| > Which are those? Well like I mentioned earlier, there's a regulation that cars have wheels, right? That's not a risk thing. > I’m beginning to think the discussion is more about dogmatic feelings about regulation than the topic at hand. No, it's just explaining my logic. Using a more abstract example makes it easier to focus on the logic. > Again, your argument is based on following regulations for the sake of regulation No it's not. > and I don’t agree that’s why regulations exist. I never said that's why regulations exist. I never said anything about why regulations exist. I'm so confused. I'm just talking about whether a certain kind of rule is circular or not... It's not a very important point, to be fair. But you seem to think I'm making some wildly different points from what I intend, and I'm not sure why there's such a communication breakdown. |