Not at all. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you make an argument, it isn't my responsibility to prove that it's incorrect unless you've actually included a sound argument that your argument is correct. If there is no basis for your argument, I don't have to prove that it's baseless to call bullshit.
Sometimes it might feel like that, but should it be that way? It may be respectable to defend your name, but does that mean that the burden of proof should be on the person being accused, especially when the accusation is made on a flimsy basis?
5
u/peak82 Jul 29 '22
It's easier to paint your opponents as something they aren't than it is to actually content with their arguments.