Elektrine lite

← Feed

@majick@mefi.social

2026-02-12 17:05 UTC

@tagir_valeev More galling still, a scheduled test of a fire alarm system typically *still includes evacuation.* Leaving the building *is* the drill. I have never worked in an office where there was any condition under which occupants are told to ignore the alarm. Ignoring alarms leads to alarm fatigue which then leads to failure. Alarms either exist for a reason or they don't. A device that says otherwise is a broken device. You're right, devices like that will kill.

Replies (3)

  • @tagir_valeev@mastodon.online 2026-02-12 17:10

    @majick well, in our case there were definitely cases of 'scheduled alarm maintenance'. In that time, random alarms occurred many times during two or three hours. Evacuating after every single of them would mean nobody is doing the actual work during the good part of the day.

    Open ##1205409

  • @richlv@mastodon.social 2026-02-12 17:58

    @majick @tagir_valeev There could be some cases where the test checks sound etc, where evacuation is not the drill, but those indeed would be exceptions. In Latvia, in 2013 fire alarms were repeatedly set off in a supermarket. Security just reset them, and employees & shoppers returned, then ignored the alarms. The building collapsed and 54 people died. Whenever I hear a fire alarm, I first get the fuck out, then I figure out what's happening. https://lv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lielveikala_%22Maxima%22_sagr%C5%AB%C5%A1ana_R%C4%ABg%C4%81

    Open ##1205414

  • @gothytim@tech.lgbt 2026-02-20 12:08

    @majick @tagir_valeev Fwiw I’ve worked in buildings with a regularly-scheduled alarm test (same time and day every week) which you were expected to ignore, reporting if there was a fault. It was preceded by a recorded announcement saying it was a rest, and followed by one saying the test was over and any further alarms should be responded to normally by evacuating. (The drills where you do leave are more common, of course.)

    Open ##1205420