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

Bluesteel thinks I used my arguments from my earlier debate to save space. That's untrue. I quoted a large portion that I want Pro to look at. What I do not wish to quote are facts that have already been acknowledged by Pro, such as that I had Internet issues and thus could not log on very early to read and judge the debate.-- Rebuttals --R1: MisinterpretationIt is a statement that is true to an extent. Call it a hyperbole. However, there's no ad hominem - Bluesteel tries to get the conduct vote by talking gibberish. Is it disrespectful to state that my opponent misinterprets what I am saying?"Mirza claims I have "attacked" other people. I would have mirza bring formal charges against me if he wants me to refute these allegations."--> Mirza claimed no such thing in any of these two debates. I think Bluesteel should stop putting words into my mouth that I never uttered. I said that he showed intolerance toward people who voted against him in his other debates. Read closely: "wow, F this site. I can't believe this many people are docking me for citing a book." [1] Notice how Bluesteel did not refute my point about him misinterpreting what I said to him. Nor did he refute my point that I never told him not to comment on my earlier debate.R2: No RFDOf course I admit I voted in the last minute. I never claimed otherwise, so that's a moot point. Moving on, Bluesteel continues babbling about me not leaving an RFD. I said I would leave one in the comments section, but it is true that I have not done it. The reason why is as I said: I was distracted by Pro and his supporters attacking me constantly in a hate thread. I prioritized defending myself over writing an RFD. Moreover, not leaving an elaborated RFD in voting section is completely irrelevant. That has nothing to do with me having time to write it.R3: Forgot Gileandos' voteBluesteel claimed that it was an ad hominem to tell him that he misinterprets what I say. He claims that I lie. Pro, don't throw stones if you live in a glass house. Nonetheless, Pro will have a hard time proving that I am lying. I genuinely believe that I forgot about Gileandos' vote."And yet suddenly he forgets all the drama surrounding this debate?"--> Bluesteel thinks I forgot the drama that was going on. Not at all. I never said I forgot about ApostateAbe's vote, which was the one I countered. He gave 1 point less to Innomen afterwards. The vote I forgot about was Gileandos' vote, which was supposedly a counter-vote to my own counter-vote. In other words, I achieved something good for Bluesteel by getting someone to give 1 point less to Innomen. However, I forgot that this did not turn out good because of what Gileandos did. It was a mistake of mine not to realize that my 7 point vote to Bluesteel should have remained, but what I had in mind was that a) ApostateAbe gave fewer points to Innomen (rather than 7-0), and b) I promised to give my real vote."If Mirza did check before re-voting, then he KNEW Gileandos was still vote-bombing me. (...) What did he think he was countering?"--> I was countering ApostateAbe's vote, not Gileandos vote. I definitely remembered that ApostateAbe gave 1 point less to Innomen due to my vote, which was a success, but I had not the least bit of remembrance about Gileandos' vote countering mine, thus making my 3 point vote to Innomen a mistake (not due to judging, but due to Gileandos). Therefore, my RFD on the counter-votebomb had nothing to do with Gileandos, but ApostateAbe."[H]e would have seen Gileandos' vote bomb since it was right above Mirza's original vote. It was impossible to miss."--> How would I have seen it if I read the RFD on the front page of the debate? My RFD was not a reference to Gileandos' vote - it was to ApostateAbe's vote. I forgot that Gileandos 'countered' my 7-point vote for Bluesteel, partially because I did not look at the votes when I was about to finally judge the debate."Mirza tries to portray his vote as a determined last-minute rush to vote on the debate. However, his decision of when to vote was clearly very calculated."--> Because I voted in the last minute, Bluesteel thinks that is very unique. Not at all. In my debate "Construction of Islam," which is a perfect example to use here because the topic was very important to me, I had very little time to respond to my opponent's arguments, mostly less than one hour. Bluesteel's debate was nothing special in that I voted right at the end."If Mirza had computer trouble and suddenly rushed to some computer just to vote on this debate"--> Where did I claim that I rushed just to vote on the debate? I claimed that I was frustrated at not being able to vote and keep my promise. My intention was to read the debate and judge it. Once my computer got Internet, I did not rush reading the debate immediately. I simply wanted to make sure I could give fair judgement to the debate. Once I started reading the debate, not too long before it ended, I had no intention to vote for Innomen, nor did I intend to make my late voting strategic. It happened in many of my own debates that I read and replied to the arguments of my opponents' very late (just about the end), which is very clear evidence that I did not vote strategically for Innomen.Lastly, I did not pay "SO MUCH" attention to the debate. A PM with Innomen reminded me of the debate, and my hour-long Internet connection issue made me remember that I was frustrated at not being able to make it on time to vote.R4: Highly improbable engineeringFirst, Zetsubou voted four hours before the debate ended, not two. By that time I had no way of telling I'd have the 'perfect opportunity' to vote strategically. Second, Zetsubou's voting was totally out of anything I could predict for the debate, and in two-three days I would never have made Innomen win by one vote this way. I want Pro to explain what he evens means by strategy. He seems to just babble endlessly about how I voted strategically, yet his claims are highly confusing. Was my 7-point vote to Bluesteel strategic? Was my vote strategic because Zetsubou created a good opportunity for me? At what point did I plan all this?R5: Reading the debateBluesteel makes nonsensical claims about me not having read the debate properly. I already explained very clearly that I read the debate and spent some time judging it, hence the last-minute vote did not come right after I read the debate, but after I re-read certain points and put some thought into who won overall."I *never* read a debate in full and then wait two days to vote."--> And I never claimed that I read the debate in full before the day/hour I voted."When someone is lying but uncomfortable doing so, they will often ask hypothetical questions rather than making explicit statements."--> This entire debate is filled with explicit statements. I cannot believe Bluesteel thinks I am asking a hypothetical question. It's not hypothetical, it's rhetorical. If it were hypothetical, I would not have said that I did spend time judging the debate. That's explicit.Pro makes another attack on my RFD, saying it was "from someone in rush." I already explained why I did not leave an RFD in comments.R6: Admission of guiltPro claims I had no real response to his claim about me admitting to being guilty of deliberately voting against him (with bad intentions). What a bold-faced lie. Read what I wrote. Moreover, the user Danielle is notably the one I had most tensions with. Yet, I cannot recall where I voted in any of her debates against her even once. But Bluesteel never had a problem with me, and he mentions that I hate him and want to enjoy him being in misery. Such nonsense. In my PM with Innomen I told that Kinesis would be a good pick for VP for being eloquent, interesting, etc. Then I said, "And lastly, Bluesteel. I think I'd pick him for the same reasons as Kinesis."Pro's evidence is blind faith.Reference:[1] http://tinyurl.com...