NaturallyLazy summary, more detailed/different comments below.
It's mostly day one post 187 that is prompting my strong suspicion of her as scum, but the whole pattern fits as well. She is someone who said over and over again (mostly pre-game) that she's such a good town player on her other site that she rarely survives long, and there hasn't been a sign of such play here. She posts a fair amount on day one while the proverbial bugger* is hitting the proverbial fan for the scum, but the closest she comes to commenting on any of it is to say that she *can't* really comment on the Mahaloth case, because there's too much metagaming and she can't check up on it. This is just false. Only one of Mahaloth's detractors (crazybunny) referenced anything that couldn't be checked up on within the confines of the day one thread itself.
On top of that blatant bit of avoiding-the-issue, there is also that she never comments on Bob, comments on Bill only to say she doesn't like the case on him (but never approaches a criticism of anyone who does), and makes a statement to Pinkies that she's been posting substantively when her contribution really consists almost exclusively of fluff, game theory, and failure to commit. The whole thing fits the pattern of a scum player in over her head too quickly.
She never votes, despite promising to vote/participate more/whatever repeatedly and apologizing for it each time it doesn' t happen. Broken promises and apologies on that scale are much more of a scum thing than a town one.
Paranoia is killed night one, and she has more reason to kill him than anyone else in the game does, because he's the one who knows how she plays and was poking her to share her thoughts.
On day two and three she posts only a single time, saying nothing of substance, but avoiding the final vote for nonparticipation. Again, much more a trait of an overwhelmed scum than an uninterested townie. (She does fail to participate entirely on day four.)
Her apology on day two for not saving KidV is detached from her claimed day one thought process, in that she would have had to vote Timmy to do so, and Timmy was the vote target of the only person she'd expressed any suspicion of at all (Captain Pinkies).
But really, post 187 of day one. Keep the circumstances in mind and read it. Here are all her posts, below.
-------------------------------------------------------
Post 20 – confirm receipt, ready and eager to go
63 – role PMs
95 -- fluff
187 – after a poke by Paranoia posts this long comment. By this point Mahaloth has a stack of votes, as do Bill and bunny. I’ve lost track of the timing of the votes on Bob, but he’s at least been questioned by sinjin and Guiri by now.
“Naturally, you would [like my thoughts]. I'm a little shy about posting them, for which I apologize. I really shouldn't be.
Vanilla claims on day one: arbitrary. I've observed people who play with them, and others who don't. I've nearly been lynched because I revealed I had a Role PM in a round where supposedly Vanilla town players did not have role PMs. What's great is ALL Vanilla Town players actually had role PMs, and the mafia tried to claim otherwise. I do not see this vanilla claiming business as a reason to vote Bill anymore than a reason not to vote him. If anything, I think it's stupidly scummy to vote for him BECAUSE he claimed alone. I realize most of the cases on Bill have more than that to their cases, but the fact that it's being used as supporting evidence is WRONG on so many different levels. “
Long paragraph on vanilla claims (a side issue), defends Bill (very likely townie IMO) and doesn’t like the cases against him (but doesn’t comment on any specifics).
“There seems to have also been votes on Mahaloth. These seem to be somewhat based on Meta which I clearly don't have, so I can't really do much about that, other than go back and read these rounds. Considering what I'm working with, that would be almost ridiculously counter-productive, and unnecessary. If it's there (I'm moving quite a bit slower this round, probably because I actually have to think more), the following bugger* does seem weird, I can't deny that, but I'd like to see a decent paragraph from him (her?). Another, if he has already posted one and I missed it.”
Votes on Mahaloth are somewhat meta-based? This is just plain not true. Only a single vote on Maha (the one from crazybunny) references anything remotely meta-related. The others are based on his vote on Bill being poor and/or opportunistic, and things related to that. There’s nothing preventing Lazy from commenting on my vote or Red Skeezix’, based on information in the game thread itself. So Lazy deflects having to comment on the whole issue with a brazen falsehood.
“Personally, I'd like to hear from Captain Pinkie. That is where my attention has been drawn. I feel that your posts have been very... strange. I can't explain it properly. Perhaps there is somebody else who knows more about it than I do, but you're definitely a player that has been pegged for watching. I have yet to decide if a vote is warranted. If you do happen to show up on the thread, I know that I would greatly appreciate a thought-out post. I cannot get a decent read on you, and from past experience, it's not a good position to be in. For either of us.”
A now-known-to-be townie is “strange”. Add “odd”, “interesting”, and the like; I swear those words are half-decent scum tells in themselves. Because “strange” and “scummy” are not synonyms, but scum often try to pass them off as decent approximations of one another.
“Let's see... I am getting headaches every time Role theory pops up. "Oh, if we have role X, then Role Y should do this and Role Z should do this. But then Role P could do this and Role V could do that. So, everybody target W, and we'll be a-okay~!" Uh, No. That's not how this works. If that's how it works, then I should just say right now - There had better be a doc AND a shrink on me here, because I haven't made it as town through three phases in such a long time that I'm likely to be either hit or converted before the dawn of Day Two. I don't remember who was sitting down and WIFOM-ing a town watcher and a mafia watcher (isn't that more like a stalker?) going around, but that is almost the most ridiculous thing I've seen on a thread in the absolute LONGEST time.”
