• thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    you know, i bet it’s literally missing its primary control surface. like a tractor with the entire cab missing and some higher up was concerned someone would try to use it and hurt themselves.

    • Bertuccio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Genuinely wouldn’t be surprised if someone did try to use it, but also don’t see why anyone would think a little red tag would prevent such a person from trying anyway.

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The red tag isn’t to stop it, it’s to document the stupidity. Now when it goes to court/WCB, there’s documented proof that they tried to ensure even a moron would understand it’s not safe to use

        • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          yeah, it’s likely for insurance or regulatory reasons.

          insurance will find any reason possible to deny your claim. even if that is a failure to remove the keys from the ignition after the car burst into flames.

          regulators shouldn’t allow slack. with any company in a regulatory situation they will to exactly as much as they’re allowed to get away with. give them an inch, they take a Mile. letting hazard tags slide based on judgement creates space for corruption and abuse. following procedures to the letter with strict documentation can help curtail that.