Mirza engaged in strategic voting behavior on bluesteel's debate against innomen

Don't let Mirza bring up new defenses since I can't refute them. The burden of proof in this debate is merely a preponderance of the evidence, not "beyond a reasonable doubt. " If you believe that it's more likely than not that Mirza's voting behavior was strategic, then vote Pro. == Plausibility == The simplest and most plausible explanation is almost always the best one. Do you believe that: A) Mirza logged onto DDO, saw an opportunity to sway the outcome of a closely contested debate in favor of his closest friend on DDO, and waited until LITERALLY the last second to vote so I could not counter Gileandos's vote bomb, or B) Mirza was having internet problems. Innomen contacted Mirza to vote. Mirza felt bad for not voting. When his internet was fixed, he immediately logged onto DDO with great urgency since he KNEW the voting period was about to end. He was following the debate closely enough to remember the exact hour the voting period ended, but not quite closely enough to remember major details about who vote-bombed whom. But his urgency at logging into DDO then suddenly dissipated. He took his leisurely time browsing and posting in the forums, then finally started reading the debate. He finished reading with plenty of time left, but decided "I'm going to wait until there's only 30 seconds left before voting – that would be fun. " He'd also forgotten Gileando's vote bomb. I mean, he knew he was countering someone, he thought it was ApostateAbe, but he now knew ApostateAbe's vote bomb was "legitimate. " Rather than checking his previous vote on the vote tab, he just stared at the computer screen for 10 minutes, waiting for the timer to run out so he could change his vote. I mean, he definitely didn't remember Gileandos' vote bomb, right? Even though he got into verbal arguments with BOTH him and ApostateAbe in the comments section, contacted both of them personally, and then ended up blocking them both. But ApostateAbe was inherently more memorable than Gileandos. So Mirza's defense was, "Oops, sorry bluesteel, my bad, I seriously forgot about Gileandos… " But then, instead of apologizing for forgetting about Gileandos, a legitimate mistake which could have easily resolved this issue WEEKS ago, Mirza instead says to me, "I also 'knew' if my votebomb-counter in your favor did not get switched, you'd not care. You'd celebrate your win. You were grateful for all the votes on you. Hurray. " Usually, when an "alibi" SUDDENLY appears well after a crime was committed, it's fake. Forgetting about Gileandos' vote-bomb is Mirza's strongest defense. In fact, it's the only defense he needs. Yet, MOST TELLING, he does not mention this defense even ONCE in his debate with tvellalot on the same issue. That's because this "excuse" hadn't occurred to Mirza yet. Had Mirza voted 5 minutes earlier, I could have countered Gileandos' vote bomb and won. It was clear from my interactions with Zetsubou a few hours earlier that I was both online and checking the debate frequently enough that I would counter Gileandos' vote if Mirza voted at any time but at the exact last second. His motive for waiting was clear. Voting with only *30 seconds left* would be far too much of a coincidence in this case. So which of the above explanations do you find most plausible and simple: A or B? Occum's Razor: the simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. == Rebuttal == R1) Ad Hominem attacks on bluesteel Mirza concedes these are irrelevant to this debate. To put the quote Mirza references in context: Danielle complained in that debate that I cited a book I own because she couldn't read it to verify its claims. I had just joined the site and got upset specifically with Mirza's RFD for the sources point: "bluesteel cites a book. " R2) No RFD I still have significant doubts that Mirza read the debate. As per the settings on the debate, Mirza is required to leave an RFD to vote. His RFD was: "The resolution itself is specific, but not detailed enough. What is the meaning of "recognize" and what are the effects thereof? " As I said before, this is just "fluff," equivocating on the meaning of the resolution. Nowhere in Mirza's RFD does he mention a single argument that either side made. It's impossible to verify that he even read the debate. R3) Forgot about Gileandos? I also knew Mirza would take this tactic next – of claiming he remembered ApostateAbe's vote but not Gileandos'. Again, this is the most obvious tactic for him to take at this point. It still makes no sense, however, since Mirza claims in Round 1 that ON MY BEHALF, he contacted both