[chagen]

> Not having access to something does not grant you rights to it.

> You probably know a lot of things I don't, and some things that I can never know. That does not allow me to compel you to tell them to me.

This is such a obtuse way to frame the comment you were responding to. It's obvious they were just talking about the right to know about labor demand price ranges. Do you really think they were advocating for the right to know everything about everything?

[oDot]

There was no justification for that so-called right other than lack of knowledge

Edit: this is reiterated by OP in a sibling comment, guess I framed it correctly?

[chagen]

We must have a different understanding of the English language. OP's sibling comment clarifies your original misunderstanding by saying

> The California law I referenced grants me rights to the pay range information.

You read that and somehow thought, _for the second time_, "I get it. OP wants to know everything about everything." Do you see the disconnect? OP is specifically talking about pay range information. You're just making up an obviously outrageous point that no one is advocating for and arguing against that made-up thing.

[oDot]

I didn't say OP wants to know everything about everything.

You seem to have misunderstood me.