4 ms·
I'd have to agree. If you are going to become a trusted party in a context where people have to trust that you are willing to follow rules, even when you may d
by bborud 6y ago
I'd have to agree. If you are going to become a trusted party in a context where people have to trust that you are willing to follow rules, even when you may disagree with them, then you will have a problem with someone whose identity is to not follow rules.
I'm sure Sunde would agree that he doesn't follow the rules if he disagrees with them. And proudly so.
One may have one's own opinion on why he did this and whether or not anyone turning it into publicity gold by being outraged is a naive moron, but one would, of course, keep those opinions to oneself. :-)
- GoblinSlayer 6y agoWait, if I crossed a street on red signal, I now have a stigma for life for not following rules?
- bborud 6y agoNo, but if you were someone infamous for ignoring traffic rules systematically over many years, because you thought that there should be no traffic rules, resulting in very visible legal wrangling, it would be optimistic of you to apply for a position as someone who administers driving tests.
- gknoy 6y agoAs long as you administer the tests properly, I shouldn't care whether you oppose the basis for those tests politically.
- bborud 6y agoYou make it sound as we’re talking about someone who merely holds an opinion. Not someone who acts on those opinions. That’s a bit disingenuous.
- GoblinSlayer 6y agoYou extended to rules in general, not some specific rules.