Gileandos and ApostateAbe to get them to change their vote bombs. Why was one so memorable and the other was not? Mirza claims in Round 1 that he was led to believe that ApostateAbe's vote bomb was legitimate (this communication occurred three days before the voting period ended). If this is true, Mirza would have switched his counter-vote bomb to zero points if he truly was led to believe that his counter-vote bomb was unfair (because ApostateAbe "legitimately" intended to give all 7 points to innomen). Given that Mirza did not change his vote to zero points at this time, either he INTENDED to vote bomb in MY favor OR he knew his vote was still necessary to counter Gileandos. It's also hard to believe that Mirza forgot Gileandos' vote bomb because it led to an argument between Mirza and Gileandos in the comments section, which ends with Mirza saying, "Gileandos, I'm now sure never to engage in a discussion with you. " According to further comments, it appears Mirza then blocked Gileandos. It really makes no sense that Mirza was so caught up with the debate that he knew the exact hour it ended, but didn't remember his verbal altercation with Gileandos or why his own counter-vote bomb was still there. Mirza says, "I genuinely believe that I forgot about Gileandos' vote. " Again, psychologists would have a field day with this. Why would you disbelieve yourself? Someone telling the truth would say, "I genuinely forgot about Gileandos's vote," not "well, I really do *think* that I forgot about Gileando's vote. " The latter is distancing language, which seeks to distance the liars from the lie itself, as if they are not the ones saying the lie, but are merely the ones choosing to "believe" it. People see it as far more acceptable to "believe" a lie than to directly say one. Lastly, this doesn't even matter if you, as the judge, believe ApostateAbe was still a vote bomber and Mirza merely created a rationalization (for unvoting) that ApostateAbe's vote was "legitimate. " ApostateAbe has shown open contempt towards me on my Jesus debate with him and congratulated Mirza on his strategic voting behavior on my debate with innomen after it led to my loss (in the comments section). R4) Improbable? Mirza, I contend that you didn't bother taking action on the debate earlier because it wouldn't have affected the outcome. I'd still be winning, and I'd have been able to counter Gileandos' vote bomb myself. I think you logged on with hours to spare, saw that Zetsubou had created an opportunity for you to really mess with me and to give innomen the win, and you took that opportunity. We know you had the opportunity. For the motive, I don't care to dig back a year through the forums to find all the times you insulted me while we were debating various things. Your admission of guilt says it all. In addition, Mirza DROPS the argument that his motive was to help innomen, his closest friend on the site. I provided a quote from innomen where innomen says that he believed Mirza engaged in strategic voting in a misguided attempt to help a friend. This is motive enough. Innomen has said that Mirza routinely confides in innomen about his problems. Mirza's vote was clearly some messed up form of reciprocation to innomen for providing a sympathetic ear. R5) Reading the debate I already showed that Mirza can't prove he did, in fact, read the debate. If he was willing to be dishonest about un-counter-vote-bombing, I don't see why he'd bother to be honest about reading the debate. R6) Admission of guilt Just because Mirza recommended me for a cabinet position doesn't mean he personally likes me. Regardless, it doesn't answer this statement that Mirza made: "I also 'knew' if my votebomb-counter in your favor did not get switched, you'd not care. You'd celebrate your win. You were grateful for all the votes on you. Hurray. " Let's analyze this statement. Mirza knew his vote was a counter-bomb. He knew I'd be happy about winning by having a vote-bomb being countered. His sarcasm ("hurray") shows that he wasn't happy at the thought of me winning. Thus, he removed his counter-bomb with 30 seconds left on the clock. Again, this statement was a 100% admission of guilt from Mirza. There is truth in anger. I'm glad he got angry and at least told the truth in the forums immediately after the incident. Mirza waited to vote until his vote was both decisive and un-counter-able. That was pretty "strategic. " Vote Pro. I ask you one last time to consider why an innocent person would say: "I also 'knew' if my votebomb-counter in your favor did not get switched, you'd not care. You'd celebrate your win. You were grateful for all the votes on you. Hurray. "