Originally Posted by
Brian Ratliff
But these are your words, yes?
Here is the full quote:
You are arguing the analogy is relevant because [if] "we enact safety laws... regardless of vehicle type" (we don't, as I have illustrated). "We see the folly of a Strava for cars..." (the analogy) "...and given the similar potential for harm..." [then] "...we can see a reasonable ground for viewing Strava for bikes in a similar light." (presumably banning or severely restricting the service).
What am I missing here regarding "intent" of your statement?
You're adding intent that simple isn't there. I'm not advocating banning or restricting Strava. How many times do I have to say that?
Read my words. Trust that they are all I am saying and no more. I have no hidden agenda.
When I say "We enact safety laws to reduce that danger, regardless of vehicle type" I don't mean we enact identical safety laws. If I had meant that I would have said it. The laws are clearly different for different vehicle types, but we enact laws anyway.