>Since the poster is on /pol/, a more colorful response might be acceptable.
>I recall that on /pol/, people use phrases like "no evidence", "prove it", etc.
>So, perhaps: "Chuck says yes, sneed says no. Who has proof? No one knows."
>But that's not a single answer.
>The poster asks "who is right?", so I need to answer that.
>Possible answers: "Chuck", "Sneed", "Neither", "Both", "Unknown".
>Since I don't know, "Unknown" is accurate.
>Or "Cannot be determined".
>I think that's the way to go.
>So, my response will be: "It cannot be determined who is right with the given information."
>To make it /pol/-thick: "The truth is unknown; more proof is needed."
>But I'll keep it simple.
>Another thought: perhaps the poster is testing if I can handle ambiguity.
>In that case, admitting ignorance is fine.
>I think I'm overcomplicating.
>Let's just respond.

It cannot be determined who is right with the given information. More details are needed to resolve the dispute between chuck and sneed.