this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2025
235 points (93.4% liked)
Showerthoughts
37997 readers
874 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To my surprise, you're right. Brigades letting buildings burn didn't happen - at least not by company decree.
The most I'd ever looked into it was to see what those plaques looked like. I appreciate you countering the idea, it led me to an interesting read of this correction article that seems a great summary of what really occurred.
Primarily it seems they all just worked together for reasons that, after reading them, are painfully obvious and I can't believe I hadn't considered even the first one.
The article by Paul J Sillitoe is worth the read, but here are some highlights for anyone interested:
More recent writers have more firmly rebutted the notion of letting uninsured buildings burn. In 1996, an insurance company history referenced, in 1702, “the first of many recorded examples” of insurance fire brigades working together to fight fires. The insuring fire office recompensated the other offices whose men who had assisted.
The “erroneous myth”, is said to have originated only in the 1920s.
Originally writing in 1692-3, Daniel Defoe noted that the firemen were “very active and diligent” in helping to put out fires, “whether in houses insured or not insured”.
Only two occasions have been reported (in 1871 & 1895), though, where insurance companies threatened the authorities that they would cease attending fires in uninsured properties.
With no reward, no water, and no insurance interest in a burning building, it is not difficult to envisage firemen standing back on occasion, jeering and generally interfering with rival brigades fighting a fire in which they did have an interest. Or, alternatively, simply packing up and going home. Arguably, therefore, the legend of insurance fire brigades letting uninsured buildings burn originated in the first half of the 18th century.
Glad I could correct some misinformation. :)
Hell ya, not only taking a correction well, but coming back with extra information to correct the original misconception. You seem like a cool person, thanks for that!