Hacker News Reader

This is assume SHE is guilty of a massive lie. The assumption is that she is trying to baselessly destroy him. Otherwise said, the benefit of the doubt is not symmetrical.

View on HN

Yes we give the accused the benefit of the doubt and require the prosecution to meet a high burden of proof to overturn that. It is not symmetric by design.

1.) There is no prosecution involved here.

2.) The actual prosecution of a crime does not start with the assumption that whoever is reporting the crime is lying.

A claim with no supporting evidence is just that, a claim.

And the list being discussed in this thread is one way to help gather the supporting evidence that you demand.

Does the list contain anything besides claims?

You (or people in question) are claiming she is lying with no supporting evidence.

The burden of proof is on the accuser not on the accused, regardless of what they have between their legs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com