You are conflating the decentralized, trustless, Sybil attackable scenario with the scenarios where the precondition can be conjectured probabilistically and thus where Lamport's "solution" has quantitative merit/utility as I stated:
No, I was reducing the problem down into its fundamental parts to illustrate that, at any given moment, the bitcoin network is functionally equivalent to any other BGP consensus system.
Just because you cannot quantify the number of traitors does not mean the system will produce invalid results within the bounds. This is true of any BGP consensus and has absolutely nothing to do with trustless, decentralised solutions.