That could be as well.

The problem is that these people will probably end up modkilled or replaced anyway, by executing them, she's keeping us from executing someone who could possibly be on her team (aka, anyone else who is active). At least by getting rid of inactives, that ensures that no one on her team has any chance of being executed. But of course, that's if she's bad and if she's thinking in that way.
Or... something like that...
(then again, your way is more likely, but how do we know she's not making some kind of mistake, or that I'm making it a custom to accuse her every game for no reason? :3)
I just think it's way too early to start the inactive voting. I mean, Urthdigger was executed Day 1 for being inactive. Though they have gotten more time here than in the average game, I still think it's too early to execute those that could end up being active members or replaced with active members just because they're inactive during day 1. :\ Usually it's day 3 or 4 when inactive voting seems to start
Of course, they could be bad, but I'd rather worry about the active baddies than the inactive ones.
All I'm saying is that Chipper may or may not be bad, but either way, I just don't think it necessarily a good idea to go after the two (yes, she voted two people, eager no?) because the vote was started on them (mostly because I know that a lot of people are going to go for the first vote they see.)