> Scheduling that work almost a year in the future does not count against their reliability score. Of fucking course it does! Otherwise your definition of that

> Scheduling that work almost a year in the future does not count against their reliability score. Of fucking course it does! Otherwise your definition of that "score" is stupid and useless. Equipment is reliable if it is available when you need it. A technology that has half your reactor fleet down for many months, just as you most need them, is by no stretch of imagination reliable. Claiming otherwise is either delusional or dishonest.