3 ms·
> The court gave a short deadline because it should have been done a while ago already. This isn't logical. When you order someone to comply with something, y
by koheripbal 7y ago
> The court gave a short deadline because it should have been done a while ago already.
This isn't logical. When you order someone to comply with something, you give them the amount of time it takes to do the task. If you want to punish them - fine them. Ordering them to do something impossible and then criticising them for failing is just intentionally setting them up to fail.
...so the only logical response is for them to suspend operations.
- Voloskaya 7y ago> When you order someone to comply with something, you give them the amount of time it takes to do the task. The French state didn't issue a mere suggestion a month ago, it was an order. The court just upheld the order. Amazon had the entire month to prepare.
- koheripbal 7y agoThis is not a logical position. If Amazon cannot comply with the order in the time NOW given, then their only alternative is to suspend operations. Whether or not they wasted time in the past, is irrelevant at this point.
- Voloskaya 7y ago> This is not a logical position. I wasn't arguing that they should or should not close, I simply responded to OP comment that they didn't have enough time to comply, while they in fact had that time (not anymore).