Are you worried yet.

[lifes2short]

Would you bet in a casino if you had 2% chance of dying?

only if i had a 98% chance of winning real big

 

[Felonious Crud]

We could simply close the thread. It could itself become a victim of one of the nastiest symptoms of cornovirus, spittle-flecked outrage and sh!t-stirring repeated ad nauseum.

Does it serve any purpose? Time to kill it?

We’d need to know that this tedious bollox won’t simply resurface elsewhere.

 

[lifes2short]

i really cant see the issue, i might be wrong but i don't think i've read anything truly offensive/vile, just beliefs and opinions from different folk/personalities and locking of horns

 

[Harry]

The ability to ignore members is great. Is there any chance we can have an 'ignore thread' option? It's like picking a scab.....

C

I didn’t realise I could “ignore” members! Thank you, I’ve hit the button.

 

[D Walker]

Tbh I’m amazed you all haven’t got something better to do with your Easter Friday...
I’ve got an excuse....I’m incarcerated with the Danish secret service tracking my phone for movement.
Wonder if they’re confused yet as the VPN places me in Sao Paolo.....

 

[Harry]

 

[Gazcw]

only if i had a 98% chance of winning real big

98% chance of winning. I am not that lucky!

 

[Phil H]

I think I read on a Facebook post that the virus only likes BMWs

That's understandable. They're German, so largely vaccine free

 

[lifes2short]

98% chance of winning. I am not that lucky!

join the club, think the last time i ever won anything was on the grand national some 15 years ago on an each way bet, think it was a whole £20

 

[mjheathcote]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56613219?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=6066e4ce25a85502e21bb7ee%26Philippines%2C%20Pakistan%2C%20Kenya%2C%20and%20Bangladesh%20added%20to%20travel%20ban%20list%262021-04-02T09%3A36%3A10.797Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:ff37f982-54ec-4932-b014-cb4c31157925&pinned_post_asset_id=6066e4ce25a85502e21bb7ee&pinned_post_type=share

Shouldn't this be now, not in a week's time?

 

[CatmanV2]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56613219?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=6066e4ce25a85502e21bb7ee%26Philippines%2C%20Pakistan%2C%20Kenya%2C%20and%20Bangladesh%20added%20to%20travel%20ban%20list%262021-04-02T09%3A36%3A10.797Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:ff37f982-54ec-4932-b014-cb4c31157925&pinned_post_asset_id=6066e4ce25a85502e21bb7ee&pinned_post_type=share

Shouldn't this be now, not in a week's time?

They do it now and there's a public outcry of people that can't come home <shrug>

C

 

[CatmanV2]

I didn’t realise I could “ignore” members! Thank you, I’ve hit the button.

There are benefits, to be sure

C

 

[mjheathcote]

They do it now and there's a public outcry of people that can't come home <shrug>

C

They can come home, but isolate in a hotel.
The hotel is free because of the short notice, but from next Friday they have to pay for it.
They now be an influx returning home before next Friday.

 

[allandwf]

There are benefits, to be sure

C

We can also ignore threads, if you find them tedious, offensive, etc. etc. You just don't open them simple. No need to close them.

 

[Wattie]

We can also ignore threads, if you find them tedious, offensive, etc. etc. You just don't open them simple. No need to close them.

Exactly:
Some pretend to ignore -whilst supporting others.

On that matter this isn’t an accurate Representation.

No.

The full posts were-




Fc i love your content and respect your humour, intelligence and passion for the forum.

Whilst u may not agree with me, editing my post to be selective to” need I go on” and cut me off is a form of censorship/bias.


I wasn’t being offensive- I was responding to a “how come.....

 

[Zep]

Wattie, just stop.

Your right to express yourself is no greater than anyone else’s.

Anyone is welcome to edit what you write when quoting to emphasise the part they are replying to.

You know that your posts press the buttons of others, but yet you post them. So, when you get the reaction you want then you gleefully go into self defence.

You have made your point, now stop.

 

[MarkMas]

Who said forever?
(Disappointed with your improper use of “for ever” MM )
...

I hope it is OK to just selectively quote the part of your post that needed to be corrected for being wrong, rather than clutter up the forum with the rest of your message.

 

[Wattie]

View attachment 83735

I hope it is OK to just selectively quote the part of your post that needed to be corrected for being wrong, rather than clutter up the forum with the rest of your message.

Bugger, touché
Wasn’t I half correct?

 

[MarkMas]

How come so many doctors and nurses ended up on ventilators? Bus drivers, dustmen. These are not elderly people. My husband was hospitalised. You really do talk a load of offensive rubbish!

Viral load, improper ppe. Lack of knowledge re virus given its newness. Terrible government preparation. Open borders.
Pre existing health conditions, obesity, smokers, no health or fitness regime.
They were unlucky.

Yes, we know all of these are a factor in both catching the disease and the severity of the experience. So what? You seem to be suggesting that there are 'good reasons' (including bad luck) why some people get ill or die, and the subtext seems to be that without these 'reasons' there is no problem. This is a common delusion; a defensive mechanism to try to create a sense of being safe.

For example fighter pilots are strangely inclined to blame pilot error when one of their number dies, because it is more comfortable to imagine that, 'he died, because he made a mistake, but I won't' than to think, 'I might die like that at any moment'. Same thing drives 'comforting' conspiracy theories - 'If 9/11 was a complex government plot, then I can make sense of it, but if it was a handful of random terrorists, I'm going to be afraid all the time.'

There is also the comfort of imagining that one has special knowledge of 'the facts' and so is insulated from uncomfortable turbulence and uncertainty.

I suspect (but may be wrong) that part of what drives the ideas for many people that 'it just affects old, obese, smokers' or 'the government wasn't prepared' or even 'we must open up to save the economy' is really a slightly delusional attempt to say 'there isn't really a deadly global pandemic that we actually have to deal with'.

Need I go on.

Assuming this is a question (a little ambiguous without the correct punctuation); no you really don't.

Look at the facts.

I think many of us look at the data and try to draw conclusions. It seems to me that the data are sufficiently ambiguous and inconclusive that only a propagandist, someone deluded or someone seeking the lifeboat of spurious certainty would claim to know the 'facts'.

Offensive or accurate.

Again, assuming this is a question; I would say certainly offensive, and mostly inaccurate through a mixture of bad data and flawed logic.

 

[MarkMas]

Bugger, touché
Wasn’t I half correct?

Nope, not even close. I was intentionally using 'for ever' to mean 'without end', not 'forever', which could have been interpreted as 'incessantly'.