[JS]

Hi Matt90,

Sure, tv audiences work qs you describe, but if we can still create a strong movement and hit some headlines (of some specialized sites, say) with something like ‘core F1 fans promise to boycott tv retransmissions of the last gp if double points are maintained’, then surely we will be heard and noticed. Nevermind if the 1% poll from which tv audiences are extrapolated remains unchanged…

Cheers…

[JS]

Andre,

I think you slightly miss the point at the beginning: your analogy is fallacious. Your questions should be, for instance, about whether one should doping in sport (by doping I mean put your health at risk by some training method that clearly endanger your health and, potentially, that of other players too). But that is debatable and I don’t want to point this out.

Rather, you’re saying: why do we need laws? If my job jeopardizes my health, I quit. Good for you: you can materially do that or, in any case, you feel confident enough and are strong enough to do so. Excellent. But let me answer: regulations are here to protect people.
What about all these people out there without your strength? Shouldn’t law be here to protect them? Should we keep allowing people to smell and eat asbestos just because they are informed enough?

Do you keep the same reasoning talking about drugs? What prevents you from saying that heroin could very well be sold in the street: people are informed enough about the risk. I would not take it. You maybe would not either. What about all the others? My kids if I had some, for instance?

Laws are here to protect people in a weaker position to be abused, be it from character and just from material point of view (I need to eat, I want to work, until which point can an employer push on me because of that? Forcing me to work in unsafety conditions?).

All this is just a game and there’s really no way that having dehydrated pilots make the game better. Come on, who needs that?

[Author]

Posts