this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2026
537 points (98.6% liked)
memes
22555 readers
2143 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You mean through a competitive bidding process?
Not to go toooooo far down the rabbit hole here, but even that is a "kind of".
Specifications can (and often are) written in a way to limit potential bidders. Lets say there are three manufacturers of these things that have good build quality, but I want to target a specific manufacturer. I could put in specific upper and lower constraints for height, width, flow rate, etc, and then I can say that due to the site conditions (which were designed to those criteria) only one manufacturer is eligible.
I can then add specific restrictions for installation certifications, warranty coverage, distance requirements for eligible servicing personnel, etc.
While all this may seem reasonable and practical in the spec, its really just a way to control who is eligible for competing on the bid.
And if I was really shitty, I could leave specific things ambiguous so a company can come in really low on the bid to get picked, who then issues a change order because of that thing. Which then makes the cost higher than the losing bidder who included it from the start.
Its not really as competitive as you think, thats part of the disgusting game being played.
Change orders aren't a unilateral process... What you're describing is a corrupt government. It's not the norm.
I'm describing what I saw from many governments and comittees from when I used to review these specs for bidding.
I would have to disagree its not the norm, governments are always corrupted in some way, but thats a much more divergent discussion.
I can say with confidence that the overwhelming majority of specs are written to include or exclude specific bidders though. My work is and was global, too, so this isn't a US only issue.
How much they do to control the bidders list will vary though.
Are we pretending that corruption isn't the norm?
Local municipalities? At that level? No, it's not.
But maybe I'm spoiled by blue states