@emptywheel @SeanVitka @JohnWonderlich - That's like saying USAF has a carve-out for towns because it only mentions cities at p 18 line 5.
@LizaGoitein Sure. But REALY EASY to fix this obvious hole. "No corporate." Done! @HarleyGeiger @SeanVitka @JohnWonderlich
-
-
@emptywheel@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich OK, but not including something in non-exhaustive list isn't "carve-out" by definition -
@LizaGoitein@emptywheel@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich Yes. Could the definition be more restrictive, sure. But there is no carve-out for bulk. -
@HarleyGeiger That is your claim you won't back by fixing transparency to prove, yes.@LizaGoitein@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich -
@emptywheel@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich Yes Harley, why won't you fix the transparency provisions? -
@LizaGoitein In any case one or other would need to change to claim this ends bulk. It doesn't yet@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich -
@emptywheel@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich My bottom line: list = necessarily non-exhastive, but will end BC if implemented right -
@LizaGoitein "If implemented contrary to what is permitted by law"?@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.