In bold and brackets are my responses to your 'counterargument'.
I wasnt arguing shit. I was summarizing your posts.
My counter counter argument will be unbolded in parentheses (where applicaple.)
I see a few posts about a possible quack, (There cannot be a quack)
A post about how assasins are a second mafia, (Proven)
More quack, (Because seemingly the first post wasn't understood) (no, it wasnt.)
A post claiming to be cleared, (which I am)(not)
Myuser was stupid, (which he was, sorry)
I could have claimed anything, (which I could have)
Your arguments suck, (which they do) (yours dont make any sense to me)
Dont change the subject, (which he did) (he responded to you)
He did change the subject, (indeed)(see above)
Target, not pointed out, (did you even understand what I meant by this)
LAL, (which I am a firm advocate of)
Ill vote if we lynch, (which I want)
Point out my flaws, (go ahead, I'm still waiting)
I can pick apart lies, storm cant, (because I have no lies to have picked apart) (unproven)
He is lieing, (which he is) (also unproven)
Dont be a hypocrite, (indeed, stop)
I didnt beg, (which I didn't, I asked nicely) (looked like begging to me)
You belive hin because you're cop, (for the thousandth time, third parties show up as inno)
This is what happened in the inn, (which did happen)
Im telling the truth, (I am) (unproven)
Iv put lots of evidence in front of you, (which you haven't, you've just spat out abridged versions of what I've said) (iv already discussed this)
I have responded. (not really.) (you responded to storm, but never really pointed out his flaws in a way that makes them evidence.)
TL;DR Ltin knows how to summarise things whilst leaving out important details at the same time.