STRANDED: DAY ONE: MORNING

I'm suspicious of everyone. I don't know who I will vote for but, it could be anyone at this point. -_-

Sith signed me up I wasn't here yesterday, because I was in the car for most of the day, and I didn't know how to play. Now I do.

Because:
A. He changed his mind at the same time Madscet Lodshoz (Scruffy) did, and
B. he "avoided" Sarvous' questions.
A is the only actually plausible evidence to use against him, because he did answer Sarvous' questions, in essentially the same way everyone else did, but Sarvous claimed it "made no sense", which is obviously false, compared to the other answers. I, myself, do not suspect him, however, as A is hardly enough premise to make such a decision.

Master, tell me: how can he conjure up a defense when he has done nothing worth mentioning to defend himself with? None of us have done anything to prove our loyalty, so how can it be exclusively used against him?
I am not trying to defend him, but it seems unfair to vote him off specifically, using "evidence" that could be premise to vote any and everyone else off.

Fellow Loyals, I stand before you to tell you something. I know my actions may have made me look scummy, so allow me to explain. The reason I switched my opinion with Madscet is because I honestly thought what I thought. And what I thought (before everyone decided I was the bad guy) was wait for more people to arrive so we could question them and see what they say, which could have given us a clue. But now, the people who arrive will look at the holorecordings and see what has transpired and just "follow the crowd" and vote for me while they (who could be scum) remain undetected. What I think we should do is question these people who are active but not too active that may be slipping under the radar. I don't think it's a wise idea to vote off somebody because of how they act personality wise. That would just get a loyal voted off. I think we should switch are focus from the more active people to the less active but not inactive people. I know it's risky but we just have to try. I am no scum, but a fellow loyal. You just have to trust my judgment. I also withdrew my suspicion of Namialus because I realized that he was just basing his accusations of me on evidence he thought was scummy and I respect that. So, as of now, I don't have any suspicions of anyone. I think while we are fighting among ourselves, someone who has just been sitting back and watching us is the scum leader (assuming there is one). We need to think on who that person would be. And come on, I'm not smart enough to be a leader of much. That's why I became a bounty hunter. Anyway, I hope you all take this into thought. I really don't want to be voted off and I certainly don't want to vote off a loyal.

Fine, use this evidence against anyone, droid.

Fine, use this evidence against anyone, droid.

I understand what you are trying to do, Master. But you are being very closed-minded. The day is very far from over; very far. OOC: Killa said Day 1 was ending tomorrow. IC: At least consider these things instead of forging forward in a blind manner.

This is all I have for a defense. You would be saying the same thing too if you were in my position because just like me you wouldn't have much of a defense.

Why? That is completely pointless. This evidence is invalid. I want your reasons, Master, because in my eyes--or optical circuits, if you will--he is not suspicious enough to be voted off with such weak evidence that I understand you are using.

OOC: I'll be back in half an hour.

You anger me, my Lord. I can do nothing else to convince you.

Explain to me why he looks scummy.

No, but IMO, it's better to go with no conviction on the first day in order to have a better idea of who the scum are and are not, than to lose a Loyalist on the first day for no reason other than our impulsiveness.