OK, I have my comments on each point, BUT...
He'll probably be replaced tomorrow, so I'll wait with my whole point-by-point analysis til then.
In the meantime, I can add some things I found that I haven't seen others comment:
A1. Zauper's #162 seemed odd - about what would intelligent scum do. WIFOM alert.
A2. He avoided answering RVS backtracking accusation (by saying he doesn't see it). You guys should have pursued it harder.
A3. Lots of "Why\Who is scum" questions (ISO #2, 2x #8 and #10) . It could be scum tactics to gain information + easy to ask them.
And I can say what arguments I agree with (even though the relevance is questionable for some):
B1. Backtracking with RVS (E1)
B2. Restating around #50 (but not the 2003 part) (H)
B3. Regression argument - needs more explaining (M)
My conclusion will come after he gets replaced\comes back and we discuss it.
All I can say is that he does look somewhat suspicious.
But most of you guys concentrated on wrong\irrelevant points and made the whole case seem weak.
Seth's analysis on him is still pretty terrible in my eyes.
@omnino
It would really help if you could pinpoint all the zauper's phases you described. So, by ISO, can you tell me when did his interrogation pick up, and when did he come back to nods and non-committal questions?
@akira
Could you explain to me this:
Akira:
"Although zauper agreed with my posts twice, I still believe he could be scum."
(#183)
Does that quote suggest that agreeing with you is a plus for him in your eyes?
But regardless of that plus, you still believe he's scum?
Correct me if I'm wrong with that interpretation.