> The comment you replied to answered your question. It really didn't, instead it weaseled out by putting up a strawman that pretends to put a loophole in a st

> The comment you replied to answered your question. It really didn't, instead it weaseled out by putting up a strawman that pretends to put a loophole in a straight-forward and very clear way. In fact, it's blatantly clear by itself the fact that no one proposed a single idea or suggestion about how to enforce that mysterious 10%. No explanation was given on the impact on customers, and how the sellers would be forced to not go beyond that 10%. Why is that? Is the idea undefendable?