Honestly are you following lockdown rules?
Discussion
Fullook said:
Because some people are prepared to inconvenience themselves for what they believe to be the greater good.
By all means challenge whether or not those beliefs are well-founded (not that you need any encouragement from me!) but I don't see why people putting their own preferences temporarily to one side should be subject to ridicule.
Some people are doing their best, based on a massively imperfect set of available information, to act in a way which considers the welfare of others.
Some people, manifestly, are not. (For the sake of clarity - not talking about anybody on this thread specifically)
This is a good post.By all means challenge whether or not those beliefs are well-founded (not that you need any encouragement from me!) but I don't see why people putting their own preferences temporarily to one side should be subject to ridicule.
Some people are doing their best, based on a massively imperfect set of available information, to act in a way which considers the welfare of others.
Some people, manifestly, are not. (For the sake of clarity - not talking about anybody on this thread specifically)
As some food for thought, I would like to think that the elements I have bolded are the same whichever side of the argument you are on.
As such, neither side of it has any place to ridicule the other, and as a functioning adult should make a conscious effort to be aware of the fact that the bolded above is all they or anyone else is doing.
Instead of gorging yourself on whatever you can find that further reinforces your pre-existing opinion, further convincing yourself you're right and anyone who thinks differently is a moron, why not try to actually better understand why other people think differently to you. You might find yourself less angry
(not aimed at anyone inparticular for the avoidance of doubt, certainly not aimed at Fullook)I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
garyhun said:
I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Tbf it sounds more like you’re using that as a reason to ‘rebel’.It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
I don't really see the point, but each to their own.
garyhun said:
I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
I'd say that the media are probably the biggest actual problem here, whichever side of the fence people have fallen on with regards to 'the rules'.It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
The more extreme and polarising the headline, the better for views!
I do not envy anyone in Government, as much as they're in charge, in a situation like this I can only assume they're very much the messenger really.
What I mean is obviously nobody elected in to government is likely to be a pandemic specialist or what have you, else they'd be working in that industry... As such, the best thing they can do is take advice from people who are supposed to be experts, and then follow it.
If they're fed a heap of s
te by the supposed experts, all they can do is repeat it and cross their fingers it doesn't turn out to be too bad, knowing full well they'll personally get the blame if it is!ThumperMc said:
garyhun said:
I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Tbf it sounds more like you’re using that as a reason to ‘rebel’.It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
I don't really see the point, but each to their own.
ThumperMc said:
Tbf it sounds more like you’re using that as a reason to ‘rebel’.
I don't really see the point, but each to their own.
So that I'm not just sitting on the fence here, I'm inclined to agree with you in so far as I don't really understand the point / outrage and thus need to 'rebel' against the current situation.I don't really see the point, but each to their own.
As was highlighted above, I am not a medical expert and I am not up to date on the illuminati or likelihood of Orwellian plots to brainwash the masses into compliant worker drones, hence I have an imperfect set of information to work on.
Based on that, my perception of "for the greater good" is me wearing a mask when inside with strangers etc.
I appreciate others may well feel that "for the greater good" is fighting back against the oppresion of the people by rebelling against wearing a mask, that's just not what my imperfect subset of information has led me to conclude.
garyhun said:
I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Don't give up.It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Just because somebody with access to a keyboard and a publisher is being a d
head doesn't mean you have to stop giving a st - you're better than that.Fullook said:
garyhun said:
I think most people, including me, are trying to do their best.
It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Don't give up.It’s just that when the government change their way of reporting (deaths to cases) without any context, and the MSM start to mislead with headlines, people start to question whether ‘doing the right thing’ is actually doing the right thing.
Just because somebody with access to a keyboard and a publisher is being a d
head doesn't mean you have to stop giving a st - you're better than that.heads’ and why are they ‘better than that’?Actually on second thoughts you must be being patronising with your view that your view is the superior one.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
garyhun said:
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re being genuine and not patronising...... why are people with a differing view to you ‘dheads’ and why are they ‘better than that’?
Actually on second thoughts you must be being patronising with your view that your view is the superior one.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
Relax - no offence intended on my part.heads’ and why are they ‘better than that’?Actually on second thoughts you must be being patronising with your view that your view is the superior one.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
You said that what you read in the MSM got to you to the extent that you started questioning what was for the best.
I agree that there are d
heads writing in the MSM (hence my comment "access to a keyboard and a publisher ") that write stuff that makes you despair.My point is - don't let the d
heads get you down. If your instincts are to do things that acknowledge that you share geography with a few million others, many of whom could be protected by your actions - dont let the fact that some politicians are self-serving ingrates and some journalists are will write anything for clicks distract you from doing your bit.
