What does "full" have to do with it? I'm accusing you of having failed to demonstrate a natural thought process in our interaction. Allow me to demonstrate. As Town, you start from point A, and the line between A and B is the evidence you amass. B is the conclusion. I'm saying you started at B, and you're now working backwards to present your process as though you actually started from A.
Town = A > B
You = B > A