4 ms·

Interesting writeup, but the Ghost Ship is an extreme example of what goes wrong - you couldn't make a place more of a fire hazard if you tried.

rwmj 8y ago
The Wikipedia page is informative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire As you say you could hardly make a more hazardous environment if you tried. Wooden pallets for stairs?!
- kakarot 8y ago
  That place was a matchbox waiting to get struck. And the electrical situation was a total mess... I mean that's why it burned down. How shitty of a landlord can you be that you wouldn't prioritize people's safety.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    Probably not shitty, just oblivious. A Hackerspace in Germany was proud of its smartphone-activated door lock. I was less impressed on their open house event when I saw firsthand how they struggled to open it for several minutes (with no mechanical override on the inside!), while dozens of guests were there. When I voiced my safety concerns they simply didn't seem to understand. I mean it's just a fun hack, right?
    - kakarot 8y ago
      No, actually just shitty. There were criminal charges. The two people mainly responsible got prison time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire#Criminal_investigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire#Cr... Also that's crazy about that smart door... Pretty sure that's against fire code if it's one of the only exits. Ignorance isn't an excuse when other people's lives are concerned, either.
      - chippy 8y ago
        But the landlord didn't get charged, the people who leased the building from him did.
        kakarot 8y ago
        If someone leases a building to me, and I turn around and let you live there under certain conditions, who is your landlord-- my landlord, or me?
        newnewpdro 8y ago
        Landlord generally implies (owner && lessor), not just lessor, AFAIK. I think you guys are just talking past eachother due to a disparity of definitions, and otherwise are actually in agreement.
        kakarot 8y ago
        I phrased my comment as a question because I was interested in OP's response. I'm not totally sure on the nomenclature here myself.
    - beerbajay 8y ago
      Landlords of such spaces are not oblivious; they want all the money for the rent and none of the responsibility of being a real landlord. This is often what artists themselves are looking for since they are under capitalized and want to do questionably legal build outs and events and are willing to take on extra responsibility to be able to so (e.g. fixing pipes, patching holes, doing pest control). But that doesn't absolve the landlord.
    - Symbiote 8y ago
      It looks like a common setup [1], and of the ones with pictures several don't have a manual override. [1] https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Doorlock https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Doorlock
      - mcguire 8y ago
        A door without a crash bar in a public space?
        Symbiote 8y ago
        I have learnt a new American word :-) In British, I never knew what they were called ("those 'Push Bar To Open' things on fire doors"), apparently "panic bar". As Wikipedia[1] says, "In Europe, the use of panic bars is generally confined to code required applications. On the other hand, in US and Canadian commercial building design panic bars are frequently used even when not required by code." The only place I see them is designated emergency exits, the type which are normally unopenable from outside and often alarmed. The main doors leading out of a large auditorium don't use them – these don't need to lock, so they use free-swinging doors. The emergency doors at the front/side would use them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_bar
- newnewpdro 8y ago
  I'm sure you can find interior photos pre-fire. If I were on a high-speed link I'd find some to link here myself. It was a grossly negligent situation. The whole place was brimming with wooden crap mixed with electrical junk for lights and sound. Words can't do justice to how much of a tinder box it was, the photos left me speechless when I investigated back on the day of the fire.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
raffael-vogler 8y ago
Actually I think the interior looked really awesome. Nonetheless some more thinking should have been put to a scenario in case a fire starts. But still I think the problem is that modern media coverage causes every hazard to be a reason to implement even more rules and regulations for how a building or room has to be designed to be fit for a public event. That's another reason why those non- or semi-professional happenings become rarer - it's just too complex and expensive. Too many laws that you need to keep in mind to do anything nowadays pretty much. It's the usual question on how to balance the trade off between safety and freedom. I myself am more inclined towards the latter.
- Symbiote 8y ago
  The Ghost Ship didn't have smoke detectors, a fire alarm, or emergency lighting. It did have blocked staircases and cluttered pathways, and the available staircase was fairly flammable. It had people warning about some of these problems; they were ignored. It looks cool/arty, and OK to wander through in an afternoon, but it also looks like the last place I'd expect to find a party. The closest place I can think of for a similar labyrinth of clutter is Camden Stables Market in London [0][1]. But it's a daytime clothing, art and antiques market, not an event space. You can see the green emergency exit signs in some of the photos; doors have notices things like "This door to be open during trading hours". For your tradeoff, how low do you propose we go? [0] Camden Town has several markets. If you've been, this is the one you're least likely to have visited, and it's furthest from the station. [1] https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/camden-lock-stables-market.html https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/camden-lock-stables-market...
  - raffael-vogler 8y ago
    Freedom requires responsibility. And probably checking the electric facilities and placing some smoke detectors should be considered self-evident. Laws try to make sure everybody acts responsible by placing lots of obstacles to trip over long before anything bad can happen. Now in this case it would have been a good thing - then again though, the laws existed - now the consequence is that dozens of people are still dead just that the guy gets punished harder. In Hamburg we have really nice planetarium. Recently a guy in a wheelchair wasn't allowed to just attend the show sitting next to a seating row because in case of a fire he might block the corridor and who would be able to quickly evacuate him? Of course the reasoning makes sense but where do we end up when everything needs to be extremely safe or is otherwise forbidden? This development is a systemic effect which cannot be stopped as far as I can tell. The desire for freedom will be satisfied simply by people refusing to be super strict in practice. Also too many regulations usually will be harder to enforce.

