JohnSnowNW
Active Member
So, if people don't have a problem with what Keef has been doing, what happens when that same line of reasoning is used toward individual actions. If everyone is going to speculate based on the limited information here, lets just look at every possibility...no matter how remote.
Here's one:
The abnormal wear of the suspension was known, as was the fact that the vehicle was out of warranty. Rather than have the vehicle taken to the SC, and pay for the repairs out of pocket, a cunning plan was devised. A Ranger was requested to perform an alignment, knowing that the Ranger would be unlikely to notice the suspension issue, because the method used at Sears would not have the wheels suspended. An alignment was chanced, as opposed to an entirely unrelated issue, so the case would be stronger if the ranger performed work associated with the suspension, and could then call them out for not noticing the damage at the time. The vehicle was then driven for three weeks down poorly maintained dirt roads, with the vehicle's suspension on max, in an effort induce a suspension failure. When Tesla didn't offer to cover the cost of the repairs, social media was used in an attempt to force Tesla's hand using all of the carefully crafted evidence available.
Now that's quite the conspiracy theory, I must say. And highlights the issue at hand, which is a lack of transparency and honesty with regard to this entire issue, and highlights the absurdity of trying to draw conclusions in this situation. The above situation while plausible, is completely baseless. Yet, apparently, it could be run in major new outlets.
It should be noted that I'm not making any accusations here...this is purely a thought experiment, to be used strictly as an example of why transparency is important.
Here's one:
The abnormal wear of the suspension was known, as was the fact that the vehicle was out of warranty. Rather than have the vehicle taken to the SC, and pay for the repairs out of pocket, a cunning plan was devised. A Ranger was requested to perform an alignment, knowing that the Ranger would be unlikely to notice the suspension issue, because the method used at Sears would not have the wheels suspended. An alignment was chanced, as opposed to an entirely unrelated issue, so the case would be stronger if the ranger performed work associated with the suspension, and could then call them out for not noticing the damage at the time. The vehicle was then driven for three weeks down poorly maintained dirt roads, with the vehicle's suspension on max, in an effort induce a suspension failure. When Tesla didn't offer to cover the cost of the repairs, social media was used in an attempt to force Tesla's hand using all of the carefully crafted evidence available.
Now that's quite the conspiracy theory, I must say. And highlights the issue at hand, which is a lack of transparency and honesty with regard to this entire issue, and highlights the absurdity of trying to draw conclusions in this situation. The above situation while plausible, is completely baseless. Yet, apparently, it could be run in major new outlets.
It should be noted that I'm not making any accusations here...this is purely a thought experiment, to be used strictly as an example of why transparency is important.
