![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
If after 12 monty they actually comply then thats still a positive.
However i fear they may “fix” it with malicious compliance at 11 months and then the cycle repeats.
Instead what i think should happen is they should need to obtain “verified compliance” within a year. (Minus the time europe takes to check) and if the term expires the penalty goes up to eventually forced splitting up.
Unironically based.
Scientific works should ideally stand on their own and present all the required information to understand its conclusions in a easy to comprehend for form.
Requiring a human, who is more prone to emotional and subjective errors during live speech then during honest predetermined writing sessions is everything but ideal.
However, a scientific work should be the most possible comprehendible to the target audience which may require multiple mixed forms including live discussion of subject matter.
[scientific medium that allows people to learn and grow independently of other factors] > [scientific medium that aids learning and growth in combination with other factors] > [scientific medium that requires near full knowledge of the subject matter to understand (thats just art for smart people)]