Whether I used AI or not to write the skeleton (which I did not) is completely irrelevant to the authenticity of the evidence or the strength of the arguments I have presented. But by throwing out these unsubstantiated claims, COPA hopes to distract from the actual evidence, shifting the focus away from what matters: the facts.
This is the kind of thing that may work in the world of public opinion, where emotion and personal attacks often take precedence over logic and reason. But in a court of law, where decisions are—or at least should be—based on facts and evidence, such tactics should have no place. COPA’s allegations, lacking any proof, amount to nothing more than a smokescreen. It's a transparent attempt to discredit me without addressing the substance of my case. And that’s the hallmark of a weak argument—when you can’t refute the facts, you attack the person instead.
Read 7 tweets

S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
Oct 3
Martti Malmi and Adam Back—
This is the kind of thing that may work in the world of public opinion, where emotion and personal attacks often take precedence over logic and reason. But in a court of law, where decisions are—or at least should be—based on facts and evidence, such tactics should have no place. COPA’s allegations, lacking any proof, amount to nothing more than a smokescreen. It's a transparent attempt to discredit me without addressing the substance of my case. And that’s the hallmark of a weak argument—when you can’t refute the facts, you attack the person instead.
Read 7 tweets

S Tominaga
@CsTominaga
Oct 3
Martti Malmi and Adam Back—
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment