I have seen that people are accusing Dance Gavin Dance in throwdown comments and on his profile page. So I am going to share what I have found after these accusations.
How are you all so caught up and know that Gavin is a cheater?
Honestly, do you have proof that "GAVIN GROUPIE BRANNIGAN KILLER" and "justanothersportfandude." are "Dance Gavin Dance"?
Well, GGBK was deleted, so there is no proof of that now, is there? You are suspicious, but what do you really have other than him getting votes in throwdowns?
Others get votes in throwdowns in close times with each other at random times. Look at sudden vote swaps in a lot of AdamLee's throwdowns. It is just insane.
So my next point is going to be that "justanothersportfandude." has a full name of "Mikey Lidonis" in their profile.
HOWEVER, 2 things. "justanothersportsfandude" was NOT the first name of this profile. It was "Mike Lidonis". The 2nd thing is why would someone if they were cheating, want to make their name similar to the one of their own main profile name? Cheaters can be dumb, but I don't think they can be this stupid.
So someone who makes their name appear the same, vote for the person in all of their throwdowns, vote for them in all of their throwdowns, share NEARLY the same name, challenge them to senseless throwdowns, and then call out others on the leaderboard is not a cheating attempt in my mind.
This is a possible act of BLACKMAIL, now couldn't it be?
Dance Gavin Dance was called out by EFB early on by saying he did not take on very many formidable opponents and only 1 person that was over .500. Is it not possible that someone took the advantage to make Dance Gavin Dance look like a cheater because he is undefeated?
People try to take down other undefeated people. Like AdamLee, and Jenkster suddenly gained a bunch of haters when his record was good, and others vote against people on this site for the hell of it because they are either undefeated, or have a good record.
Now, onto those throwdowns.
Why would Gavin need to give himself 2 votes if he was already winning a stunning 5-1? Does he suddenly feel the need to jump way out when the throwdown is already in his favor?
Before either of these 2 accounts voted, the score was 15-1 in favor of Dance Gavin Dance. Why would he want to vote for himself when he is already going to most likely win the throwdown? I don't think he would.
One argument posted and the votes are already done. Would a cheater feel the need to cheat before the throwdown has even come to a start? Insurance? What insurance? Look at the title of the throwdown. The title was a lie to begin with. So he wouldn't need any insurance.
5-3 was the score of this throwdown with just a few hours left. Gavin had the lead. If it is off the main page, and Gavin has a "comfortable" 2 vote lead where nobody shared the throwdown via Groupmail, why would he need to vote for himself twice with a few hours remaining? Nobody is going to see it anymore unless they go to his name and click "My Throwdowns" on his page. So why would the 2 votes be needed? They were NOT needed. I don't think it was Gavin for those reasons.
As you have just seen, those are the throwdowns that Zapp has pointed out to under suspicion.
I don't think we can claim that Gavin is a cheater. The throwdowns he has taken might not be to your liking, however does it mean he is cheating?
Is blackmail suddenly out the window here because he is undefeated or has a good record? Like I said before, others have hated others in the past just for having a good record (i.e. AdamLee, Jenkster, GoatHCW).
So I don't think it is fair that people are running around right now calling "Dance Gavin Dance" a cheater. That is my take on it. This is from what I have seen with my own eyes too. The voting however has been lopsided in a few of those throwdowns, so I could easily figure who voted for who.
It is unjustice to call "Dance Gavin Dance" a cheater at the moment in time, in my opinion. Blackmail is suddenly thrown out the window? Or just hate for another? Running around and calling him a cheater is not the conclusion, especially when the evidence is not clear-cut and there, everyone.
That's my take on it, I hope you consider this.