My exchange is going somewhere, I think.
Lamont firstly said that, according to his theories, I should believe him to be scum. To believe anything else is scummy. This behaviour from someone is kind of hard to ignore. The idea that I should be convinced he's scum means that either his theories are crap, or that he's scum.
Now I've given him a chance to use information he believes to be
completely irrelevant
to clear himself. He has claimed to have received the Innocent role PM, but that he did not read it when Dev initially claimed, for tactical reasons, to explain his ignorance of its content at the time.
As I said before, and as ZazieR pointed out way back when Dev claimed, there were some inconsistencies with what Dev said - clearly, it was a paraphrase, but he got the jist of it down enough to convince everyone, myself included, that he received the Innocent PM.
Now I'm asking L_C to clear up those inconsistencies from his own role PM. He's refusing to do so, using bluff and bluster to try and make this issue irrelevant. I think it's highly relevant.
If he truly believes that the Innocent role PM is irrelevant and that everyone (except the non-Innocent town-aligned players, presumably, but he has claimed Innocent) has access to the information I'm asking for, then why won't he address its content?
The only conclusion I can reach at this time is that he is not Innocent, hasn't received the Innocent PM, and can't answer my question.
Vote: Lamont_Cranston