Verizon vs. the Needham Fire Department

netbuzz writes "At issue is whether — or not — there was a minor fire in a house on Pine Grove Street in Needham, Mass., caused by a Verizon employee drilling through an electrical main. Everyone agrees that whatever happened — or didn't happen — was indeed the fault of the Verizon employee; it's "fire or no fire" that is at issue. Verizon says no fire, not even smoke. The Needham Fire Department begs to differ. New eye-witness reports are emerging ... and it's not looking good for Verizon."

Comments

Headline?

[MyLongNickName]

Is this even worth being on Slashdot? Employee screws up, causes problems. International news?

Crap, several of our T1 lines were cut last week by a government employee who "forgot" to get a map of buried cables before digging. It cost us a heck of a lot more than a house (OT and moving of computer equipment from one location to another)... and that is just our business. I am not even sure it got local coverage.

What? Why is this on the front page?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

I thought this would not even merit a place in the Firehose. Come on guys, if you keep posting such rubbish, I have to log out and do some work.

Let me be the 15th to say..

[tgd]

"Who cares?"

I mean seriously, this didn't even make the local news.

Anyone want to post a front-page story about the plastic Dasani water bottle I found in my front lawn this morning? I feel it was tossed there from a passing car. My girlfriend thinks it was blown there from across the street. I told her people litter all the time on the street in front of our house, so they probably just tossed it on the front lawn.

FWIW, there was no fire in my house when Verizon installed my ONT. Me, Verizon and the town all agree on that.

Re:Blogspam

[triplecoil]

What's your point? Story submissions have to come from somewhere. He thought the Slashdot crowd would be interested in his take on it, and so did CmdrTaco, apparently. The source of the submission, regardless of what you think of the story in and of itself, should have no impact on whether or not readers should deem it valid.

Re:I'm Sorry

[ePhil_One]

Keep in mind words aren't as precise as we'd like them to be, over the years they take on multiple meanings. Witness the following permutayions on a classic Military phrase, which you think would be very well defined:

One reason the Armed Services have trouble operating jointly is that they have very different meanings for the same terms.

The Joint Chiefs once told the Navy to "secure a building," to which they responded by turning off the lights and locking the doors.

The Joint Chiefs then instructed Army personnel to "secure the building," and they occupied the building so no one could enter.

Upon receiving the exact same order, the Marines assaulted the building, captured it, and set up defenses with suppressive fire & amphibious assault vehicles, established reconnaissance and communications channels, and prepared for close hand-to-hand combat if the situation arose.

But the Air Force, on the other hand, acted most swiftly on the command, and took out a three-year lease with an option to buy.

So its quite possible that both sides are telling the truth, there was no fire & there was a fire. If I asked you if there had ever been a fire in your house, you might truthfully tell me no, even though you had a gas stove, lit matches and candles, and maybe even flambe's some meals. Would that make you a liar?