The d
heads in question are those public figures who could make you lose faith.By the way - I don't think my view is the superior one. My view is the one I hold now, based on what I know (or think I know) now. I'm always open to persuasion, based on new information received.
Edited by Fullook on Thursday 22 October 19:39
Fullook said:
garyhun said:
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re being genuine and not patronising...... why are people with a differing view to you ‘dheads’ and why are they ‘better than that’?
Actually on second thoughts you must be being patronising with your view that your view is the superior one.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
Relax - no offence intended on my part.heads’ and why are they ‘better than that’?Actually on second thoughts you must be being patronising with your view that your view is the superior one.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
You said that what you read in the MSM got to you to the extent that you started questioning what was for the best.
I agree that there are d
heads writing in the MSM (hence my comment "access to a keyboard and a publisher ") that write stuff that makes you despair.My point is - don't let the d
heads get you down. If your instincts are to do things that acknowledge that you share geography with a few million others, many of whom could be protected by your actions - dont let the fact that some politicians are self-serving ingrates and some journalists are will write anything for clicks distract you from doing your bit.
The d
heads in question are those public figures who could make you lose faith.heads are 
My point is that, based on the science I have read, I do not believe that following the rules will result in the level of protection that you believe they will. The numbers do not agree with the message from the politicians and that’s where my issue lies.
I’m sure you’ll tell me that the science you are reading will say something different. It’s a polarising subject and we all believe that our view of the situation is the right one so I’ll suggest we just let this one drop and agree to disagree.
My partner and I just returned from one of the Canary Islands. Numbers there are less than our home area in a tier two area. Yet we have to self isolate for two weeks. Can’t say I agree with the logic when we could easily have stayed at home and mixed in pubs and restaurants etc which would be a higher risk IMO, but happy to do it because it’s the rules and we decided to stick with our travel plans....
Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
ETA: We hadn’t received any phone calls and both been in all day.
Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
ETA: We hadn’t received any phone calls and both been in all day.
Edited by Birdster on Friday 23 October 00:29
Birdster said:
My partner and I just returned from one of the Canary Islands. Numbers there are less than our home area in a tier two area. Yet we have to self isolate for two weeks. Can’t say I agree with the logic when we could easily have stayed at home and mixed in pubs and restaurants etc which would be a higher risk IMO, but happy to do it because it’s the rules and we decided to stick with our travel plans....
Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
Good if all the criminals are self issolating they will be nice and easy to find.Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
Birdster said:
My partner and I just returned from one of the Canary Islands. Numbers there are less than our home area in a tier two area. Yet we have to self isolate for two weeks. Can’t say I agree with the logic when we could easily have stayed at home and mixed in pubs and restaurants etc which would be a higher risk IMO, but happy to do it because it’s the rules and we decided to stick with our travel plans....
Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
You should have stayed there for a bit longer. From Sunday morning the Canary Islands will be considered safe and quarantine will no longer be required.Just had the local police officers knock on our door to check we were self isolating. Asked a few questions and then on their way. It was a bit surreal having a chat at the door, they said we didn’t answer the phone so they were sent to check. They then explained that all they’d done all day was these self isolating checks and they seemed a bit sick of it.
Makes your situation seem a bit daft.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54650531
By definition of the word (Comes from Ancient Greek, meaning "All People"), we're definitely in a pandemic!!
So far, judging by W.H.O. figures of people who are registered as having died with Covid-19, were a total of 0.0139% of the world's population.
Mostly people with deficient immune systems, such as the very old, people with cancer, etc.
The news says so - so must be right! We must all wear masks and be afraid. Be very afraid!
0.0139% globally is not a Covid pandemic. It's a pandemic of public stupidity.
So far, judging by W.H.O. figures of people who are registered as having died with Covid-19, were a total of 0.0139% of the world's population.
Mostly people with deficient immune systems, such as the very old, people with cancer, etc.
The news says so - so must be right! We must all wear masks and be afraid. Be very afraid!
0.0139% globally is not a Covid pandemic. It's a pandemic of public stupidity.
Cold said:
You should have stayed there for a bit longer. From Sunday morning the Canary Islands will be considered safe and quarantine will no longer be required.
Makes your situation seem a bit daft.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54650531
The whole situation seems daft and poorly thought out, full stop. The governments are just pulling rules out of their arses.Makes your situation seem a bit daft.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54650531
The use of police resource to go door to door checking on people is an absolute disgrace too and a complete waste of resource. Last year, we were told the government didn’t have two pennies to rub together and police on the street were lean due to cuts, yet this year they’re flush enough to send them knocking. Just making it up as they go along.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff