Finally finished all of my things and caught up with the thread! So, here we go...
Initially I was confused about your first post, Illwei, but that has sense been cleared up, at least in my mind. But I was interested in the part I bolded, as I had sorta forgot what your reasons were. So I went back to check that D1 post you did.
What I see there is that you came to the conclusion of nothing: Two equally feasible ideas (elim!LotusAdjud claiming for protection/alibi and vil!LotusAdjud claiming for protection) and you leaning more on the elim side of things, but when you vote on Lotus:
...That doesn't make much sense and doesn't have anything to do with what you had previously said, iirc. Then you eventually retract:
Which I would say that elim!AdjudicatorLotus' teammates would not let her claim. First off, it was right after we were discussing elim adjudicators as a possibility and that we were scared of them and would like to be rid of them if they do in fact exist. Moments later Lotus claims and Gears immediately jumps on her for that specific reason. Secondly, an elim adjudicator is a very powerful role and if I were elim!adjudicatorLotus' teammate, I would definitely want to keep that as quiet as possible. So I just don't see that being how it works out, at all. I'm decently sure Lotus is village.
But then that brings up the question of why she's still alive. There are basically three options, all I believe which have been mentioned before:
Devotary used her actor ability on Lotus (which makes sense visually but not a whole lot of sense considering Lotus was the expected kill target, though I guess it's possible Devotary sacrificed herself for the belief of Lotus' survival...)
The elims are setting up a possible mislynch later (I think is was Ash who said this?)
The elims viewed Lotus as a far to obvious kill target.
Anyway, I kinda went off on a tangent there, so back to Illwei's retraction:
The first paragraph is talking about Gears. What I don't see there is a reason to retract from Lotus, or even an explanation for voting on her in the first place.
Illwei ends the day with, I believe, is a fairly NAI or Null reading on Lotus.
Flash forward to this cycle:
Remember Illwei voted Lotus for reasons from last cycle. Which as I already discovered... don't really exist :P. Anyway, on to more explaining by Illwei:
I get the possibility that Lotus wasn't NK'd because she's an elim herself, but... I see so many other more likely options than just that. I also think it's odd you're pushing this so hard after a fairly NAI end read at the conclusion of D1. It seems like you would have considered that more before immediately jumping on with a vote.
Basically saying the same thing that was already said.
One more thing: Here's a specific part of the above post:
See, the problem that I'm having here is that you know and acknowledge that one of your major points for voting Lotus (getting the adjudicator out of the way before the elims do) is entirely useless now, and still don't retract your vote. And still haven't. Even then, your two points about voting Lotus are contradictory: One suggests Vil!Lotus, and one suggests Elim!Lotus. The first which has been proven invalid now, the second which I fundamentally disagree with.
On top of that, you've been a lot more confusing this game than I remember you being ever before. So I'll join Venture in voting Illwei. After reflection I really don't think Lotus is elim.
TL;DR: Illwei said that they were voting Lotus for 'reasons expressed last cycle', which I found there to be none. Then, the two reasons they gave this cycle not only are half incorrect, but contradict each other entirely. I don't think Lotus is an elim because I see no situation in which her teammates would let her claim.