3 ms·
It really rubs me the wrong way that you seemingly refer to the previous test related death of 3 people as a "small" incident. I'm sure that's not what you inte
by krisoft 12y ago
It really rubs me the wrong way that you seemingly refer to the previous test related death of 3 people as a "small" incident. I'm sure that's not what you intended to write. Maybe what you say is that it's unrelated, therefore "has a small relevance" now. Even then I would argue that evidence of blatant disregard of safety protocols in the past is a relevant piece of the puzzle.
But declaring it a small incident? I would not.
- pulkitpulkit 12y agoApologies: don't mean to imply that deaths are a "small incident" or that they can be forgiven. My point is not about whether they are or aren't guilty of malpractice or poor protocols, but that a thorough investigation should be used to determine that, not stringing together a series of events that make it easy for any passive reader to discredit the organisation. tl, dr: we shouldn't pass judgement based on this article.