I've seen a lot of anons worrying that the secrecy behind shilling lends itself towards people calling each other shills all the time. Since they're not easy to immediately identify it has been raised that we run the risk of wrongly accusing people for having the "wrong" ideas.
I put it to you, is this really such a bad thing? A norm of shill accusations means people are more hard-pressed to defend their questionable positions intelligently and with evidence, lest they be dismissed. And even an incorrect accusation still maintains the knowledge that there ARE shills, even if the person being accused is just particularly stupid.
The ultimate commonality between shills is that they are all opposed to countershilling; therefore a culture of countershilling paranoia has the effect of weeding out these people as the obvious common denominator between accusers.
tl;dr when it doubt, always call shill.
Thoughts?