4 ms·
> There was serious consideration given to boycotting the [triennial review process] entirely. But as digital technology spread, and more of the world fell unde
by car_analogy 5y ago
> There was serious consideration given to boycotting the [triennial review process] entirely. But as digital technology spread, and more of the world fell under 1201 (from garage openers to tractors), it became clear that we had to do everything
Are you sure this is the best strategy? The review process seems designed as a safety valve - ameliorating the worst short-term consequences of the law, to prevent the build-up of frustration, motivation, and technical means (e.g. businesses relying on an exemption) that might produce any meaningful change. It is the red cape keeping the bull distracted, while the matador slowly jabs the bull to death.
- dannyobrien 5y agoI'm not sure at all, and this is the core of the debate. It's really a co-ordination problem: boycotting the triennial proceedings would require a unanimous action, in the face of increasing damage by 1201. So when I say "it became clear", it's not so much that the strategy was clearly better, but the calculation between a principled boycott and pragmatic involvement shifted.