1. Yes, there are always possible motives. However, unless you have some data showing there are more false reports of rape than truthful ones, or even that the disparity between the two isn't a night-or-day difference, that's not something we ought to consider each and every case of doing.
2. Correct; my response was more about the general discussion taking place here than the specific OA one. That said, while not speculating on Tammy Camp ever having been raped, these three men who have banned her from three different conferences just for refusing to sleep with them sure are doing their best to interfere with her career.
You're making assumptions again I think. She didn't say there were 3 different conferences and 3 different men. Merely, that something "similar" has happened 3 times in the last year. Technically, it could all involve the same conference and same person. And it might not have even been a tech conference or industry related at all, who knows. Maybe, but not specified.
Assumptions are what put innocent people on death row. And what drive people to break out the pitchforks and torches. They're not a mark of modern civilization. I hope. :)
I'll agree that there was some level of assumption involved, but it's pretty clear this was not "the same conference and same person" given that that doesn't make logical sense.
How could she have been banned three times from the same conference, and why on Earth would she have written this post the way she did if it had been the same person three times in a row?
1. there are many possible motives for a false accusation; all kinds of permutations have happened historically; it happens sometimes
2. no rape mentioned or implied in the OA. just a refusal to have sex, supposedly