rwmj 8y ago

The Wikipedia page is informative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire As you say you could hardly make a more hazardous environment if you tried. Wooden pallets for stairs?!

kakarot 8y ago
That place was a matchbox waiting to get struck. And the electrical situation was a total mess... I mean that's why it burned down. How shitty of a landlord can you be that you wouldn't prioritize people's safety.
- Tomte 8y ago
  Probably not shitty, just oblivious. A Hackerspace in Germany was proud of its smartphone-activated door lock. I was less impressed on their open house event when I saw firsthand how they struggled to open it for several minutes (with no mechanical override on the inside!), while dozens of guests were there. When I voiced my safety concerns they simply didn't seem to understand. I mean it's just a fun hack, right?
  - kakarot 8y ago
    No, actually just shitty. There were criminal charges. The two people mainly responsible got prison time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire#Criminal_investigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Oakland_warehouse_fire#Cr... Also that's crazy about that smart door... Pretty sure that's against fire code if it's one of the only exits. Ignorance isn't an excuse when other people's lives are concerned, either.
    - chippy 8y ago
      But the landlord didn't get charged, the people who leased the building from him did.
      - kakarot 8y ago
        If someone leases a building to me, and I turn around and let you live there under certain conditions, who is your landlord-- my landlord, or me?
        newnewpdro 8y ago
        Landlord generally implies (owner && lessor), not just lessor, AFAIK. I think you guys are just talking past eachother due to a disparity of definitions, and otherwise are actually in agreement.
        kakarot 8y ago
        I phrased my comment as a question because I was interested in OP's response. I'm not totally sure on the nomenclature here myself.
  - beerbajay 8y ago
    Landlords of such spaces are not oblivious; they want all the money for the rent and none of the responsibility of being a real landlord. This is often what artists themselves are looking for since they are under capitalized and want to do questionably legal build outs and events and are willing to take on extra responsibility to be able to so (e.g. fixing pipes, patching holes, doing pest control). But that doesn't absolve the landlord.
  - Symbiote 8y ago
    It looks like a common setup [1], and of the ones with pictures several don't have a manual override. [1] https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Doorlock https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/Doorlock
    - mcguire 8y ago
      A door without a crash bar in a public space?
      - Symbiote 8y ago
        I have learnt a new American word :-) In British, I never knew what they were called ("those 'Push Bar To Open' things on fire doors"), apparently "panic bar". As Wikipedia[1] says, "In Europe, the use of panic bars is generally confined to code required applications. On the other hand, in US and Canadian commercial building design panic bars are frequently used even when not required by code." The only place I see them is designated emergency exits, the type which are normally unopenable from outside and often alarmed. The main doors leading out of a large auditorium don't use them – these don't need to lock, so they use free-swinging doors. The emergency doors at the front/side would use them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_bar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_bar
newnewpdro 8y ago
I'm sure you can find interior photos pre-fire. If I were on a high-speed link I'd find some to link here myself. It was a grossly negligent situation. The whole place was brimming with wooden crap mixed with electrical junk for lights and sound. Words can't do justice to how much of a tinder box it was, the photos left me speechless when I investigated back on the day of the fire.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

raffael-vogler 8y ago

Actually I think the interior looked really awesome. Nonetheless some more thinking should have been put to a scenario in case a fire starts. But still I think the problem is that modern media coverage causes every hazard to be a reason to implement even more rules and regulations for how a building or room has to be designed to be fit for a public event. That's another reason why those non- or semi-professional happenings become rarer - it's just too complex and expensive. Too many laws that you need to keep in mind to do anything nowadays pretty much. It's the usual question on how to balance the trade off between safety and freedom. I myself am more inclined towards the latter.

Symbiote 8y ago
The Ghost Ship didn't have smoke detectors, a fire alarm, or emergency lighting. It did have blocked staircases and cluttered pathways, and the available staircase was fairly flammable. It had people warning about some of these problems; they were ignored. It looks cool/arty, and OK to wander through in an afternoon, but it also looks like the last place I'd expect to find a party. The closest place I can think of for a similar labyrinth of clutter is Camden Stables Market in London [0][1]. But it's a daytime clothing, art and antiques market, not an event space. You can see the green emergency exit signs in some of the photos; doors have notices things like "This door to be open during trading hours". For your tradeoff, how low do you propose we go? [0] Camden Town has several markets. If you've been, this is the one you're least likely to have visited, and it's furthest from the station. [1] https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/camden-lock-stables-market.html https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/camden-lock-stables-market...
- raffael-vogler 8y ago
  Freedom requires responsibility. And probably checking the electric facilities and placing some smoke detectors should be considered self-evident. Laws try to make sure everybody acts responsible by placing lots of obstacles to trip over long before anything bad can happen. Now in this case it would have been a good thing - then again though, the laws existed - now the consequence is that dozens of people are still dead just that the guy gets punished harder. In Hamburg we have really nice planetarium. Recently a guy in a wheelchair wasn't allowed to just attend the show sitting next to a seating row because in case of a fire he might block the corridor and who would be able to quickly evacuate him? Of course the reasoning makes sense but where do we end up when everything needs to be extremely safe or is otherwise forbidden? This development is a systemic effect which cannot be stopped as far as I can tell. The desire for freedom will be satisfied simply by people refusing to be super strict in practice. Also too many regulations usually will be harder to enforce.