I made a request that if you downvoted you explained why. Thank you for heeding my request. You and someone else have already mentioned that merely saying the word "downvote" in a comment is an insta-downvote trigger, which is completely inappropriate since I made but a simple request that you seemed to handle just fine. Your extrapolation of the very ambiguous guidelines into mental rules for downvoting people is disingenuous and harmful to discussion, and you are not the only person that does it. It's one of the diseases endemic to this community, and it was only made worse by pg implementing grayed-out comments. Now it's just an opportunity to censor.
I'm glad you consider my opinion preposterous, because that's an opportunity for discussion. I'm annoyed you think that because my opinion is preposterous, I must be trolling. That's the biggest example of groupthink I've ever seen; "he's way out in left field, he must be here to disrupt the community for his own sick pleasure!" No, people do disagree with you for what you consider to be preposterous reasons. Just look at the gun control debate. There are preposterous things on both sides of that.
My underlying concern here is that we were called to this girl's attention via international media, we're relying upon very little actual demonstrable evidence, including media statements and a police report, and we've already made the determination that the charges were unfair, people in power should apologize and be voted out, etc. The girl changed her story once in the police report. That's cause enough for me to say 'hm, I'll wait for the facts.'
This sort of thing segues into a bigger, disgusting trend of people on the Internet donating to causes like this so they can philanthropically feel good about themselves. The girl didn't even ask for a legal fund, potentially might not need one, yet here we are. Calling the person who prefers to take the long view and wait until all the facts come out a troll.
> My underlying concern here is that we were called to this girl's attention via international media,
Why is that a concern?
> we're relying upon very little actual demonstrable evidence, including media statements and a police report, and we've already made the determination that the charges were unfair,
When you arrest someone you don't need to show much evidence, because arrest is merely a way to have a discussion with someone with protections for both sides.
When you then charge that person, as an adult, with 2 federal crimes that carry a potential (even if unlikely) prison sentence you better show you have very good reason to do so.
Using a chemical reaction to create steam to pop a bottle is a bit silly. Do you honestly believe it deserves prison time? A criminal record?
> The girl changed her story once in the police report. That's cause enough for me to say 'hm, I'll wait for the facts.'
She's young. Many people don't know their rights, and do not know "Don't talk until you have a lawyer. Say only 'Please can I have a lawyer, and then I'll answer all your questions.'"
PS Now you know that pre-emptive mentions of downvotes is a trigger for knee-jerk down voting you may wish to reconsider mentioning downvotes until they've happened.
> This sort of thing segues into a bigger, disgusting trend of people on the Internet donating to causes like this so they can philanthropically feel good about themselves.
What a goofy thing to say. Why do you think people do anything when they aren't under coercion or obligation, if not to feel good about themselves? Acting out of a desire to feel bad about yourself would be rather perverse.
> The girl changed her story once in the police report. That's cause enough for me to say 'hm, I'll wait for the facts.'
The part where you demand everyone else be hobbled by this same uncertainty is kind of amusing. (Whether it's intended as trolling or not.)
I wouldn't have deleted my comment if I'd seen your reply. But this is clearly the wrong kind of conversation to be having, so it's probably best that I did.
I'm glad you consider my opinion preposterous, because that's an opportunity for discussion. I'm annoyed you think that because my opinion is preposterous, I must be trolling. That's the biggest example of groupthink I've ever seen; "he's way out in left field, he must be here to disrupt the community for his own sick pleasure!" No, people do disagree with you for what you consider to be preposterous reasons. Just look at the gun control debate. There are preposterous things on both sides of that.
My underlying concern here is that we were called to this girl's attention via international media, we're relying upon very little actual demonstrable evidence, including media statements and a police report, and we've already made the determination that the charges were unfair, people in power should apologize and be voted out, etc. The girl changed her story once in the police report. That's cause enough for me to say 'hm, I'll wait for the facts.'
This sort of thing segues into a bigger, disgusting trend of people on the Internet donating to causes like this so they can philanthropically feel good about themselves. The girl didn't even ask for a legal fund, potentially might not need one, yet here we are. Calling the person who prefers to take the long view and wait until all the facts come out a troll.
Yay, Internet.