2 ms·
Logic like this, ignoring risks because disaster was averted in the last, is causes plane crashes and space shuttle explosions. It's normalization of deviance.
by lupire 4y ago
Logic like this, ignoring risks because disaster was averted in the last, is causes plane crashes and space shuttle explosions.
It's normalization of deviance.
Ancestor wrote "the actual governing entities don't play these kinds of games" and I gave a recent example of that kind of game being played.
- ameliaquining 4y agoThere wasn't any specific bad outcome for consumers that was only narrowly averted, though. The thing that was narrowly averted was management of the registry being taken over by an entity that said it wasn't going to do bad things to consumers, but not everyone believed them. That's still a fair few steps removed from anything directly bad happening.
- kevin_thibedeau 4y agoThe bad outcome was removal of the price caps. That happened without any outside interference. The rest of the scheme depended on that first step and they got away with it.
- mikea1 4y agoAnd it is fair to say that a significant price increase was likely after the transaction. From the above linked article, it was a leveraged buyout (which by its nature puts a lot of pressure on extracting revenue from the business and its customers). > This concern grew after it was revealed that the [$1.1 billion] transaction required taking on a $360 million debt obligation.