Both random and personal choice, I mean. Both arguments have their merit, and I don't think either will be anything but helpful. I like Ranagrande's idea because with the dearth of clue-like material we have to work with we really do need to try and analyze people's behavior psychologically. Trying to work from text makes it a little more difficult, but that's the fun in low-flavor games.

Anyway, I think that coding our personal suspicions is a good idea because it keeps people from bandwagoning or agreeing out of apathy or whatever, but I think coding an entire argument is just a pain in the ass. What if we just did the name of our top suspect? And you can do a creative spelling or whatever if you want to make it hard to decode. Like maybe use "Question Mark" instead of "?" or something like that.