Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Get yourself something like this.s-l300.jpg

When a concession can only be sought via manipulation rather than given willingly, is says something about the concession sought. 

If one asks another for something unusual but that person does not have the choice of refusal without consequence or smear, the the person doing the asking is a c**t and they can GTF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Some nice people on here.

Are folk really so aligned to their anti restrictions stance that they're not prepared to display just  a little consideration?

Some of this is just weird.

You’re not really the judge of “nice”. Not doing what you want doesn’t mean someone isn’t nice. 
What are your moral credentials? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ddfg said:

What is weird is the amount of totally unfounded fear that there would appear to be in circulation about a virus which in its current form is almost harmless.

 

Believe me.  That's not nearly as weird as the prevailing narrative on here this afternoon.

 

Some people really need to step back.  It's genuinely astonishing that people would greet the sight of this badge (which remember, might be worn by those with a genuine vulnerability) with hostility, and a complete unwillingness to modify behaviour.

Honestly, in its own terms, that's amazing.

Edited by Monkey Tennis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

You’re not really the judge of “nice”. Not doing what you want doesn’t mean someone isn’t nice. 
What are your moral credentials? 

If I see someone rendered vulnerable either by their health or an irrational level of fear, I tend not to despise them and wish further ill upon them.

Not a high bar, I know, but in this company it probably makes me a candidate for sainthood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

In respect of these badges, context is important. 

If they are against the backdrop of dropping all legal requirements for masks, distancing etc but people have the option to display that they’re a bit uncomfortable then fine, I find it odd but no harm done and I’d respect it as long as it’s not abused. 

If it’s in addition to all the “protections” then it’s yet more nonsense that adds months and years to the recovery people are going to require from the scaremongering and it can f**k off. 

It's clearly part of the transition from a world of restrictions, isn't it?

Its reception on here is monumentally absurd, and pretty nasty too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is these badges will almost exclusively be worn by those who, for whatever reason, feel concerned / scared / worried / nervous… whatever. I cannot see anyone wearing them at St Mirren Park and asking anyone sitting in the seat next to them to move. I cannot imagine anyone walking onto an aircraft wearing one and expecting to be given a row to themselves. Maybe if an old dear is in the queue at a shop and someone stands too close to them or something… all seems a bit, well, somewhat useless. So much of this shit is though. I generally don’t crowd others in queues or whatever anyway, so I’m not expecting to be chastised by a badge-wearing worrier… who, as these badges are discretionary, are perfectly free to wear one if they want. I’m just waiting for the moment where I’m in a queue, and sense the person behind is a bit too close for comfort, and it’s an auld granny wearing one of these badges. That’ll be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

If I see someone rendered vulnerable either by their health or an irrational level of fear, I tend not to despise them and wish further ill upon them.

Not a high bar, I know, but in this company it probably makes me a candidate for sainthood.

“Do what I say or you’re not nice” isn’t even veiled manipulation, it’s overt. We aren’t the best judges of ourselves.

When you have to completely fabricate the motivations or feelings of others to justify your position; it’s time for pause.

Edited by Thorongil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I think at this point we have to step back and look carefully at her words.

"so long as face coverings make a difference to covid transmission".

That is a potential get-out clause for her right there because there's plenty of research which says they make no discernible difference.

This may not be the big pro-mask statement that it initially appears to be.

I wonder if, between this and the badge announcement, the weaselling has begun.

 


‘We’ll make them discretionary too, but England have only just done it, so we need to be seen to be different for just a wee bit longer’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

If I see someone rendered vulnerable either by their health or an irrational level of fear, I tend not to despise them and wish further ill upon them.

Extrapolating and fabricating an argument no-one is making as usual I see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I think at this point we have to step back and look carefully at her words.

"so long as face coverings make a difference to covid transmission".

That is a potential get-out clause for her right there because there's plenty of research which says they make no discernible difference.

This may not be the big pro-mask statement that it initially appears to be.

I wonder if, between this and the badge announcement, the weaselling has begun.

Could go either way tbh. The wording allows also for keeping them in place despite the difference in transmission being tiny.

