I have interned there (obligatory "this opinion is my own" etc etc), so if you believe that disqualifies a discussion which actually has nothing to do with Pala

I have interned there (obligatory "this opinion is my own" etc etc), so if you believe that disqualifies a discussion which actually has nothing to do with Palantir (one of NGO stat inflation), then that's fine. I guess it comes down to this: you have the same question as I do. I'm curious to see what the actual evidence for the alleged manipulation is. Has the commenter who put forth the allegation re: stat inflation provided evidence for the claim? The question of definition is fair in principle. I'd be glad to discuss whether or not the definition is fair. I'm of the opinion that it is, and if you're of the opinion that it's not then I really do want to know why. Not sure what this discussion is, to be honest. You seem to be saying that we should be able to criticize these stats/categories/definitions. I agree with you, and then I'm asking you what your criticisms actually are. So far you're still pointing to "definitional flaws that can negatively affect certain populations." If there are such flaws with such consequences, that would be really problematic, I agree. What are the definitional flaws, and how are they negatively affecting which populations?