X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00800000 X-Mozilla-Keys: Message-ID: <54D8E3E6.6040805@sbcglobal.net> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 08:44:22 -0800 From: Richard Childers User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:10.0.3) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/10.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jessica Hatmaker , Dan Janney CC: Gary Goade Subject: Why PPM Would WANT Tenants To Use Clothes Washers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jessica, Dan, I want to point out that the alternative to using a machine to wash ones' laundry in extremely hot water, would be to wash one's clothing, by hand. Surely washing clothes by hand would generate more humidity than washing clothes by machine? Also, PPM has not identified an alternate strategy for washing clothes in extremely hot water. In closing, I need to point out that it is absurd to suggest that these apartments were not designed for washing clothes by hand, since, when these apartments were built - post World War II - hand washing was still predominant, machine washers were still a luxury ... and dryers were unknown. And so: IF it is a true statement: "the apartments were designed with hand-washing in mind", AND IF it is a true statement: "washing clothes by hand generates more humidity than washing clothes by machine", THEN It is also a true statement: "the apartments were designed to handle the amount of humidity generated by machine washing, because it is less than the amount of humidity generated by hand washing". I understand that PPM wishes to build a case for blaming the infestation of mold on the washing machines inside apartments, but if this were true, then every apartment that Richard Henson lived in, would have mold - because I got the washing machine from Richard Henson, and it was well used. Also, Karen Wilson never had a washing machine in her apartment, 5B - nor did the residents of 5A - because such machines were not available five years ago. Regards, ~richard