Dear STV
Most of my entries to the message board have been to answer questions raised in entries made by ?“anonymous?” individuals like you. You do not have the courage to put your name on your entry. I do not mind having my dues reduced by $7.50 -- and even more because this ?“cost of eating a meal out (and at a place fancier than McDonald?’s)?” has been used by the board to justify other expenditures. Just how many meals do I have to pay for that I don?’t eat?
According to you, it is okay to waste money because according to you, it is not much money. You do not think ?“principle?” is involved at all.
If you could very easily reduce your own personal annual expenses by 2.5% (by not purchasing something you don?’t need and want), would you do it? Do you grossly overwater your yard and wastefully use electricity in your home for the heck of it? Maybe you do. If you do, then I think you are irresponsible. If you don?’t, then why is it okay for the board to do this? I cannot follow your logic.
And as far as determining if our lawn service is overwatering, how else would you do this unless you began using a rain detector again and/or compared a homeowners watering to the lawn service watering? When I was monitoring watering for RPHA there was no rain detector, so I used this comparison. Maybe you don?’t know anyone that makes such a comparison. So what? That does not mean the comparison is a bad approach. I believe the comparison is a very good way to check on the lawn service.
As I pointed out before, I made the board aware of this approach and the overwatering I discovered through it. The board agreed with this approach and assessment. So, I guess you disagree with the board.
This comparison is extremely easy to do and takes only a few minutes. Since you complain about my comparison, how would you monitor the watering? Oh, I forgot, you and the board do not care what the level of watering is and are proponents of no monitoring at all.