3 ms·

Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation. It is the starting

Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation. It is the starting point in a negotiation, and is by definition one-sided. It's an example of the kind of cherry picking I was referring to. Using hyperbolic language in comments may be an effective rhetorical tool, but it reduces the credibility of your argument. The objective fact is that Tesla and Walmart are working together to solve these problems as it's literally in everyone's interest to solve them.

dragontamer 7y ago
> The objective fact is that Tesla and Walmart are working together to solve these problems as it's literally in everyone's interest to solve them. Not really. Walmart is well past that point. Walmart is literally suing Tesla over what Walmart perceives as gross incompetence on this issue. > Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation. In general, no. But in practice, Walmart has a very strong reputation in the business world. Walmart is well known to be an upstanding business that gives lots of leeway to its contractors. In fact, its pretty rare for Walmart to sue contractors, despite the fact that Walmart is a huge business with probably thousands of contractors working with them. Furthermore, the Legal Briefing Walmart has prepared is unusually well-researched. The briefing makes clear that Walmart went to extraordinary lengths to help Tesla in this case: > Walmart nevertheless worked closely with Tesla to explore a potential path toward re-energization of the systems. Walmart discussed with Tesla in detail the concerns it had about the conditions it discovered at the sites, and Walmart's consultants helped educate Tesla's personnel on how to conduct solar system inspections properly, including the types of conditions that can contribute to the risk of fire, how to use equipment and tools properly to look for and correct such conditions, and how to follow site safety and inspection protocols. Walmart gave Tesla over a year to correct the defects and to raise the quality of the inspections. And yet fire-after-fire continued to break out at Walmart stores across the country. This wasn't some sort of one-off crazy event. And all the evidence has been documented already. Sure, these court documents show Walmart's perspective on the matter, but they're not allowed to lie or slander in these court documents. Walmart started to move and investigate after the 3rd fire. A total of seven fires took place before Walmart sued (and even after Tesla allegedly de-energized systems). This is a systemic issue.

dragontamer 7y ago

> The objective fact is that Tesla and Walmart are working together to solve these problems as it's literally in everyone's interest to solve them. Not really. Walmart is well past that point. Walmart is literally suing Tesla over what Walmart perceives as gross incompetence on this issue. > Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation. In general, no. But in practice, Walmart has a very strong reputation in the business world. Walmart is well known to be an upstanding business that gives lots of leeway to its contractors. In fact, its pretty rare for Walmart to sue contractors, despite the fact that Walmart is a huge business with probably thousands of contractors working with them. Furthermore, the Legal Briefing Walmart has prepared is unusually well-researched. The briefing makes clear that Walmart went to extraordinary lengths to help Tesla in this case: > Walmart nevertheless worked closely with Tesla to explore a potential path toward re-energization of the systems. Walmart discussed with Tesla in detail the concerns it had about the conditions it discovered at the sites, and Walmart's consultants helped educate Tesla's personnel on how to conduct solar system inspections properly, including the types of conditions that can contribute to the risk of fire, how to use equipment and tools properly to look for and correct such conditions, and how to follow site safety and inspection protocols. Walmart gave Tesla over a year to correct the defects and to raise the quality of the inspections. And yet fire-after-fire continued to break out at Walmart stores across the country. This wasn't some sort of one-off crazy event. And all the evidence has been documented already. Sure, these court documents show Walmart's perspective on the matter, but they're not allowed to lie or slander in these court documents. Walmart started to move and investigate after the 3rd fire. A total of seven fires took place before Walmart sued (and even after Tesla allegedly de-energized systems). This is a systemic issue.