| ▲ | galkk 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
At this moment I just assume by default that those “watchdogs”, “environmentalists”, “nonprofits” are mix of nimby-ists and/or thinly veiled attempts of extracting money (it’s a nice things you got here. It would be a shame if some rare species of a frog would be found here. A small donation for the great cause/good, of course, would help us to work on ensuring that nobody gets in harms way). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | viccis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
>I just assume by default Gitmo couldn't get me to admit to this degree of intellectual cowardice | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | random_savv 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This comment made me curious is such a thing actually happens. As it turns out "greenmailing" is a thing, but not from environmental groups. Here's what claude found for me: <ai> The concern isn't baseless—there are documented cases of parties using environmental law as leverage, particularly California's CEQA. But empirical studies show only ~13% of such lawsuits actually come from environmental groups; the majority come from labor unions, business competitors, and NIMBYs hijacking environmental review for unrelated purposes. In this specific case, WaterWatch has a 40-year track record on Oregon water issues and the concerns about fish habitat are supported by the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs—so the 'thinly veiled shakedown' framing doesn't really fit </ai> I hope doing that research didn't spend too much water! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Nicksil 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Do you still work for Google? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||