Well, Mr. Mensa - do you care to inform all us stupid folk how you feel about the issue and why? Or are you content to spend the rest of the afternoon clucking like a country hen?
Well, since you asked, I'll answer....
I don't like the idea of live cameras in the court. I think it encourages showboating rather than rational discourse. I like the action planned by the court in this case, where they release the audio same day, not live. You can hear what's going on, there is a complete transcript, you have sunlight but none of the Johnny Cochran-like trapeze acts that have harmed courtroom behavior around the country, everywhere it's been tried.
Same-day audio only release was done in Bush v. Gore, and it worked out fine for one of the most passionate cases of our day. I think that satisfies the need for complete disclosure without encouraging antics in the courtroom.
That's how I feel about it. Thanks for asking, because I was getting irritated. Whenever I hear the words "Nobody has ever complained" I have an alarm that goes off in my head because that is *never* true. Somebody *always* complains about a public decision, no matter what it is. 99.9% may agree, but that .1% != 0%. I am an engineer who works with scientists, and we're sticklers for that sort of detail. What is most likely meant is "I've never heard of any complaints."
Consider this example of what I meant by "bureaucratic:" Let's say your town decided to increase parking meter rates by 500%. You get a dozen of your friends to complain to the Town Council and you see the letters they sent. Then, at a meeting you ask them about the complaints. Wouldn't it pi$$ you off if the council members all said "Nobody has ever complained about the increase. Next item!"
You know for a fact you were just lied to in a public meeting. I feel that way every time somebody says those words, as you just did. I accept your apology.