Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

"Mammoth Snow Storm" Underwhelms

Posted by timothy on from the blame-uber dept.

mi (197448) writes You heard the scare-mongering, you heard the governors and mayors closing public transit and declaring driving on public roads a crime. But it turned out to have been a mistake. Boston may have been hit somewhat, but further South — NYC and Philadelphia — the snowfall was rather underwhelming. Promised "2-3 feet" of snow, NYC got only a few inches. Is this an example of "better safe than sorry," or is government's overreach justified by questionable weather models exceeding the threshold of an honest mistake?

11 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. jessh by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...except there IS a mammoth snowstorm in other parts of New England.

    The 21st Century: the Century of Whiners.

    1. Re:jessh by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yeah, this was absolutely the right call. There were four possible scenarios here:
      • -There is no snowstorm and the officials shut the city down. At worst, people lose a day's worth of work, some businesses are affected. Whiners abound.
      • -There is no snowstorm and the officials leave the city running. Nothing happens, nobody notices.
      • -There is a snowstorm and the officials shut the city down. Everyone congratulates them for their foresight.
      • -There is a snowstorm and the officials leave the city running. Possible severe damage to infrastructure, possible death toll, cleanup is significantly more complicated and takes far longer. Officials are berated for their carelessness.

      The best course of action by far is to shut the city down. The downside of doing so when there is no snowstorm is far lesser than the opposite. Those who complain have no idea what the fuck they're talking about (and who really expects a cabaret singer to have any knowledge of risk assessment and weather prediction?).

    2. Re:jessh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to your logic, officials should shut the city down if there is even a tiny chance of a snowstorm.

    3. Re:jessh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The collateral damage from scenario #1 in your list is that people are additionally desensitized to future warnings.

      It happens so frequently that I ignore storm warnings entirely until I actually see some snow.

  2. Boston Representing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Boston may have been hit somewhat"

    I think that's completely unrepresentative. It doesn't take much searching through instagram or any other photo sharing site to see that Boston not only has a lot of snow this morning, but that the storm is still raging and blowing pretty hard (and will throughout the day).

    Just because NYC was underwhelmed does not mean that the actions for safety are unwarranted.

    Nothing like having a headline for the sake of having a headline. Media can never be happy.

    1. Re:Boston Representing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      +1 for you if i could login and had mod points.

      No matter what was done some group would be very vocal about how it was not the right thing to do.

      Call a state disaster and close the roads but the storm is less then expected - Complain
      Dont call a disisaster and lave the roads open and the storm is really bad - Complain.

      Oddly enough, those same group of people dont take their vast meteorological knowledge to places like the national weather service where it could be put to better use.

  3. Weather is unpredictable by PvtVoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It just isn't possible to predict this stuff precisely. But you can't put a travel ban in place once the storm has actually started -- it would be too late. You have to do it pre-emptively for it to be effective.

    1. Re:Weather is unpredictable by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's also the brain dead employers that are just sure their dollar store will be swamped with customers because they have a sale of pool floaties scheduled and so all employees are to report on time or be fired. Naturally, they don't report themselves, they plan to phone it in.

      A ban protects all of those people from artificially adverse consequences of behaving reasonably.

  4. Someone will always be butthurt by Scutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter what the mayor's office does to prepare for an emergency, there will always be someone there to say they were wrong to do it.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  5. Quality Journalimism by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "You heard the scare-mongering"

    "Promised "2-3 feet" snow"

    "government's overreach"

    Congratulations, Timothy. Today's the day I take Slashdot up on its longstanding offer to disable advertising, and it's all because of you!

    Because honestly, y'all don't deserve money for this level of pabulum.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:Quality Journalimism by Layzej · · Score: 5, Insightful
      My favourite part of the post is "exceeding the threshold of honest mistake" - implying that there was some dishonest conspiracy between the various weather agencies to over-predict. For what nefarious reason, we can only speculate... and who is the mastermind behind this? Maybe George Soros is trying to drive down the price of auto dealerships so that he can get them at a steal, but we can't know for sure. Al we know for sure is:
      1. 1) Rig all weather forecasts so that cities shut down the roads.
      1. 2) ???
      1. 3) Profit!