Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
SEVERE ALERT!
Comments
-
The only logic I'm applying is that I'm not going to block such alerts because I don't think it's sensible to.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
2 -
I do agree this one was a little close to the line in terms of justification. When it first came through I thought it was notifying me of a local wildfire and was expecting it to tell me to close windows and stay inside.
I do get the logic that with so much of the country in drought, water supplies dwindling and fire services stretched this is a national emergency.
Let's wait and see how they are used in future before any kind of overreaction.3 -
Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.How dare they send unnecessary alarms to my phone!The alert system is designed to inform the relevant population of imminent threats to life. The whole country is currently a tinder box and the severe threat of wildfires exists everywhere, hence a nationwide alert asking people to be extra careful. Common sense is, unfortunately, not that common.Since the system was introduced there has only ever been ONE nationwide alert - and that was the test. Hardly flooding your phone with unnecessary alarms. All other alerts using the system have been localised and relating to Red weather warnings - primarily wind and floods.A reasonable question to ask is not why it was sent but whether or not it should have been sent earlier.
8 -
An emergency alert warning for a severe wildfire risk, when our firefighters and other emergency services are stretched to the limit, isn’t a misuse of the system or governmental overstep. It's exactly what it was designed for, given most of the population don't watch the evening news or take notice of more traditional public health/safety messaging.
Unless you have a narrative to push of course...10 -
If the next one is Rodwell telling us about the merits of our latest signing we might need to be concerned. 😉😀1
-
My only annoyance with it is the fact that (as per my earlier comment when putting my son to bed) it screams at you even if your phone is on silent (not sure if it still comes through if your phone is set to do not disturb).
I completely understand that people need to be alerted, hence why it is sent to all phones, and therefore it screams at you to make sure you're aware. But with the way people check their phones now, everyone will see it even if their phone is on silent, surely?
But then when you do need someone to act quickly because of an imminent threat you need the sound. So I'm torn...
0 -
Maybe the answer should be this:Ross said:My only annoyance with it is the fact that (as per my earlier comment when putting my son to bed) it screams at you even if your phone is on silent (not sure if it still comes through if your phone is set to do not disturb).
I completely understand that people need to be alerted, hence why it is sent to all phones, and therefore it screams at you to make sure you're aware. But with the way people check their phones now, everyone will see it even if their phone is on silent, surely?
But then when you do need someone to act quickly because of an imminent threat you need the sound. So I'm torn...
If it's an alert which is an ongoing or imminent threat to you nationally or locally etc, you get the severe alert with all the sirens etc.
If it's something like this (which I agree is important) it should come through but as a standard notification, not with the siren etc
That makes perfect sense to me and would be a good use of the system.
3 -
Wasn’t good when you iPhone is connected to your hearing aid, mind you won’t need to clean my ear holes for a while now😀3
-
The missus thought I was doing ‘find my phone’ from Apple Watch. She took no notice of it1
-
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
1 -
Sponsored links:
-
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already6 -
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already3 -
It amazes me that some don't have anything better to do than comment about the choice of others to post.O-Randy-Hunt said:
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already
It also amazes me that when our emergency services are stretched to their limit, some still think that advice that may help to reduce their workload, is something to be criticised.6 -
School playground bully behaviour by a couple of posters on here.9
-
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”1 -
He says whilst posting in the same threadO-Randy-Hunt said:
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already4 -
Maybe there could be a way to send out a text message instead when the alerts are not an urgent emergency such as this one.The emergency alert in my view should only be used for imminent life-threatening risk in your immediate area. Such as perhaps everyone within a certain radius of a wildfire/terrorist attack/other incident being told to stay indoors until further notice.The risk you now have is that some of the public are turning off the alerts or now going to ignore them, because they don't think they are only sent when absolutely necessary.4
-
Perhaps an alert might just make those who don't care or that it won't happen to me, think just that little bit more about their actions.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”
I think there are more who don't understand how fire starts and spreads than you think. I had a discussion with a woman who was adamant that glass carelessly discarded couldn't start a fire.0 -
If we discover that people are dying of prostate cancer because other people aren't having prostate exams; or that people are being killed because other people aren't doing regular exercise, then there might be a case for a population-wide alert.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
But, where you suggest there should be a line drawn somewhere, it should probably be between the alerts that protect YOU and the alerts that protect OTHERS.
