On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 12:18:46PM -0500, quil...@riseup.net wrote: > Matthew Garrett <mj...@srcf.ucam.org> writes: > > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 08:36:27PM -0500, quil...@riseup.net wrote: > >> Matthew Garrett <mj...@srcf.ucam.org> writes: > >> > I can - Jake raped or sexually assaulted several people I know. No > >> > social benefit can be used to justify that. > >> > >> I can't because I have no evidence. The evidence you present is not > >> convincing to me. > > > > If I've seen evidence that's convincing to me, what is the appropriate > > way for me to describe Jake? > > The way you do it is appropriate for you. How can I know what is > appropriate for you? Perhaps you meant to ask something else.
So there's nothing wrong with me calling Jake a rapist if I've seen evidence that convinces me that he's a rapist? _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
