If the world could stop believing their phones algorithm long enough to look up and see the trees, itd be easier show them the forest they dont believe exists
Joined February 2022
- Tweets338
- Following68
- Followers23
- Likes158
Why does UVU after action report devote substantial detail to TPUSA/private-security failures, unavailable witnesses, failed coordination, and the limits of the evidence, yet offer almost no explanation for a potentially dangerous alert sent through UVU’s own system?
1:52 p.m UVU Alert: Shooter in [INSERT location], avoid area. If shooter is near. Run-Hide-Fight"
Given that this alert, its transmission records, and its subsequent retraction fell squarely within UVU’s institutional control, why does the report simply call it “inadvertent” without explaining what evidence established that conclusion? That disparity in evidentiary detail is especially striking because the report is intended to examine UVU’s own responsibilities and lessons learned, yet one of its most consequential UVU-controlled failures receives its least transparent causal explanation...?