4 ms·

You're just deflecting, those people complaining have a point. Even excluding the "comforting fact" that it's only literally freezing "rarely", having to work f

You're just deflecting, those people complaining have a point. Even excluding the "comforting fact" that it's only literally freezing "rarely", having to work full shifts even at an average low of ~6-8C/43-46F, and an average high of ~16C/62F (official weather data for Dec/Jan/Feb) for ~3 months is still damn uncomfortable if not dangerous. Enough to warrant taking dangerous measures in such an environment like using a space heater. Would you like you day job to be a choice between "freezing" and "risking life threatening fire"? If the tent would be the better choice that people actually ask for, you'd expect more of them popping up in that kind of climate. It's just the cheap and fast choice (for the company) and these are the downsides (for the employees).

cptskippy 7y ago
> You're just deflecting I'm not deflecting anything. You quoted some PR that said "we have a large number of employees who request to work on GA4" and said "Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work." I pointed out that, by your own admission, for ~9 months of the year the climate is fine AND it's outside as possible reasons for choosing to work in the tent. The original quote doesn't say employees requested permanent positions or even year round. Two employees requesting to work 1 shift in the tent during ideal conditions would still make the statement true. Why is that so far beyond your comprehension? You're fixated on the fact that it gets cold at night in the middle of winter as proof that no one would ever request to work in the tent ever. I think you're just being contrary and difficult which may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda.
- close04 7y ago
  > for ~9 months The year has 12. If you have to selectively pick the part of the year or of the job that supports your point then you need to widen your view. You can't just ignore whatever contradicts it. I'll rephrase: off the top of my head I can't think of a reason for a "large number of employees" to want to work in that tent without any significant disclaimers attached to the request. "Only in good weather" or lack of awareness (not realizing that work conditions are bad part of the year) would be such disclaimers. > Why is that so far beyond your comprehension Because if people hate it 25% of the time it still makes Tesla's statement disingenuous and supports the complaint. > may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda Why is this always the go to response whenever someone criticizes Tesla (short sellers!)? If you need to try to discredit me to counter my argument then I'm making a pretty strong argument. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
  - cptskippy 7y ago
    The statement you questioned didn't provide any context, you're being presumptuous (e.g. An employee will only request to work outside year round, no less) which is why you couldn't fathom why someone might ask to work outside and thus concluding the statement was false.

cptskippy 7y ago

> You're just deflecting I'm not deflecting anything. You quoted some PR that said "we have a large number of employees who request to work on GA4" and said "Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work." I pointed out that, by your own admission, for ~9 months of the year the climate is fine AND it's outside as possible reasons for choosing to work in the tent. The original quote doesn't say employees requested permanent positions or even year round. Two employees requesting to work 1 shift in the tent during ideal conditions would still make the statement true. Why is that so far beyond your comprehension? You're fixated on the fact that it gets cold at night in the middle of winter as proof that no one would ever request to work in the tent ever. I think you're just being contrary and difficult which may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda.

close04 7y ago
> for ~9 months The year has 12. If you have to selectively pick the part of the year or of the job that supports your point then you need to widen your view. You can't just ignore whatever contradicts it. I'll rephrase: off the top of my head I can't think of a reason for a "large number of employees" to want to work in that tent without any significant disclaimers attached to the request. "Only in good weather" or lack of awareness (not realizing that work conditions are bad part of the year) would be such disclaimers. > Why is that so far beyond your comprehension Because if people hate it 25% of the time it still makes Tesla's statement disingenuous and supports the complaint. > may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda Why is this always the go to response whenever someone criticizes Tesla (short sellers!)? If you need to try to discredit me to counter my argument then I'm making a pretty strong argument. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
- cptskippy 7y ago
  The statement you questioned didn't provide any context, you're being presumptuous (e.g. An employee will only request to work outside year round, no less) which is why you couldn't fathom why someone might ask to work outside and thus concluding the statement was false.