Warbler said:
I find it interesting that despite the arguments made against me, no one has been able (even really tried) to refute the reasoning I used in post 273 or the reasoning used by C3PX in his email to me.
Warb said:
1. Whose claim is easier to prove? Dayv's claim that he has cancer or Shawn's claim that he does not? Dayv's claim. ... ... ... Just because you don't have cancer does not mean there are medical records that exist that prove you don't have Cancer. It is almost impossible for Shawn to prove his claim. Therefor, if we are to clear this up either way, the proof needs to come from Dayv.
This is a valid point about the difficulty of proving a negative. It follows that IF PROOF IS NEEDED, it would make sense for it to be a positive proof (even if Dayv is trying to decieve people, it's possible he has an undiagnosed cancer).
2. Who should have the most desire to clear this up? Dayv. ... ... ... Yet he delayed and delayed and delayed. Shawn's initial accusation came on 12/20/2010, Jay's post that Dayv sent him records came on 01/06/2011. That is a 17 day difference. That seems very strange to me. ... ... ... I'd be professing like crazy that I was innocent and I would probably demand that the accuser be banned. Dayv does not seem to be acting like I would in the same situation.
Now we enter a realm of emotional value judgements. Dayv "should" want to clear this up. "This is what I'd do."
I don't know Dayv, or have clue what his headspace is, but clearly the dude is in a very bad place, but not defending oneself fervently enough does not equal a confession of guilt.
Finally, this is not a court of law. If it were, the burden of proof would most definitely be on Shawn. This is a case a of a forum member asking for money to help treat his cancer. ... ... ... ... Heck, even if Dayv did proof concretely, no one would be required to donate. Everyone has the right to decide for themselves under what conditions they will donate.
In a fraud case, I beleive the burden of proof would be on Dayv, for the reasons you said in #1. His records might be supoenaed. That being said:
- This is ultimately a case of a friend asking his friends for help. You're right that everyone has the right to decide for themselves how that transaction would go, but that applies to Dayv as well.
- Evidence has been provided. Is it convincing? I dunno. That's up to the person. You can dictate the conditions of your trust, but that too is up to Dayv if he's going to meet those conditions.
Warbler, I can tell you're angry, and given the situation I for one agree your anger and frustration is perfectly justified. You started this thread with only the best of intentions, and it's all kinda gone to hell. I think your requests are reasonable, but ultimately this is a take-it-or-leave-it situation. You can't pressure Dayv into doing what you want, this is just a message board. If other people are content with this situation, that's between them and their conciences.