Joined: Mar. 2007
[Interesting perspective, TP. But I don't think that this is "shield bashing", as you describe it. This is a simple lack of evidence, rather than any attempt to frame anything. I'll try to be a little clearer.
JAM maintains that he got banned for posting comments that included arguing for cogent hypotheses and testing of those hypotheses. TT admins maintain that he got banned because of despicable behaviors. Unless arguing for testable hypotheses is despicable, one of those is wrong.
JAM could undoubtedly link to a message where he said what he says he said. That would be pointless. It would then become incumbent on the TT admins to point out the messages that they were concerned about. Which is what I, and others, are asking them to do now. Why not bypass the intermediate step?
As for this statement
|Now, if I were to simply accuse SteveStory of being rude to me as the reason I quit, would it become Steve's burden to prove otherwise.|
No. The burden of proof rests with the accuser (you). As it does in this case. Show the evidence, and let the jury make up their minds.
You seem to be arguing for a situation where the persons making the accusation (TT admins) don't have to prove it. I won't even speculate why you would do that. While we wait for the TT folks to step up to the plate (or not), maybe you can expound on that interesting behavior.
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
- Pattiann Rogers