The alert sent this week was aimed at residents, landowners and visitors and was specifically targeted at reducing the risk of wild fires putting lives, homes, businesses and responders at risk.
I think that's perfectly well targeted and absolutely proportionate to the risks involved.
If some people avoid death, if some people don't lose their homes or businesses and if some firefighters aren't placed at mortal risk, then one alert sent early on a hot Friday evening would have been well worth it.
Finally, wildfires are one of only three things that these alerts are set up for, the others being severe flooding and extreme storms. They've only been used once before anywhere in the country, that being in January this year in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, warning of high winds.
This week's alert - and the potential reduction in the number and severity of wildfires - is precisely why the alerts were set up.6 -
I think it’s far more likely it just makes people turn their alerts off entirely, which could be very dangerous if there is ever a real imminent threat where they are.ME14addick said:
Perhaps an alert might just make those who don't care or that it won't happen to me, think just that little bit more about their actions.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”Something that entirely overrides the settings of your phone seems somewhat OTT for a non- imminent threat. As others have said, in this instance, an SMS would seem far more appropriate.4 -
Sponsored links:
-
Goodness knows what kind of major crime ME14 is supposed to have committed by posting on here about a current event.4
-
Did you just assume my gender. Anyway I won't be on here posting away until midnight. Got better things to be doing 👋Kindoncasella said:
He says whilst posting in the same threadO-Randy-Hunt said:
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already0 -
Well it's got us talking about wildfires and how only someone much more stupid than us would be using a disposable barbecue out in the countryside, which reinforces the message to those who hadn't grasped that point. Seems quite successful to me. My social media is full of people telling stories about stupid places they've seen people using disposable barbeques or other activities that might start a fire. It all helps.
Obviously they do have to be careful not to use this system too often or it will lose its impact.
Given that a lot of Charlton fans live in the flood zone of the Thames and even more would if the Thames Barrier were to break down (which hasn't ever happened, but it's getting quite old now), we probably have more need than most to have these alerts available.3 -
Appropriate? Maybe.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I think it’s far more likely it just makes people turn their alerts off entirely, which could be very dangerous if there is ever a real imminent threat where they are.ME14addick said:
Perhaps an alert might just make those who don't care or that it won't happen to me, think just that little bit more about their actions.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”Something that entirely overrides the settings of your phone seems somewhat OTT for a non- imminent threat. As others have said, in this instance, an SMS would seem far more appropriate.
Significantly more expensive? Almost certainly.
Easier to ignore? Yes.
More attention grabbing? No.
A nationwide SMS system would require the Government to obtain, maintain and process an enormous database of people's mobile numbers (and we can guess what the public opinion of that would be), creating substantial data-protection, security and data-sharing obligations.
Emergency Alerts achieves the same basic objective without the Government needing to possess that database at all.2 -
A fair point I hadn’t considered, an alert without the sound override then.Chizz said:
Appropriate? Maybe.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I think it’s far more likely it just makes people turn their alerts off entirely, which could be very dangerous if there is ever a real imminent threat where they are.ME14addick said:
Perhaps an alert might just make those who don't care or that it won't happen to me, think just that little bit more about their actions.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”Something that entirely overrides the settings of your phone seems somewhat OTT for a non- imminent threat. As others have said, in this instance, an SMS would seem far more appropriate.
Significantly more expensive? Almost certainly.
Easier to ignore? Yes.
More attention grabbing? No.
A nationwide SMS system would require the Government to obtain, maintain and process an enormous database of people's mobile numbers (and we can guess what the public opinion of that would be), creating substantial data-protection, security and data-sharing obligations.
