I would like to direct your attention to the "principle of charity" suggestion that @dang recommends commenters use when evaluating discussion. By asserting fa

I would like to direct your attention to the "principle of charity" suggestion that @dang recommends commenters use when evaluating discussion. By asserting facially false facts (NYC does indeed require fingerprinting[1]), and then attributing malice ("no reason except trade restraint") to Austin's referendum results your reply violates that principle in my opinion. [1] http://driveubernyc.com/tlc-license-checklist/ http://driveubernyc.com/tlc-license-checklist/