Larztheloser is a troll

To begin I would like to clarify I assume when making statements like 'I think Larzlouser made the troll account' that its understood by others I did not mean 'and I have evidence to back that up' like anyone does not mean that on this site. Suspicion is all we can amount to have concerning multi-accounts when we have no way to check I.P. addresses. But given all that I do know, my suspicion is a reasonable one to make. Larz began to post comments in the debate while still in the challenge period labeling the topic 'too absurd' to accept then later saying after an account literally named 'Troll' accepted it Larz posted saying that of course a troll would accept this debate because 'you need a twisted mind' to accept it further insulting the debate topic. The very fact that an account created that very day took up the debate that was blatantly labeled 'Troll', causes my suspicion that this was a multi-account. Named 'Troll' is obviously to send a message that the debate deserves nothing more than a troll to argue against it. The account itself lasted only long enough to get in 2 rounds of Troll quality rebuttal before being 'closed'. This message being made by having a literally named 'Troll' take the debate and kill it coincidentally seems to try and make Larz's point that it was 'too absurd to comprehend' and that it required 'a twisted mind' to even take part in. He later somewhat steps back (though only a little) from those statements by saying 'It's a fair argument. I may disagree, but it's fair to argue it.’ calling it a fair argument to make doesn’t really mesh with the original 'twisted' argument to make statement, but lets note he only changed to say this after I posted my FOS that he was in fact the Troll. that inconsistency kind of looks like trying to soften the harsh criticism that the debate was 'twisted' to cover over my suspicion that he disliked the debate topic so much that he would Troll account kill it. 2 considerations are left that fuel my current suspicion that Troll was a multi-account of Larz. Larz while claiming the debate was too ridiculous to understand and unworthy of his accepting the debate, he actually followed it pretty close, posting enough to argue with me in the comment section that he might as well have just taken the debate. This goes to show he took interest in it while remaining against accepting the topic for its great absurdness (in his view). Now if one does not take interest in accepting a debate due to its unfair or insulting terms or some other reason that makes you decide its an unworthy topic for you to take the challenge for it would naturally follow it was not deemed worthy of your interest either. Most of the time a person like that would just post the one opinion in the comments and then forget about the debate. But if your ‘other’ account has accepted the debate, and it shows up on your news feed there’s a comment in the comment section, you probably can’t help but check and see your previous comment in your normal account was responded to. So naturally you go ahead and post again The last thing that fuels my suspicion is this very debate challenge. I left one post of my paranoid conspiracy theorist FOS in my own debate. And remember the debate was forfeited by ‘Troll’ as his account was closed so the debate would probably never see the light of public eye, forfeited debates don’t ever go to the front page of the website. Also even if someone did read it looking for Ron Paul related debates to check out, people generally don’t read through the drama’s going on in the comments, they read through the debate then vote then forget about it. So this is not like I have made some public ‘slander’ in the forums with a thread labeled “Larz is a troll” (something which I have actually not what I have said about Larz, I said I think was behind the troll account that took my debate. To BE a troll Larz would have to make a regular habit of stuff like this). So this rather has one ponder the statement ‘Me thinks he does protest too much’ If he did this why issue a whole new debate challenge over the comment? Why not just forget about if innocent? After all I’m just a faceless account that to my memory has not interacted with Larz much since either of us has been a member probably because of interest in different forums and my superficial accusations are coming during the angry frustration we know often follows from having your debate freshly Troll killed. It’s hard to see that so quickly being taken personally. Also its not like I have campaigned to have other members think he made the troll account, I made a post on a debate that probably wont get read, one which I have not nor intend to bother posting in the ‘forfeited debates’ thread. And I don’t have power to do anything with my theory I cant prove. So for my opening conclusion, It’s still my guess that you created to the troll account given that a) You were following the debate enough to argue in the comments b) You are (needlessly) very quick to protest a single accusatory theory posted of you c) Your statements about the ‘twistedness’ of the debate retracted to ‘fair to argue’ after being accused d) And most key reason, the account actually labeled ‘Troll’ taking the debate is an act of someone supporting your opinion in the comment section that the debate was ‘twisted’ and ‘absurd’ I await my opponent (hopefully calm) response.