I'm going to start by saying that I hate games that start with me having to defend myself. It never ends well. Either I get lynched, or I spend the entire game trying to tell people that they are wrong, and everything I say just fits into their misconception of me being bad, and whether I succeed or not, I don't have much fun. Therefore, I'm going to do my best to defend myself, but I'm not going to go nuts when people decide to attack and tell me I'm No Uing, and silly stuff like that. This is how I play.
So:
A. MP, in general, this is day 1. Yes, more has happened than usual first days here, but still, it's not like I have evidence of someone actually being bad. I talk about what I read and pops to mind as I read it, and if someone pressures me for a read, I'll state what I see. What I saw (and forgive me for not fully reading your long strategy post), was you suggesting, or at least I assumed you were, that we play the cop card smartly, and a few fake claim. Thus, the baddies can't catch the real cop. Am I wrong about that?
Then, you give about 3-4 names in green, and the rest in grey. So far, so good. I can see you doing it both as a civ and as a baddie. Then, when someone else gives a coloured list, you don't ask about their suspects, but rather why that person trusts Marmot. How can you not see why this looks suspicious? It felt to me like someone trying to fish for reasons for trusting people. And the fact that you were first to give your list (no matter that it wasn't a coloured one, got me even more worried. It's like you were drawing out people to make such a list so you can use it.
Given all that, the fact that you joined the vote on me made me doubt your civviness.
I appreciate you trying to get to the bottom of things, and if you are a civvie, then yes, we should clear things fast, but please explain to me how your actions are from a civvie point of view.
Damn, I need to go. Plenty more to say. I hope to be back later before you all lynch me.
