The Law of Infinitesimal Nit-Picking

(Scientific) Notes From The Cube: It is an office axiom that -

No idea is good enough.

Every idea benefits from input.

It easier to address an issue step-by-step than as a whole.

Therefore, all ideas should and will be subjected to a detailed, micro-managed, nit-picking critical review limited only by the following conditions:

a) Is the critique-giver required to know the subject?
* If "yes," add a limitation
* If "no," solicit opinions from anybody in the company.

b) Is the critiquer required to study the issue?
* If "yes," add a limitation
* If "no," give the critiquer a position on the Review board.

c) Is the critiquer is allowed to make it up on the spot?
* If "no," add a limitation
* If "yes," give the critiquer a place at all meetings.

d) Is the critique verbal or written?
* If written, add a limitation
* If verbal, expect more useless feedback than imaginable.

e) Will the critic be required to participate in achieving the results of his/her commentary?
* If "yes," add severe limitation; critical input ceases
* If "no," give a free pass to Review Hell.

The Law of Infinitesimal Nit-Picking states that the degree and amount of unessential critical commentary is directly proportional to the number of limitations placed on the critique-giver: i.e., the fewer limitations, the more bullshit will be shoveled.