I don't believe they will be mandated here much beyond spring tbh, so I don't really understand what NS is trying to gain by generating soundbites like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Believe me.  That's not nearly as weird as the prevailing narrative on here this afternoon.

 

Some people really need to step back.  It's genuinely astonishing that people would greet the sight of this badge (which remember, might be worn by those with a genuine vulnerability) with hostility, and a complete unwillingness to modify behaviour.

Honestly, in its own terms, that's amazing.

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

If I see someone rendered vulnerable either by their health or an irrational level of fear, I tend not to despise them and wish further ill upon them.

Not a high bar, I know, but in this company it probably makes me a candidate for sainthood.

 

So you are saying someone's totally irrational fear of a relatively non harmful virus is worth placing unwarranted expectations  on everyone else?

This attitude is actually doing a huge disservice to those with genuine medical conditions.

Maybe they should get Jason Leitch off the adverts every day and replace him with some positive messages of  people doing activities under normal circumstances and try to encourage people that things aren't as dangerous as they think they are. 

Everyday things like packing your case for your holidays, picking your pal up to go to the football, going out with friends for a meal or meeting work colleagues for a drink. Surley that is a far more helpful message than constantly thanking everyone for being careful and telling them to keep testing just in case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

Could go either way tbh. The wording allows also for keeping them in place despite the difference in transmission being tiny.

I don't believe they will be mandated here much beyond spring tbh, so I don't really understand what NS is trying to gain by generating soundbites like this.

Becasue at this moment, there is at least some sentiment that the rolling back of restrictions in England is about Boris Johnson deflecting, and so the ReCkLeSs ToRiEs cow can be milked just a little more, even as Sturgeon herself rolls back to a position decscribed by Bob Mahelp, who appears to have slithered away of late, as "Full Bolsonaro" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Could go either way tbh. The wording allows also for keeping them in place despite the difference in transmission being tiny.

I don't believe they will be mandated here much beyond spring tbh, so I don't really understand what NS is trying to gain by generating soundbites like this.

I still think my favourite one is ‘we will be governed by data, not dates’ *

 

 

 

 

 

 

* Unless the dates are the election, the Euros at Hampden, Cop26, and the Six Nations Rugby….

Shower of cnuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Snafu said:

If you find that a post offends you, feel free to use the report option in the top right hand corner of their post.

Why are you being so silly?

I can disapprove of something without being offended by it or see it as breaking rules.  It's a trick you can probably perform too.

What's next - If you don't like it;don't read it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ddfg said:

So you are saying someone's totally irrational fear of a relatively non harmful virus is worth placing unwarranted expectations  on everyone else?

This attitude is actually doing a huge disservice to those with genuine medical conditions.

Maybe they should get Jason Leitch off the adverts every day and replace him with some positive messages of  people doing activities under normal circumstances and try to encourage people that things aren't as dangerous as they think they are. 

Everyday things like packing your case for your holidays, picking your pal up to go to the football, going out with friends for a meal or meeting work colleagues for a drink. Surley that is a far more helpful message than constantly thanking everyone for being careful and telling them to keep testing just in case. 

Can't we have it alongside some more positive messaging?

Does affording someone a wee bit space, really meet your definition of "unwarranted expectations"?  Extraordinary.

Edited by Monkey Tennis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I think at this point we have to step back and look carefully at her words.

"so long as face coverings make a difference to covid transmission".

That is a potential get-out clause for her right there because there's plenty of research which says they make no discernible difference.

This may not be the big pro-mask statement that it initially appears to be.

I wonder if, between this and the badge announcement, the weaselling has begun.

 

I read it completely differently.

Eg - as long as there remains any ambiguity as to their effectiveness, we will keep them mandated, as it may just make a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

It's clearly part of the transition from a world of restrictions, isn't it?

Its reception on here is monumentally absurd, and pretty nasty too.

I don’t know if you’re including me in the nasty bit but nonetheless I agree, some of it is over the top. 

I do totally get the frustration with continuing down a rabbit hole of layering on encouragement for people to be fearful of mixing with the outside world, hence the context I gave. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...