I stated clearly that this evidence is not conclusive. I stated clearly that open-folding happens randomly in heads up games, though not that often.
What is clear is that our (now) prior knowledge increases the probability (does not prove) that the open fold in this case was not a random event, but caused by the use of a super user account. In my opinion, based on estimations of open-fold rates, estimations of Mark and Scott's relationship, and estimations of the context of the original story, I would guess the likelihood of the open-fold being a random event to be less than 5% (The actual figure could be way off, but it is certainly much lower than the likelihood in abscence of the prior knowledge).
I'm not saying 'Seif is guilty'. I'm saying the knowledge we now have increases the likelihood he is, but there is still reasonable doubt (sources listed by Alobar).
This clearly struck a personal nerve with you, and it was not my intention to do so. I would welcome thought out, statistically founded counterarguments, but 'your reasoning is FOS' isn't really productive.