The strength of your arguments in the last two posts of the day appear as weaker points and did not seem as pressuring of Lamont_Cranston.
Post 219
Here you are pointing out his bad logic by form of a (rhetorical) question. Bad or flawed logic is not a scum tell on its own. Any player can be the victim of bad logic. The way a player uses his logic, whether good or bad, can be scummy, but just because it is bad logic does not make it scummy. If you would have pointed out why the way he used poor logic to be scummy, if you thought it was, would have made a much stronger point and applied more pressure than you did.
Post 247
This looks like your trying to help him, or help him to help the town more than you are trying to condemn him. You point out what is the pro-town thing to do and in pointing it out in the way you've done it didn't read to me so much as being pressure, but rather as advice on how to play. You do point out that you think it is a scum tell, but you don't really back it up with any reasons for why that is a scum tell for you. You explain how not trying to convince the town of a suspect is a bad thing, but you don't link it to not talking to the person. If you are trying to convince the town that someone is scum, it doesn't have to have anything to do with talking to the person you think is scum, it can have to do with talking to
everyone else
. There is more pressure here than in post 219, but the pressure still feels light in comparison to you other posts.
_ _ _ _ _
Now looking at a couple of your previous posts regarding Lamont_Cranston.
Post 152
Here you are bringing up cases. Statement. Facts. I would find any section of this post to have been applying more pressure then your later posts in the day. Just a small portion of this post is stronger than your two later posts combined, size is not what makes the pressure or strength. Here you are citing specific evidence. You are pointing out specifically what it is you don't like about his behavior and that is what makes your case stronger and applying more pressure.
Post 209
Once again you are pulling specific evidence to support your point against him: the fact that he contradicted himself/lied. Here you have something solid, you point to it and use that evidence as pressure.
These are both different than 219 or 247. They both apply much more pressure.
I'm such a good lover because I practice a lot on my own.