It does? How can you conclude that without having inspected the missing parts?

It could be a manufacturing defect, it could be all kinds of other things including a design flaw, to conclude that it 'screams of bad servicing' without having any evidence on an incident that is not even a day old is jumping to conclusions.

"Screams of x" is an educated guess, not a conclusion.

An educated guess is something entirely different than throwing out the first thing that comes to mind in a complex situation. Evidence, not guesses is where it is at.

I'm merely pointing out that the parent mischaracterized the statement as a conclusion. It's just a guess. (it's also an unnecessarily adversarial post)

You are trying to counter my observation about terminology, guess vs conclusion, by saying that evidence is better. Not really relevant.

Typically, fan blades failing are due to metallurgical defects during manufacturing. Not sure where you are getting poor servicing from.

The conclusion of United Airlines Flight 232 was that although it was a manufacturing defect, the maintenance crew should have noticed the crack. Normally, cracks slowly spread over time until the part catastrophically fails, giving you time to catch it using various techniques (ultrasound, x-ray, penetrating dyes).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232

I'm not sure why you think it's reasonable to extrapolate the conclusion from an accident with a 1973 plane to an accident with modern hardware and vastly different fan materials. UA232 had a titanium alloy fan disk, while modern turbofans tend towards a nickel superalloy, sometimes even a single crystal.