I think we're being a bit too hasty having him have with most votes. Sure his defenses were flimsy and irrelevant, but the reason we voted him in the first place was because he wasn't sure of the rules. This is a beginner's game, so I don't think this alone should be enough for a lynch.
The fact that he has, however, been flimsy with his defense leads me to believe that we may have gotten lucky accusing him. Another thing is that he continually cites his experience with SC2 mafia. I don't know if any of you played this, but it's not very difficult. You have 1 minute days and it is random lynching most of the time. Now it is possible to pin his poor defense on the easier mafia game, but I don't think that's really relevant at all. The poor defense is either caused by he is mafia, and a bad liar, or he's town, and a bad player.
I don't think however, that asking about the rules makes him mafia, and besides, if he was mafia, he would know the answer to the question. If we pretend he's really good at this game though, he might ask the question just to attempt to show inexperience and therefore be less likely to be lynched. I do think though, that if he were experienced, he would be able to foresee the fallout of his question. Therefore I think that he is just an inexperienced player looking for answers of how the game is played. That also is probably the reason his defense was so bad.
This one is interesting because he only has 2 posts. Both not very informative. One of them patting aprudds on the back, the latter accusing him because of something that happened far before the first earlier post. he voted freeloader at first, RIGHT before his second post. But an hour after he accused aprudds, he unvoted for seemingly no reason, and has yet to vote.
lafali is acting awfully suspicious, but I don't think that 2 short posts is quite enough information to judge him on. However, keep an eye out on him, he does seem rather suscpicious.
He seems like an honest scum-hunting citizen, and his only vote so far is by pyo for the reason "aprudds - for a really arbitrary out of nowhere accusation". His accusation was reasoned by him, and he even stated it was partially just to get the discussion started. Honestly, he has been the most scum-hunting of us, so I think he's very town.
Considering this vote seems like a joke, I don't have much to say. First of all, it wasn't nearly his first post, as monsterDraker said, and furthermore, it wasn't even anything that bad, it was just facts. It does lead me to be suspicious of monster though. He voted because the post "annoyed" him. He seems WAY to hasty to vote.