...uh, still comparing apples to oranges, I see, and the American Arbitration Association hasn&#x27;t published their full dataset, but according to their internal study that contradicts external studies, it&#x27;s great? Here&#x27;s a paper that digs into this a bit more:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu&#x2F;cgi&#x2F;viewcontent.cgi?article=2018&amp;context=articles" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu&#x2F;cgi&#x2F;viewcontent.cgi?ar...</a><p>So if people don&#x27;t have access to legal representation below a certain income level, the solution is not to increase accessibility to courts or to allow them to represent themselves in court, but instead to set up binding arbitration where they also have no representation? Do you feel that in abstraction, a neutral observer would reach that conclusion?