3 ms·

I have no horse in this race but I’m glad that - for once - people aren’t taking claims with absolutely no evidence seriously. That’s no way to function as a so

I have no horse in this race but I’m glad that - for once - people aren’t taking claims with absolutely no evidence seriously. That’s no way to function as a society. For all we know she could be jealous, have mental issues, or have a different bone to pick with him and thought that’d be the best way to hurt him. If I had his money I could see some of my own relatives doing similar things after being denied handouts, for instance.

pests 2y ago
Oh okay then we should just dismiss it?
- exitheone 2y ago
  "we" as in "a group of people not in a position to provide any evidence or investigate"? Yes, absolutely, because all "we" would be adding to the conversation is speculation. No new information can be gained here.
  - pests 2y ago
    Who said "we" were going to investigate or speculate? There is a difference between a witch hunt and making sure underheard voices get attention. I was suggesting "we" make sure these claims are not being ignored because they are against a public figure. The fact they are a public figure and "might get blackmailed all the time" doesn't somehow relieve a person of criticism. That "we" ensure the proper authorities and groups prioritize finding new information or investigate these claims instead of being swept under a rug.
- Auracle 2y ago
  Absolutely. We have a justice system, not mob justice. False accusations happen all the time. I feel like anyone that feels like you have had pretty charmed lives if you've never known the type of person that would do that.
  - pests 2y ago
    Who brought up mob justice? Real accusations happen all the time too. Nah, I've been homeless and in institutions, I'm well aware of the types of people out here. Just saying we shouldn't sweep things under the rug just because the person is a public figure or "has family begging for handouts" or "is at risk of blackmail". We should ensure the proper authorizes investigate and the potential victim is not drowned out by more powerful voices.
Teever 2y ago
It's okay to talk about things and people.

pests 2y ago

Oh okay then we should just dismiss it?

exitheone 2y ago
"we" as in "a group of people not in a position to provide any evidence or investigate"? Yes, absolutely, because all "we" would be adding to the conversation is speculation. No new information can be gained here.
- pests 2y ago
  Who said "we" were going to investigate or speculate? There is a difference between a witch hunt and making sure underheard voices get attention. I was suggesting "we" make sure these claims are not being ignored because they are against a public figure. The fact they are a public figure and "might get blackmailed all the time" doesn't somehow relieve a person of criticism. That "we" ensure the proper authorities and groups prioritize finding new information or investigate these claims instead of being swept under a rug.
Auracle 2y ago
Absolutely. We have a justice system, not mob justice. False accusations happen all the time. I feel like anyone that feels like you have had pretty charmed lives if you've never known the type of person that would do that.
- pests 2y ago
  Who brought up mob justice? Real accusations happen all the time too. Nah, I've been homeless and in institutions, I'm well aware of the types of people out here. Just saying we shouldn't sweep things under the rug just because the person is a public figure or "has family begging for handouts" or "is at risk of blackmail". We should ensure the proper authorizes investigate and the potential victim is not drowned out by more powerful voices.

Teever 2y ago

It's okay to talk about things and people.