Алерт, который все игнорируют, хуже, чем его отсутствие

An alert that people ignore is worse than its absence, because absence of an alert means honest admission of "we're not monitoring this". Ignored alerts create false sense of monitoring. The author has seen this situation many times. The system sends dozens of notifications daily. Most are nothing: temporary spikes that disappeared quickly, overly strict thresholds, irrelevant errors.

People quickly learn to skip these emails, and stop reading them at all, including the rare but important ones. Then a real incident happens. The alert about it arrives on time, correct. But drowned in hundreds of false ones that built up immunity. The system warned, yet nobody trusted the warning because the warnings were too frequent.

Therefore, the author treats monitoring noise as a problem, not a triviality. Each false alert is not just extra email; it pays a price for trust in the entire notification system. Enough false alarms and the real incident will go unnoticed. Good monitoring is not about sending the most signals. It's about trusting the right signals.

Fewer alerts, but each one is for a reason; each one demands action; each one is taken seriously. If people don't respond to your notification, the problem is not with people. The problem is with the notification. Remove the noise until it drowns out what will be truly important someday.