More meta-game near-fluff.
“Oh, yeah. It was Bill. Go figure. That said, Bill, please don't quit. If I may, it never looks good to quit. If anything, it reflects poorly on yourself, and shows a low tolerance for crazy stuff that always happens. Which is generally something that's not good in Mafia players, it just makes the game less of ... uh... less of a game, and more of crazy stuff just went down and now I should be stressed ball of twine. OR something like that. That would generally be how the game runs under everybody quit when the going gets tough scenario.”
Don’t quit, Bill!
“Also: I need a new vote tally. >_> Mine has totally been lost with everything else I've been doing.
I've probably been cut a few times, considering that my roommate went to bed about fifteen minutes after I started this post, and that was half an hour ago. *sigh* Oh well.”
For all the words in this post, it is largely a pack of nothing at all, and what substance it does contain consists of the following:
deflecting responsibility for commenting on a case on a known scum with a falsehood
defending a very likely townie from attacks, without follow-through
This post is scumscumscumscumscum with scum-sauce, and that’s why I changed my vote.
188 – gives Texcat a “what the heck was that, is that all you have to say?” type of comment aimed at Texcat’s pointlessly fluffy post 185. Given my confirmation bias, reads as trying too hard.
232 – response to Pinkies contesting her comments about him, saying that he never knows what to say until day three and questions are good, and what does she want to know?
“I have never played a round with you, as far as I know, so I am unaware as to how the, ah, normal routine goes.
Typically when I'm asking somebody to talk, I'm asking because I feel as if there's something more that I can't see in just the average post. Certainly it doesn't take until Day Three to form opinions about the activities going on in this thread. Maybe it takes until Day Three to form ideas about specific players - I always think that I'm more accurate any day other than Day One - but it certainly does NOT take that long to decide, "Okay, I agree with Player X, because you know, this is what seems right for the way I would play things, which is Tactic Y."
I realize I do not have much space to talk with the way I am approaching this round, and how few times I have posted. However I do think it's safe to say that most of my posts have been substantiative and while they may be a little rarer than I would like, they will probably bounce back as I get used to a thread that actually moves, as opposed to one that I can check in on once a day and find the mafia in five minutes. “
“Most of my posts have been substantive” is a self-serving exaggeration, as she’s actually said ZERO in regards to actually finding scum. Some game mechanics/game theory comments, some “I don’t like the case against Bill”, some “I can’t evaluate the case against Mahaloth” [FALSE], and “Pinkies is strange”. That’s it. She’s trying to look like she’s participating – this comment itself leaves no doubt that she is actively trying to leave that impression – but she’s not actually doing it.
(The following is in response to a weird comment from Timmy about Paranoia, Texcat and Lazy’s recent fluffy comments to one another.)
“Texcat invited Paranoia here. Paranoia invited me here (The latter should be obvious from the sign-up thread - Paranoia mentions that I'm a frequent Night One hit). I imagine that Paranoia, knowing my play style, wanted my opinion on things faster than I've been putting out as of late. The other issue might be that I promised I'd vote Day One, and I haven't done so yet, so I need to figure out what I'm dooooooooiiiiiinnnnnnnnngggggggg”
Note she doesn’t actually vote day one. Or at all so far, in the entire game. And that she’s conscious of Paranoia wanting her input. (Paranoia is killed this night.)
The rest of the post is fluff in response to a terminology correction by peeker and the wiki link provided by MHaye. So another long post that barely touches any important issues and which puts her own participation level in an undeservedly good light to boot.
336 – In response to Pinkies’ countervote on Timmy, characterizes it as possibly OMGUS and promises once again to get a vote down this day and saying she has plenty of time to do so over the afternoon/evening.
337 – “oh my claiming shenanigans” (Seriously, what was the point of this post?)
Day Two
57 – responds to Romanic’s “where are you” poke
“I'm here.
I shall start by apologizing for my negligence inadvertently causing KidV's Death. I was not paying enough attention to this round the day the lynch occurred. In general, I have been paying less attention to this round than I should be. I am clearly too used to playing at a slower rate. I probably would not have helped much anyway, since I was more interested in Pinkie than anybody else, honestly.
*continues reading the thread*”
Pointless (and confusing) apology – is she saying she would have voted to prevent KidV from dying? If so, her only reasonable choice at the end of the day would have been to vote for Timmy – who was in turn being voted for by the only person (Pinkies) she’d come close to suspecting all day long. A person who should logically have been looking more townie than most to her, as a result. And she implies she would have voted for him? And that doesn’t need a whole heck of a lot of explanation, under those circumstances?
There’s no connection to anything solid in her comments. It’s just words.
Day Three
98 – more apologies, finals week, wouldn’t have signed up if she’d known it would be that bad, will try to catch up “in a few hours”
She doesn’t post on day four.