Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Jeezo. 

At no point did I say NO scientists used statistics.

Calm your ego down.

No, what you said was "I can assure you that this isn't true in general" when I said that scientists use statistics. 

I'm making the point that evert scientist I know does use them. It isn't arrogance - just calling out bollocks when I see it.

image.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Go to the literature and seek it out for yourself.

It's out there and it's everywhere. You just need to want to find it.

Hang on - you said I wasn't the only scientist on here. I'm asking the others to come in here and say what they think. 

Unless there is an article somewhere studying the professions of P&B users, I don't think the literature will help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Yep, it's a great selling point having fixed holidays every year when, for some reason, the price of actually having a holiday goes through the roof and any resort you can afford to get to will be over-run with the wee people you've just spent months trying to control at work.

I'm surprised folk don't do it for fúck all.

An unnecessarily sarcastic response, bizarre.

You can’t be serious with this though. Are you seriously suggesting that having a mountain of holiday time compared to the vast majority of professions is not only not a key driver for why people choose the role, but is in fact actually a negative of the job?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

 

I don't want to read too much into this but it doesn't sound overly-encouraging.

On the positive side, she's not talking about rising case numbers alone.

She's talking about them in terms of vaccination progress and also the SG have in general started talking about the link between cases and hospitalisations/deaths. So there's some more encouraging noises there.

We'll just have to wait and see.

No area should be moving back up a level. I think the worst case will be another few weeks of everyone on Level 2 but we'll need to see.

I'm in the same boat. This was apparently pencilled in as the date to announce a nationwide drop to level 1, but clearly not going to happen. There was talk of some areas going to level 1 but the Tories (boo, hiss) are against that. I guess they want everyone moving down the levels together for some unknown reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 

I don't want to read too much into this but it doesn't sound overly-encouraging.

On the positive side, she's not talking about rising case numbers alone.

She's talking about them in terms of vaccination progress and also the SG have in general started talking about the link between cases and hospitalisations/deaths. So there's some more encouraging noises there.

We'll just have to wait and see.

No area should be moving back up a level. I think the worst case will be another few weeks of everyone on Level 2 but we'll need to see.

I will be a seething mess if Edinburgh moves back to Level 3 while Glasgow goes up a level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

An unnecessarily sarcastic response, bizarre.

You can’t be serious with this though. Are you seriously suggesting that having a mountain of holiday time compared to the vast majority of professions is not only not a key driver for why people choose the role, but is in fact actually a negative of the job?

Absolutely, it's a negative. Oh, it's a selling point initially, but the reality is that teachers don't get quite as much time off as you'd think - decent ones will plan ahead for the next AY in their own time, and it's undeniable that any travel will cost them more. Their lives are absolutely tied to term times, and they cannot simply drop everything at any point outside school holidays for such as weddings, stag dos, or all those other wee breaks the rest of us take for granted. 

Anyone joining the profession for the time off won't last long, or if they  do, will be shit teachers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Absolutely, it's a negative. Oh, it's a selling point initially, but the reality is that teachers don't get quite as much time off as you'd think - decent ones will plan ahead for the next AY in their own time, and it's undeniable that any travel will cost them more. Their lives are absolutely tied to term times, and they cannot simply drop everything at any point outside school holidays for such as weddings, stag dos, or all those other wee breaks the rest of us take for granted. 

Anyone joining the profession for the time off won't last long, or if they  do, will be shit teachers. 

This is laughable nonsense. Only working about two thirds of the year is a negative, I’ve heard it all now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, super_carson said:

Are there major differences between levels 1 and 2 that would make much of a difference anyway?  Crowd sizes and household mixing aside, aren't they much the same?  

AFAIK “6 from 3 households” is actually a Level 1 restriction, so basically when Level 2 was brought in, household mixing was actually relaxed further than originally planned. For that reason we could move to Level 1 without any change in household mixing rules. 

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...