I thought I'd summarize the various points on Beet, as I see them.

1) He was originally flagged as suspicious for minimal participation, considered an anti-town action. He came up lowest in 4 methods:

A) Post Count: 4
B) Non-NM Postcount: 0
C) Wordcount: 24
D) Artsapat's relvance method: 1 (Answered the three questions)

2) Upon coming up topping all those methods he posted in to hypothesize about game make up, at which point I felt his suggestions strongly implied he possessed some game relevant information as the suggestions were otherwise random and counter-indicated by the minimal knowledge of the game we had. The principle theories raised focused on multiple scum factions, a rare thing in a game of this size and while grounds for a mod to want many players to help absorb the extra night kills it is very definitely not a reason for a Mod to want 12 players. All options focused on an abnormally powerful scum faction(s).

3) He accused me, on the grounds I clearly thought he knew something, though he claims to know nothing. This accusation to be logically coherent would require A) That he had guessed and guessed correctly and B) That I was a scummer and C) that I would believe he had not guessed and D) That with all of these I would tip my hand so out of character and incredibly clumsily of fashions. All 4 of these improbable conditions must be true for his accusation to be viable, and thus far he has not even confirmed the first one, he has not yet denied having extra knowledge and has IMO sought to imply he did even as he presents an accusation that can only be true if he does not.

4) He was asked by multiple players to role claim, a customary request when one is considered a primary lynch candidate, which is obviously the case. He was also reminded that any delay would damage the credibility of his claim, he has neither roleclaimed nor offered any defense or reason why he should not.

5) In his remarks he referenced being 'bussed', a term regularly used here and exclusively to refer to when a scummer votes for another scummer. Revealing slips of this nature are not unheard of even very rare, but may be sheer accident so he was asked to explain it. Rather than claiming it was an innocent slip of words he instead claimed the term did not mean that, and replied evasively when told by the two most senior players that it only means that, including citations of the mafiascum wiki and a post where he himself asked what the term meant and was told, in absolutely unambiguous language, what the term meant, by the moderator of the game herself. He was also challenged to find any use by any player if the term in which his definition was used or even a definition other than the one given. He has not done so, instead claiming that even taking note of the usage is 'grasping at straws', this is not a proper offense but is instead an attempt to discredit the accusation rather than justify his own actions.

6) His entire defense now rests on a counter-accusation at myself, claiming I am a scummer for behaving in a fashion he himself acknowledges is totally normal for me, town or scum. He has made virtually no effort to answer any questions or inquiries directed at him except as a counter-accusation at me, using as his lone piece of evidence that I suspect him for actions he claims were not suspicious even after other players have said they also found his behavior suspicious. This does not even qualify as an OMGUS vote, a counter-accusation based solely on suspicions which can be considered even somewhat reasonable is anti-town, a sit implies asking questions and inquiring about abnormal actions is itself grounds for a lynch.