I get what you're saying - and actually I do agree to an extent. But I don't think the 'problem' is these takes themselves. The problem is that generally our t

I get what you're saying - and actually I do agree to an extent. But I don't think the 'problem' is these takes themselves. The problem is that generally our tolerance for negative outcomes has dwindled. Instead of being upfront and saying "we expect these launches to kill 500-1000 extra birds over the next 3 years, and we think that's an acceptable price", we play silly games with fudging models and numbers and language to say "we expect the impact on wildlife to be negligible". We've lost the ability to properly lead and discuss and decide on trade-offs, and instead fall back on an illusion that we can almost make decisions that are 99% upside, 1% downside. We then torture our processes to sustain this illusion.