It is irrelevant. However, the next guy can walk in and do the opposite and the victims will have no recourse.

I’m pretty sure he has already violated it after the verdict was read. How funny would it be that he gets jail time for contempt at his sentencing hearing?

Tell that to the CDC and who when giving COVID guidance during the pandemic. 😡

When they do something wrong, there is a perceived reward for that action. So the goal of discipline is to have a net outcome that negates that reward. But also please keep in mind that you can’t just focus on correcting wrong behavior - you must also reward good behavior!

What discipline looks like will change dramatically throughout your child’s life.

When they are little you are looking more at modeling good and reinforcing/rewarding good behavior than punishing bad behavior. If there is an object responsible for their negative behavior, remove it (that includes putting your cell phone/device away). If your childs behavior is negatively affecting other children/people around them, put them in timeout. You’ll spend a lot of time saying phrases like “hands are not for hitting”.

As they get older discipline will need to be more taylored to the individual and what motivates them. My daughter is highly motivated by praise and melts into tears at any hint that she did something wrong. My son on the other hand is more motivated by self reward and he will continue to act out if the “consequence” is worth paying to him.

With my daughter we focus more on setting “long term” goals and rewards, and very delicately give verbal corrections for behavior. I expect things will get a lot harder with her as she enters puberty.

With my son, we establish smaller rewards for good behavior (or whatever it is we are working on) and award them often. If we “catch him being good” we will give him a reward on the spot. For little things there we try to have natural consequences. When bigger issues happen there is a “larger consequence”; this is usually variable and based on severity of the issue, but also must “sting” enough that he doesn’t judge that to be a price he is willing to pay. We try to tie it to whatever action he took, but barring that the default is usually a loss of screen time (which is what he wants to do 24/7). The consequence is usually tempered if he is honest with us (because he will lie to try to get out of it, which is hilarious at this age but will be a real problem if it continues when he gets older), and is substantially negated if he comes to us and tells us before we discover it. We usually try to sit down with him and talk through what happened so he understands why it was wrong. If it involved another person, we try to get him to engage his empathy and look at it from the other person’s perspective and how that person must have felt (which sometimes results in tears, but that tells us it clicked at some level). Depending on what he did we will also try to help him understand how those actions can affect his relationship with that person beyond just that moment.

You can probably guess which child receives more discipline. But hopefully you will also see that the approach we take is taylored to what works for each individual.

Supposedly the current generation of LG fridges are good. The appliance repair folks have said repair rates on those are very low. Remains to be seen if that holds long term.

I rolled the dice. Between the lawsuits they lost over the previous generation and warranty substantially longer than others on the market, along with nabbing one on sale for stupid cheap, I figured it was worth the shot.

So far so good anyway.

Same experience with Samsung here. We also had a fridge, which had a few problems under warranty but once those were fixed it made it 14 years before some plastic piece cracked and started leaking in the interior. That seems to be more the exception than the rule for them though.

My lg washer dryer perform well but had problems after 6 years. But we go through a fuckton of laundry (probably 60 loads/month).

Dryer drum cracked and it also needed new rollers. Washer needed new shocks and suspension, springs needed lubrication.

Wasn’t too hard to diy repair; even though it wasn’t difficult I had to almost completely disassemble the dryer, so be warned. If you ever replace the washer shocks make sure you cover the access panel with a towel and/or wear protective gloves (my hand slipped and I sliced it bad enough to need 3 stitches).

All you have to do is lie about producing toxic chemicals for as long as possible. Checkmate epa!

It did for me the first time I saw it (ages ago).

I think if Russel had more experience with Alonso’s shenanigans he wouldn’t have crashed. But I don’t think Russell is the only driver in the field that would have reacted poorly there, so I have trouble blaming him for the outcome.

I say this as someone who doesn’t particularly like or dislike him (medium talent + medium personality).

It absolutely is, can and has been penalized, and is consistent with my point… So what are you trying to say?

Russell would have not made it back to the pits and would still be DNF.

I know all of the Alonso fans are in a tizzy over this, but it was an appropriate penalty.

Everyone upset seems to be buying the line that he was taking the corner slower to get a better exit. That would be late apexing. When you do that, you brake LATER and turn into the corner LATER (at a sharper angle), then apply throttle EARLIER. Alonso’s actions are inconsistent with an intent to get a better exit.

He broke earlier. Then he sped up. He entered the corner on the usual line with extra traction available. Then he jabbed the brakes mid corner. If he had taken the corner at normal speeds, that would have absolutely upset the car, so this was PLANNED. Immediately after jabbing the brakes he is back on throttle and accelerating out of the corner.

I believe his intention was to force Russel to react to his behavior, then accelerate away while Russell reacts to him braking, to build an extra bit of gap to neutralize the drs advantage.

This was absolutely a brake check. Alonso has done this many times before, and he usually gets away with it because it is on the line or he has a plausible excuse for his actions. This time he screwed up and took it over the line.

You know his intentions here because he was immediately on the radio making up an excuse for his actions. Except that excused didn’t jive with the telemetry so he had to give the stewards a DIFFERENT excuse which still isn’t plausible (see late apex above).

This penalty isn’t punishing him for driving defensively. It won’t result in drivers getting penalties for parking their car on the apex. This penalty was about erratic driving that compromises the safety of other cars and drivers on the track. The outcome here is direct evidence of the safety concern.

As much as you may not like Russel or question his skills, ask yourself what would have happened to other drivers in this situation? I would argue 2/3 of the other drivers would have bottled it the same way he did.

Lookup how vsc works again. No passing allowed. No racing allowed. Cars must reduce speed and prepare to stop. Cars must maintain deltas.

Once the vsc came out the race results were frozen.

Getting back on full throttle then hitting the brakes a second time mid corner is what got him in trouble. The early braking denotes the erratic behavior was intentional instead of accidental.

The penalty wasn’t about being slow, it was about being erratic. This was effectively the same as weaving, except it was with the brake and throttle instead of the steering wheel.

The cars still all have to travel back to the pit lane for a red flag; they don’t just stop where they are in the track. It was the last lap, the only difference between vsc and a red flag is the trip down pit lane.

Your order(s) don’t necessarily ship all of the items from the same warehouse.

I’m convinced those statements are wrong in some way. Either not comparing houses of similar size or unoccupied units are skewing the numbers. Or they just tell everyone they’re doing horrible to try and sell energy efficiency stuff.

When I compare using figures from my thermostat via beestat.io my house is in the top 40% (uses less energy than 60% of similar homes in my area).

RTFA, it is right there ffs

Nobody is arguing that valve shouldn’t be compensated for the value they provide. Many of us do, however, argue they are taking too much. Their revenue per employee being so much higher than anyone else in the market supports that argument.