Clearly it is - I don't know why you would think I implied otherwise. My point is that maybe you have a hunch they are trafficked, but it is a logical leap to simply state it as a fact that they are trafficked.
Yes - sorry. I had one logged in on my laptop and one on my phone which I switched to. I initially created this secondary account to talk to some other poster about hiring advice at my company without linking it to other autobiographic details I've possibly posted on my other account in the past, but have since unfortunately muddled the two in a big OPSEC fail(don't worry - I'm not in cybersecurity).
No - I only have two accounts that I post under, basically one with an autosaved password on my computer, and one on my phone. And I don't see what is so strange about my arguments. I'm not arguing that Epstein was a good guy or that his assistants necessarily weren't trafficked. I'm saying no one knows - and so far, not one of them has come forward, so regardless there is no real way to know. I would be saying the same thing if people were arguing that all the children who went to a church were raped by a pedophile priest who clearly raped, say, at least 10 children. I don't see my points as logically too difficult - merely that the subject is a clear baddie, and that means if someone says he has 19 fingers and another person responds that he probably has 10, that person will be accused of defending the baddie.
And really, this isn't a point I particularly care about. But message boards let you focus on parts of a conversation and address them independently of the rest. This isn't something I'd try to defend to the death, or would even feel the need to rebut in actual conversation. But as long as threaded messages exist, I don't see a problem with talking about these details.