Well, at least the discussion is proving fruitful. I agree the "tincown" and "change we can believe him" are likely intentional (the latter because it is repeated twice). However, "had accused shlin28 of" and "lied on the ground" seem to be careless errors to me, particularly the latter. Those are the kinds of writing errors that are difficult to disguise, because often the writer is not even aware that they are wrong. You can't fake a particular part of your writing if you aren't aware of what characterizes that writing in the first place. Those mistakes tend to occur in people for whom English is a second language or primary language speakers who are young and still learning, such as teenagers.
I am by no means so foolish as to think that my conclusions are completely correct, nor that I have miraculously identified a mafioso right off the bat. I am simply trying to sift through the available evidence to look for clues. Calling this a "vendetta" against Beefy is excessive, IMO. The odds are certainly high that he is innocent, but he's the best I can come up with at the moment, and I haven't yet seen another argument in this thread that has any weight behind it (barring that recently made against Seamus). If it makes you feel any better, I also considered you as an alternative to Beefy, but I then discounted you based on patterns of punctuation in other threads. Punctuation habits are also difficult to disguise.
Bookmarks