3 ms·
Isn't that backwards? If most offenses are first offenses, then firing after a first offense won't help much. But if most offense are repeat, firing after the f
by gweinberg 8y ago
Isn't that backwards? If most offenses are first offenses, then firing after a first offense won't help much. But if most offense are repeat, firing after the first offense would have prevented the repeat, right?
- brlewis 8y agoWhat you're saying and what I said are consistent, not backwards. "If most offenses are first offenses" satisfies the predicate "Unless [% of first offenses] is a really low number" The consequent "firing after a first offense won't help much" is consistent with "firing after first offense won't reduce the total number of incidents enough."