I can't say that I'm really surprised with the accusation. I was aware of the inconsistencies in my own "Modern Real Earth" claim some time after I posted them and noticed the dicussions on what "MRE" meant in the eyes of the other players. I hoped nobody would notice, but it's impossible to hide stuff here. That's why DK's warning was so important.

Then comes the question why I did not change them, even though others changed their answers and were not being called down for it? To be honest: because, even after DK's warning, I messed up. My MRE claim is supposed to be "Yes", but I answered "UNC" as I was not certain enough. Apparently my interpretation of "MRE" is life as you and I have it. The setting I have is not the kind of life we all have, as it has some unusual rules that I can not consider normal. (Just look at what the three "obviously YES worlds" have in common.) If I would have changed, without changing the worlds I had already named at that time, at least one, and likely two of the worlds would be dismissed immediately.

At that point, I faced the choice between leaving the "UNC" stand and have others look in their way at all the worlds and how their interpreted, or changing to "YES" and throwing away two worlds. I chose the first one, as that was more pro-town in my eyes.

Yeah, it's weak, I know, but I really was not certain about it. As I mentioned several times before, I'm not familiar with most of the things named in this game, I'm feeling out of my league here, so I tried to take a route that at least tells you all something. I wanted to participate and therefore did not want to go with the FT route of not answering at all.

Did I take clues from Kronin? Yes, yes I did.

Why did I do this? Because somebody else pointed out that we sould take overlapping worlds.



It's something I had in my mind when making up my list. (Monopoly was my "fairly off the wall one". I also used others' lists, BTW.

Who was it that made this suggestion? Actually, it was you, Isaac. So don't you go accusing me of something just because I followed suit. I have the feeling there is a reason you're doing this, but that's something for later in this post.

As I'm now under accusation, let's also answer the last question, the one about consistency: "Yes". If you need me to, I will also tell you the world I'm set in. I will not role claim at this point.

So, in conclusion: MRE = "YES", CON = "YES". I do not have a reason to change the other answers, and will tell you my world if you need to.

Some other points:

- Can anybody tell me what FOS means?

- I did not "jump on the chair role like rats on a biscuit". The position was open, nothing was happening and we were all just goofing around with an "OMGUS"-vote, some "give me an oompa-loompa song if anybody dies" and more useless (yet funny) stuff. I wanted to get it moving so I did, in a "friendly banter"-kind of way. It's a bit unfair, Yuna, that you now try to accuse me of something, just because you didn't read the instructions on Chair right in the first place and you were put in your place because of it.
DK followed suit (also in a banter-like way), nobody else chimed in and we were good to go. And as far as I'm concerned, we still are.
(I also dislike being Lynched for being Active, btw. Best way to bring activity on Day 1 done to nothing.)

- I have not seen any rules for the chair to be impeached, so let's just assume we can't, OK? I know that Rana told he would use the rules from last game, but in that game nothing was ever said about impeaching either. Let's not invent rules, just because you have the feeling you need them.
(I've looked for the original post on the Chair rules from last game, but can't seem to find them. If anybody can point them out for me, or can show me I'm wrong: please do so).

- I had my list of reasons why I think Isaac is suspicious in my eyes before. Added to this is now the fact that he uses his own suggestions to implicate others. I know I'm not the most trustworthy person in your eyes right now, and almost none of you will therefore follow suit, but let's at least put my money where my mouth is.

Vote: Isaac

Two more things that I would like to mention, but that I really can not take into account in the accusation. But really, in my eyes it's just some icing on a cake already well made. (1) He tries to cast suspicion on the one person who thinks he's acting strange (me). (2) There's also the fact that he's apparently inventing new rules to take the Chair away from me. It needs to be confirmed that this rule was not mentioned before, though.