Emergency Alerts achieves the same basic objective without the Government needing to possess that database at all.1 -
Yeah. Don't understand why if people don't want to read a discussion about emergency alerts about wildfires they choose to open the thread on the topic on a discussion forum. Just move past. Or if you don't like a posters posting style move past their posts its not thay hard most of us do it.FishCostaFortune said:School playground bully behaviour by a couple of posters on here.
Instead they go for Emmy everytime, who is actually one of the kindest most patient posters on here.
Proper playground bully behaviour as you say8 -
An alert without the settings override on is definitely the answer.Stu_of_Kunming said:
A fair point I hadn’t considered, an alert without the sound override then.Chizz said:
Appropriate? Maybe.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I think it’s far more likely it just makes people turn their alerts off entirely, which could be very dangerous if there is ever a real imminent threat where they are.ME14addick said:
Perhaps an alert might just make those who don't care or that it won't happen to me, think just that little bit more about their actions.Stu_of_Kunming said:
I find it hard to believe there’s an adult in the country that doesn’t understand how fires are started.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.It’s far more likely they simply don’t care, or, more likely, think “it won’t happen to me/us”Something that entirely overrides the settings of your phone seems somewhat OTT for a non- imminent threat. As others have said, in this instance, an SMS would seem far more appropriate.
Significantly more expensive? Almost certainly.
Easier to ignore? Yes.
More attention grabbing? No.
A nationwide SMS system would require the Government to obtain, maintain and process an enormous database of people's mobile numbers (and we can guess what the public opinion of that would be), creating substantial data-protection, security and data-sharing obligations.
Emergency Alerts achieves the same basic objective without the Government needing to possess that database at all.
Proportionate and doesn't undermine the severe alert system.
I don't see how anyone could disagree with that.5 -
But don't post on football related matters on a football forum 🤔O-Randy-Hunt said:
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already2 -
I can imagine the outcry I would get if I were to post on more threads. I post if I feel I have something useful to say. I didn't realise that it is mandatory to post on other threads.LargeAddick said:
But don't post on football related matters on a football forum 🤔O-Randy-Hunt said:
It's a Saturday (not that it matters) and the same people will be posting essays and preaching for the rest of the day. It amazes me how they don't have anything better to do.blackpool72 said:
This thread was made for you.ME14addick said:
It's a national emergency right now and it's clear many don't understand that just one spark can start a devastating fire, so it's fully justified.Huskaris said:
Ok then by that rationale, let's send out an alert to everyone saying they should get their prostate examination. If it saves one life, it's worth it right?swordfish said:
Oh the irony. The people choosing to block such alerts, and there's only been one so far, are acting irresponsibly.ME14addick said:I really don't understand the outcry from some about the alert. It's not as if they happen frequently. It's the first time it's been used nationally since the test.
People all over social media saying they have turned off alerts. Why would you do that when an alert could save your life.
If that one prevents the outbreak of one wildfire, then it was worth it.
Why not send one out saying that you should do regular exercise? It shows that it will extend your quality of life, and has serious co-morbidity issues. People are often too stupid to realise this too, it would save lives.
The line should be drawn somewhere, I don't particularly care about this, but I would expect the alerts to be something I imminently need to know, that's all, and I really support that system to be clear!
Just because a message is important, does not mean it should be using the severe alert mechanism which to my mind was not set up for this purpose.
The Fire & Rescue Services have been calling for this and they bear the biggest burden in fighting these fires, so we should take their advice. I'm listening to one Fire Chief on the tv right now, calling for the public to follow the advice.
Did you see the live tv pictures from Stourbridge on Thursday? The aerial shots showed individual houses completely alight, whilst others near them were untouched. It shows just how a whole community can be affected in a few minutes. It could happen to any one of us through the stupidity of a few ignorant individuals. At least the alerts have brought the problem to everyone's attention, except those stupid enough to turn off alerts,
About 10 posts already2 -
Ooooh, someone’s just received a wet willyFishCostaFortune said:School playground bully behaviour by a couple of posters on here.0
