Yuma: I don't see why you see a trend in me that you don't see in Robz. Both Robz and I voted for mcmc, for the exact same reason, one post after the other.
I voted for mail-mi after you had, and Robz voted for myself after you had.
I voted for Chairs after Robz had, but Robz hadn't voted until I had applied some pressure on him and made it clear that I was suspicious of what he was saying. I guess it's important that Robz voted before I did, but I think you're incorrect in saying that there's a trend for me where there isn't for Robz. We're both acting in a similar way.
Which makes me suspicious of Robz for finding me suspicious for something he himself is doing. Hm.
Now to come back to this question. Let's make a timeline so I can get everything straight in my head eh?
So the people in question here are nkiribit and robz in relation to mcmc, chairs and mail-mi.
Mcmc:
Lio - votes for mcmc: but not for the VT claim, but rather for some inconstancies in his post.
NK - votes for mcmc, for the VT claim
Robz - votes for mcmc for the VT claim (notes that he never really thought mcmc was claiming, but wanted reactions)
Point 1 - so in this scenario, nkiribit is second in line voting, but first in line for the reason why, whereas Robz is the second in line for the reason, but third in line for voting.
chairs:
yuma - points out some suspicious behavior by chairs and mail-mi in the same post (I vote mail-mi)
Robz - votes chairs based off his reaction to mcmc claiming VT
spiritbears - votes chairs
nkiribit - semi-defends chairs, and semi-defends mail-mi
nkiribt - finds a slightly scummy post by chairs
nkiribit - now a little more suspicious of chairs, might vote, but the case might be "too easy"
nkiribit - votes chairs (third in line here)
point 2 - in this scenario robz is the first vote, where as nkirbit is the third vote and a kinda slowly easing into voting.
mail-mi:
yuma - makes a case on mail-mi (votes, see above timeline wise)
lio - (after everything is done with chairs) also votes mail-mi
Robz - says my case on mail-mi has some merit, but doens't vote
nkiribit - performs a reread on mail-mi, finds some scummy stuff, doesn't change vote
nkiribit - votes mail-mi
Point 3 - in this scenario, nkirbit is again the third vote and again slowly eases into it
From there the nkiribt case is made by me (again) and it takes off a bit.
So I can see why you might think the comparision between you and robz is there, but I think what I am accusing you of doing is much less pronounced in robz than it is in you (i'll admit it is there) but to a lesser extent.