So you are saying your reply in the situation above would be:
If you were super-intelligent and/or super-sentinent I would say you did nothing wrong in leaving the boy to die in the woods because in that case you *might* have an *unknown* reason for doing so.
No. I'm saying that Cofty couldn't logcally conclude that you didn't exist, or perhaps more specifically that he shouldn't conclude that he has access to more information than you do if you are a super-intelligent and/or super-sentient being.
Now if there is no evidence to the contrary then based upon this information alone if we have to reach a decision then we are probably going to judge you as bad. I grant that.
The difference with God and the tsunami is first of all that a theist will not acknowledge that there is no evidence to the contrary. Also we do have the option of reserving judgement.
[have hit posting limit]