You completely missed my point. You aren't "the other party" once you start making claims of your own.
"I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election..."
If your argument was just "there's not enough evidence to conclude that..." then I would agree with you.
> Why is that important?
Because you're trying to apply a convention from the context of legal disputes to something that isn't a legal dispute. Do you also ask HN commenters to go through a discovery process?
"I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election..."
If your argument was just "there's not enough evidence to conclude that..." then I would agree with you.
> Why is that important?
Because you're trying to apply a convention from the context of legal disputes to something that isn't a legal dispute. Do you also ask HN commenters to go through a discovery process?