More or less. The thing is though, I can’t continue this subject because as @inane.imp pointed out, without me realising, that would take the subject even further into the grounds of intent. Still I would like to legit thank people for their time invested in this thread, even if they feel frustrated at times.
Because LOF is Open Information that you need to be 'open and honest' about. So you're not allowed to 'say nothing about your LOF'. It's why 'Yes if X, No if imitating X' is allowed. Its completely (overly? ;) ) open and honest. The fundamental difference between LOF and other skills is that other skills are Open at Resolution (the Lasiq example), whereas (arguably) LOF is Open at all times. I disagree with this premise, but the rules aren't explicit in generalising the Lasiq example to LOF (but that's how most people read it). Its why I've long agreed that @Zewrath's position was plausible. I just think it's pointless because it makes life harder for no actual benefit. There is no knowledge difference between going: 'Yes' and 'Yes if X, No if imitating X'. But there's a huge practical difference.
LoF to the model is open information and the model is a sekban that has 360 visor, what model is hiding under is private information including its lack of having a 360 visor. It has virtually no change from claiming the model has TO camouflage or mimetism when it clearly does not have.
What about hypothetical LoF? As in, between a model and a point on the board where another model might go? Or is this part of the "official response from CB" we're still waiting on?
Part of the official response. The point I was making is the imitated model on the board is what matters when questions are asked, not the actual model that hides underneath it.
