Link :Nissan Fired Its Le Mans Team Over E-Mail
When I first saw the specs on this car I wondered how it would compare to the more conventional designs... I guess we know now.
Link :Nissan Fired Its Le Mans Team Over E-Mail
When I first saw the specs on this car I wondered how it would compare to the more conventional designs... I guess we know now.
Nitpick: They were not fired over e-mail. They were fired VIA e-mail, or notified that their jobs were terminated via e-mail.
"fired over e-mail" sounds like they were terminated due to something they wrote.
Knurled wrote: Nitpick: They were not fired over e-mail. They were fired VIA e-mail, or notified that their jobs were terminated via e-mail. "fired over e-mail" sounds like they were terminated due to something they wrote.
+1. I read it expecting to read they were fired over and email listing all the ways the cars sucked and how useless the management team were back in Japan.
Adrian_Thompson wrote:Knurled wrote: Nitpick: They were not fired over e-mail. They were fired VIA e-mail, or notified that their jobs were terminated via e-mail. "fired over e-mail" sounds like they were terminated due to something they wrote.+1. I read it expecting to read they were fired over and email listing all the ways the cars sucked and how useless the management team were back in Japan.
+2. I was confused.
While "via" would definitely be the best way to go, "over" is not wrong per se, just more ambiguous. Methinks "over" is just a holdover from the olden days of saying something like "Nissan Fired Its Le Mans Team Over The Phone", though we strangely referred to all phones as "the phone," whereas with email, we only use the definite article "the" to refer to a specific email.
Knurled wrote: "fired over e-mail" sounds like they were terminated due to something they wrote.
I expected Nissan exec tentacle porn pics were involved.
Trackmouse wrote: I know this sounds like "Hank Hill", but: "can't they just do something normal?"
I'd be happy if they just made a leaner, crisper version of the Z.
That said, I love to see them trying. It's just a shame that their creative designs haven't bore success. Every time something innovative flops, a few more project managers go "note to self: creativity is dangerous. Boring sells."
markwemple wrote: From the same brain that gave them the delta wing. Wonder why it didn't do well. LOL.
I thought Gurney had more influence on the DeltaWing than Nissan anyways.....
One of my favorite sayings: "Different for the sake of better is good. Different for the sake of different usually isn't good."
The sucky part is that, just like the Deltawing, we won't ever know how it would have performed. The people bashing those concepts have obviously never done any product developement. To say that it's a failure after only a half-season of half-hearted efforts is just idiotic. Especially when you go after cars that have a half-century of development behind them. I do think that they took too many new approches at the same time to have any chance of success. At least, if they would have started with a proven drivetrain and ERS, they would have had a better idea of it's potential.
fanfoy wrote: The sucky part is that, just like the Deltawing, we won't ever know how it would have performed. The people bashing those concepts have obviously never done any product developement. To say that it's a failure after only a half-season of half-hearted efforts is just idiotic. Especially when you go after cars that have a half-century of development behind them. I do think that they took too many new approches at the same time to have any chance of success. At least, if they would have started with a proven drivetrain and ERS, they would have had a better idea of it's potential.
Yep. While I honestly HATE the phrase thinking outside the box, I appreciate the people in racing who do it. That's where the innovation comes, especially in the last couple decades, where it's getting harder to find that loop-hole in the rules to try something different.
""
You'll need to log in to post.