No, that isn't remotely how it works at all. In fact, that's pretty much a textbook definition of how it
doesn't work.
If you think something in the story is a problem,
you have to prove it. Just like in a criminal trial, the prosecution has to prove guilt. The defence doesn't have to prove
anything. As long as the defence can offer a reasonable explanation of innocence, the defendent is considered innocent.
Likewise, I don't have to prove anything. Just like we assume 'Innocent until proven guilty,' we assume the story works until someone can prove a problem. And since I can easily offer a reasonable, plausible explanation to your complaints, you've failed to establish that proof and your complaints are thus illegitimate.
Modifié par David7204, 09 juin 2013 - 11:12 .