4 ms·

> So, the regulation needs regulation. Supervision is not regulation, it's the enacting of the regulation. Read it as "to regulate them well watch what they're

> So, the regulation needs regulation. Supervision is not regulation, it's the enacting of the regulation. Read it as "to regulate them well watch what they're doing". Nitpicking is a great way of showing you hold a crap hand. [from another comment] > I fail to see how regulation of regulators is somehow invulnerable to the same failures It is not, it's just more impervious because regulators by design have to work in a more transparent fashion and there is some accountability, even if at the next elections. The players being regulated are usually completely opaque and there is no real accountability. And just because something isn't infallible doesn't mean you have to throw it away. Looking at all your comments in this post it seems you have very strong opinions and you don't let facts get in their way.

pgayed 6y ago
Please point me to the facts being presented in this thread. Nearly every comment is voicing opinion. There's no data in the commentary.
- buran77 6y ago
  The definition of "fact" is also not present in this thread yet you still need to know it before jumping into a discussion. Much like the other concepts you are arguing here, starting with misunderstanding the simple concepts laid out in the first line of the study. The more things you expect to have presented for you during the conversation, the more likely it is you shouldn't actually be in it. You expect to throw the proverbial stone in the lake and everyone else to jump in and give you decades worth of education all neatly packed in a comment. Well you just got the conclusion from multiple users. Flailing about that we didn't support our opinion like it was a PhD thesis while you yourself just throw some inflammatory opinions with no qualified support inside or outside of this forum, and worse you remove text after posting, just confirms that you're not only unqualified for the discussion but are very likely carrying it in bad faith.

pgayed 6y ago

Please point me to the facts being presented in this thread. Nearly every comment is voicing opinion. There's no data in the commentary.

buran77 6y ago
The definition of "fact" is also not present in this thread yet you still need to know it before jumping into a discussion. Much like the other concepts you are arguing here, starting with misunderstanding the simple concepts laid out in the first line of the study. The more things you expect to have presented for you during the conversation, the more likely it is you shouldn't actually be in it. You expect to throw the proverbial stone in the lake and everyone else to jump in and give you decades worth of education all neatly packed in a comment. Well you just got the conclusion from multiple users. Flailing about that we didn't support our opinion like it was a PhD thesis while you yourself just throw some inflammatory opinions with no qualified support inside or outside of this forum, and worse you remove text after posting, just confirms that you're not only unqualified for the discussion but are very likely carrying it in bad faith.