Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, I still think the consequence qualifies as cutting the nose to spite the face.

Although I don't get why you think you're entitled to come up with a hypothetical scenario but balk at entertaining any questions clarifying it or related hypotheticals. But anyway, agree to disagree.



In contrast to opinions of employers or employees, laws are the result of the democratic process. The process itself might lead to imperfect results due to populist election campaigns, lobbying parties, and lawmakers funding the next golf party by making the actual legal text a bit complicated, but it's the closest approximation of general consensus we currently have.

That being said, once it's law you have one thing to do and two options:

- you have to follow the law

Besides that, you should embrace what your fellow humans might have thought when bringing in this legislation, enabling you to either:

- Help you understand and embrace it - Vote differently in the next election (or, sadly but truly bring in your net worth to lobby towards your opinion to greater effect)


Well I think my hypothetical was a parallel the OP might have more empathy with, rather than your extreme extrapolation.

To be clear though: I think directing the booths be rebuilt to standards was acceptable; burning the building down would be excessive.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: