3 ms·
In my mind, it would be as simple as stating, "unless you're a single human being, your request will not be reviewed.". If you're representing a group of people
by tomlin 15y ago
In my mind, it would be as simple as stating, "unless you're a single human being, your request will not be reviewed.". If you're representing a group of people, or a group of entities, you are disqualified from having an opinion on record.
I know it sounds utopian and probably not "realistic", for whatever reason, but it would certainly even out the playing field.
- jerf 15y agoSo, when going to write laws on $TECHNICAL_TOPIC, it is now illegal for anyone in $TECHNICAL_FIELD to even try to advise the Congressperson. That's not progress. Oh, and before you answer that one objection, that's one I choose from many. You've killed way too much necessary speech with that restriction.
- tomlin 15y agoIt's hard to agree that my ideal world is without flaws, but towards the point you made, it wouldn't be hard to create an avenue for $TECHNICAL_FIELD to advise, not lobby, on $TECHNICAL_TOPIC. I'd imagine all sorts of restructuring would occur in the event that lobbying was banned. There is a clear and definitive difference between those who are grinding an agenda down your throat, and those who are offering expertise.