/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>25871524
>the evidence of fraud is overwhelming to the point where only people arguing in bad faith would pretend it didn't happen

You say that, but I think if given the chance to argue your case before a jury of your peers, even a jury that leaned somewhat right, you would tacitly admit that the evidence isn't really compelling enough to overcome a default skepticism. I mean, that's pretty much what happened here with kleros, and everytime the Trump administration has gone before conservative judges.
Remember, appealing an incorrect consensus is heavily rewarded with kleros.
By contrast, for example, I think you would be eager to argue that the video evidence is consistent with the argument that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense.
This case increases my confidence that kleros is capable of differentiating true beliefs from tribal shibboleths. It is significant that even all the abstainers in this Biden case didn't bother to submit an argument protesting against the judgment.