6 ms·

I tend to think it's neither, but rather an inevitable result of the lossy process of condensing legal text (which has been carefully written to include all the

• potato3732842 11mo ago
  I've seen way, way, way too much cases where the key clauses or details that someone who does not deal in the subject on behalf of others for money will need to know because it tells them of some "less crappy" path that they can go through to do a regulated thing, or know exactly what they need to know to dial back their thing so they don't have to put up with all the BS that getting .gov permission entails are conveniently omitted from the text they present to the general public. Like if you follow their instructions in good faith you'll wind up going through 80% of the permitting you'd need to open a restaurant just to have some boy scouts sell baked goods at your strip mall. In the best possible case the secretary is over-worked and doesn't wanna do the bullshit and whispers to you "why don't you just <tweak some unimportant particulars> and then you wouldn't even need a permit". Ditto for just about every other thing that the government regulates on the high end but the casual or incidental user is less subject to. IDK if it's ass covering or malice because the distinction doesn't matter. It's hostile to the public these agencies are supposed to serve.