I don't know anything about Mitchell beyond what I saw in "The King of Kong," but he and his lackey come off as scheming, haughty jerks in that film.
back
4 comments
I've seen videos about this case on and off. Some of the things that seem particularly problematic for Billy's case are the conflict of interest in the fact that moderators were able to post records, the shady record trail for the DK run (only "seen" by one said moderator, who later was found to cheat, and the proof tape subsequently "disappearing"), and a claim that a run was done in real hardware despite video proof showing glitches that only happen in MAME (an emulator). He made claims that said video was adulterated after the fact without his knowledge, but hasn't provided any evidence for that claim (nor is it particularly believable that anyone would go through the trouble to do so).
There's also some surrounding circumstantial videos where Billy originally claims to change an arcade machine circuit board to a different game board in a very theatrical video, but then is called out for merely putting the same board back in (one can verify by looking at the circuit boards and cross-referencing with verified images of each alleged board), casting doubts into his motivations and general credibility.
There are also cracks in his main line of argument (decks and decks of "signed testimonials" from people who allegedly witnessed him doing the runs). Some of those witnesses have later come out claiming to having misrepresented, and would likely testify to that effect if ever called to stand.
Personally, I agree with the sentiment of the vast majority of the community that Billy is likely a cheat and that he sees this whole thing as "defamation" merely because it is a threat to his income model of milking sponsorships etc through his fame. I don't particularly see this as a good use of the courts' time, especially given how "productive to society" the monetary impact is here, but alas, he does have a right to pursue whatever crazy suit he wants if a judge hasn't thrown out his case.
Wearing your patriotism on your sleeve ... or around your neck ... tells me all I need to know.
No, seriously, I have never been wrong yet about a person's character by observing things like that. I know a view as unscientific as that will not go over well with the HN crowd, but perhaps some of us do find merit in body language, and other external "tells".
To be sure, not saying he is not an impressive, and maybe even the best Donkey Kong player — just making an observation about his general trustworthiness in my view.
I'm not sure if he's so much wearing/celebrating his patriotism as he is cloaking himself with it. He's extremely litigious from all accounts I've seen and it seems to be part and parcel of a carefully crafted and intimidating persona. Billy himself has no credibility to a lot of people, so why not throw a symbol front and center that holds weight for people. Just my opinion, don't sue me Billy.
Thank you. This was a fascinating read.
Anyone who creates a persona around their association with something else casts suspicion on anything they do outside of that something else.
Even within that something else. There's more incentive to cheat if you've tied your public identity into being good at something.
The tie is what gives you that impression? Not the mullet?
Yep, Joe Dirt had a mullet, and I think that’s all I need to say.
Life’s a garden, dig it.
My take when watching the show was that it was intentional documentary drama.
I wonder if that sort of figures into the whole equation.
Did he get typecast or was he really that type of person?
I watched "The Talented Mr Ripley" and I couldn't see Matt Damon as a hero type character in any role afterwards.
Many athletic all-time greats have been haughty jerks. I wouldn’t say that’s any evidence for or against the high score being authentic.
Yet I read Lance Armstrong's book before it all came out...