Here's my classification, although it's more lose than your precise one. More based on feels. I left things in place, but relabeled:

^ unprompted scumhunting
* prompted scumhunting
" insubstantial scumhunting
~ non meaningful content
unmarked = normal contribution. Not direct scumhunting, but not meaningless.

No need to calculate things, though. I just included the chart because I already finished it. Looking back at Noctis' posts more closely, I don't feel as strongly regarding my active lurking acusation.

I think I had a major case of confirmation bias. First, I wanted to lynch him because he didn't seem active enough to be an asset late game. Also, he felt suspicious merely because of the low number of posts, and not being as vocal as the most vocal among us (except most players aren't). Those + confirmation bias = it made everything he said seem more scummy than it actually was. There's also something that just hit me: he was asking me questions because he suspected me. I failed to even consider that, lol. I was so busy trying to BW on him, he has every right to suspect me.

Side note: I also kinda suspect axum, Final-Fan, Stefl, and even zero in the back of my mind, for that same reason; not being very vocal. That's not to say they are scum, but I don't like how they are flying so easily under the radar.

[1] Yeah, probably. That post got me thinking, though. So, thanks.

[2] At the time. I didn't look back or give it much thought later on, either. I probably should, but not tonight.

I'm sorry. I was reading something that wasn't there. I thought you were a PR subtly hinting at something.

And yeah, you have every right to ask me stuff. I forgot to consider that I might be your suspect, lol. My bad.

Thanks for the reads.

Fun Fact: I've been reading Round 50, so this felt like I once again took you under my wing to show you the light.

Relevant to this game: Once again I'm going to strongly disagree about this post being scumhunting. That discussion has been over for days, and didn't yield a single lead. Bringing it up again as a general question isn't going to suddenly shed light on the mystery nor does it do anything to determine who to lynch. It's actually worse than a filler post as it's just a distraction.

First off: shaduuuuuup :p

Second: That was certainly a fun one. DarkThanatos' performance haunts me to this day.

Re this game: I dunno, it kinda feels like he wanted people's opinions on the unusual circumstances of Baalz' death, but was just too lazy to read.

no, with how noob he has given himself I am wondering why he wondered about any victim at all. This is something I posted not in the vein on tunneling him. (and no, it was not so much a typo as a way to paraphrase him, I am not sure if the meaning actually diverges too much if I use another instead of any other - the quotes were misguided, but it was points I wanted to bring up to maybe discus, as I said, the ideas I got from it might be not favourable to discus openly)

On the subject of me being inactive, please keep in mind that right now my free time is limited on weekdays to basically two windows of x

So apparently putting greater-than signs in the Quick Reply box that are not code is a bad idea. 

... two windows of x<1 and 2<x<3 hours.  Hopefully a third window of x<1 hour will open up soon.  Outside of these I lack Internet access to this site.  I am more available on the weekend and especially Sunday. 

Or even less-than signs.

This one was prompted because re-reading everything I noticed that Baalz was pegged as a killing role by miz. My stance before on the matter was, why would someone redirect someone on to themselves? But if they knew Baalz was a killing role, was it intentional? And if so why would they redirect him on to himself if they knew when they could have used him in later nights? 

I was also thinking that by the way Baalz was talking his most likely target was Mr. P, but something happened there. 

@linkz
thanks for your input about both the topics.
I completely agree with the flavor one so I'm not going to spend much time talking about that one, but I appreciate the insight into the vote activity.
I also liked the noctis vote because it was very early in the wagon, too early to be a bw vote. Something felt good about it. I was, however, excited to see both noc and then clyde vote because they were 2 of my top 3 and got me excited that I was on to something, which made me want to suspect them both. But I think I can agree with your stance as it was what I was leaning towards.