If we say that “because targeting you is the most effective thing we can do”, we incentivise them to not budge. Because they will know that willingness to compromise invites more aggression
That presumably depends on whether “targeting you is the most effective thing we can do” translates into because you’re most vulnerable to enforcement action or because you’re a major supplier of this company that’s listening very carefully to your arguments or because you claim to be market leading in ethics or even just because you’re the current market leader. Under those framings, it still absolutely makes sense for companies to consider compromising.
Agree with the broader argument that if you resolve to never bother about small entities or entities that tell you to get lost then that will deter even more receptive ears from listening to you though.
That presumably depends on whether “targeting you is the most effective thing we can do” translates into because you’re most vulnerable to enforcement action or because you’re a major supplier of this company that’s listening very carefully to your arguments or because you claim to be market leading in ethics or even just because you’re the current market leader. Under those framings, it still absolutely makes sense for companies to consider compromising.
Agree with the broader argument that if you resolve to never bother about small entities or entities that tell you to get lost then that will deter even more receptive ears from listening to you though.