that "Greasy Gibbons" isn't a good enough nickname for ol' Jimmy Gibberish, I am open to other suggestions. :)
    Thanks grinder2112, Tompa, Foot0fGod thanked this post
    Likes Barra, Tompa, Foot0fGod liked this post
  8. 11-20-2020, 02:33 AM
    Look forward to Mitchell putting up the money so this case can move forward!
    Let's get it going.
    Likes Barra, ersatz_cats liked this post
  9. 11-20-2020, 10:10 AM
    I wish I realized this sooner, but seeing how often Mr. Mitchell does his positive sign of encouragement while keeping an awkward poker face, we could do the opposite.
    Name:  sol-badguy-taunt1.gif
Views: 143
Size:  78.3 KB
    (BTW, Guilty Gear is full of subtle 70s/80s rock references. Sol Badguy here takes a lot from Freddie Mercury.)
  10. 11-20-2020, 11:14 AM
    Can someone please clarify for my tiny brain. If TG's anti slap appeal is successful, that means the suit that Mitchell is bringing against them will not go ahead. I get that bit. But does that mean that the TG countersuit won't go ahead either, Is that right?


    john

    .
Page 68 of 77 FirstFirst ... 18 58 66 67 68 69 70 ... LastLast
Results 671 to 680 of 767
Page 68 of 77 FirstFirst ... 18 58 66 67 68 69 70 ... LastLast
Join us