Maybe your view of merit is too narrow, or mine is too broad. QA supremacy makes sense, but it relies on the merits of QA (that QA are competing to be the best

Maybe your view of merit is too narrow, or mine is too broad. QA supremacy makes sense, but it relies on the merits of QA (that QA are competing to be the best) to avoid false positives/negatives rather than rubber stamping, no?