[DemocracyFTW2]

> All because the city made the hotel turn down the heat.

That's a little bit early to start aiming at the city, isn't it? The call to reduce energy consumption is, if anything, coming on as a case of too little, too late if anything given the ongoing crisis over here; it is altogether a reasonable thing to do. As is always the case in Germany with such things, there will be maddening array of if/then/otherwise escape hatches that is part of those rules, and, frankly, if the management of the hotel and the people responsible for the aquarium had been in the know that keeping a constant temperature in the lobby was essential to the structural integrity of the aquarium and they still lowered it, they're mad. If they weren't told they can't be held responsible. If the manufacturer did know or should have known, they'll be in (sorry) hot water.

All of this is conjecture at his point so phrases like "all because the city told them to turn down the heat" have to be understood in the conjunctive or, better, be explicitly written in that voice.

[plastiquebeech]

Whenever I hear people describe a complex chain of events only to conclude that there was a single root cause, I'm reminded of the old proverb:

>For want of a nail the shoe was lost.

>For want of a shoe the horse was lost.

>For want of a horse the rider was lost.

>For want of a rider the message was lost.

>For want of a message the battle was lost.

>For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.

>And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

The moral of the proverb is: it is important to ensure that critical systems have redundancy built in.