This is exactly the kind of discussion we hoped these maps would generate. You’re right about the current law. We anticipated that issue and have already run versions of our maps using those constraints. But our larger question is whether we can go further and remove the incentive and the information needed to gerrymander in the first place by excluding party registration, election results and incumbent locations from the map-drawing process. That doesn’t mean we reject Stephenson. Quite the opposite. For a map intended to comply with current NC law, we must incorporate it. What we’re asking is whether a transparent, predetermined process that excludes partisan data can provide an even stronger protection against political manipulation. We’re trying to move the discussion forward from simply limiting how maps can be drawn to also limiting the political information mapmakers are allowed to use. It’s also worth noting that splitting counties is not unique to our maps. Current NC Senate maps already include multiple split counties. So the real issue is not whether a county is ever split. It is how and why those lines are drawn, what constraints govern the process, and how much political discretion remains. That is where we think a rules-based, data-limited process can add another layer of protection. That leads to the question I’d genuinely be interested in your view on: Should the party controlling the General Assembly be able to use partisan registration, election results or incumbent information when drawing districts? If so, what public purpose should that information serve? Our concern is simple: if either Republicans or Democrats can use that data to understand how a proposed map will perform politically, then they have information that can be used to tilt the playing field in their own favor.