It's open Again

[Wanderer Vagabond]

1 hour ago, The Happy Nomad said:

I'm afraid unlike you I don't take anything on here very seriously,

 

I think it's pretty well acknowledged that the Daily Fail is normally not a bastion of accurate reporting and I can't recall WV ever using at as a source previously and given his political leanings found it quite amusing.

 

As I said lighten up matey.

 

 

 

 

Then you clearly never read properly do you? Whilst I (and wikipedia) don't necessarily take much that the Daily Wail says as fact, I have often quoted them to demonstrate that what I may have said wasn't necessarily left/right bias. If you looked at the thread concerning the weasel Cummings I quoted the Daily Wail as one of those calling for his resignation, but that obviously doesn't fit with your own bias does it?

[WotEver]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Some bare GRP, some undercoat, some primed and some 1st coat of gloss.

Take it onto the K&A, it’ll fit right in

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Then you clearly never read properly do you? Whilst I (and wikipedia) don't necessarily take much that the Daily Wail says as fact, I have often quoted them to demonstrate that what I may have said wasn't necessarily left/right bias. If you looked at the thread concerning the weasel Cummings I quoted the Daily Wail as one of those calling for his resignation, but that obviously doesn't fit with your own bias does it?

And you call me biased.

 

LOL

[doratheexplorer]

31 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I cannot see me getting to our boat anytime soon - North Wales 'new cases' are 'going crazy - guess where our boat is !

 

Cases throughout Wales are still climbing (they don't report that in the daily presentations) but look at North Wales (the yellow / gold line) over the last 3 weeks.

 

 

 

Your y-axis has no label.  Your x-axis has no label or scale.  The top has 6 coloured regions yet the graph has 7.  In other words, this is meaningless.

 

I'm presuming that the y-axis is number of new cases and the dots along the x-axis are individual days, although we can't tell which days.  In any case, numbers of new cases is as much a function of ramping up testing as it is increased spread.

22 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Then you clearly never read properly do you? Whilst I (and wikipedia) don't necessarily take much that the Daily Wail says as fact, I have often quoted them to demonstrate that what I may have said wasn't necessarily left/right bias. If you looked at the thread concerning the weasel Cummings I quoted the Daily Wail as one of those calling for his resignation, but that obviously doesn't fit with your own bias does it?

I'd ignore him. He's clearly just trolling.

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, The Happy Nomad said:

I'm afraid unlike you I don't take anything on here very seriously,

I think you do, but only when it suits you.

 

Are you now saying that you didn't believe the original statement was "fake news", and you were just having a bit of a jest? If so, one could wonder why you insisted on a link?

 

I'll lighten up, and take things less seriously, when things are less serious and warrant some light hearted banter. Government preventing people using their own money to pay for their own tests is serious, and not something to lighten up about.

[Momac]

4 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

... it's bit hard to see where the 2nd wave is coming from. I'd be bloody unlucky to catch it. 

That's what a lot of people seem to be thinking.

However I suggest you dont drop your guard

 

4 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

... it's bit hard to see where the 2nd wave is coming from. I'd be bloody unlucky to catch it. 

That's what a lot of people seem to be thinking.

However I suggest you dont drop your guard

 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I'd ignore him. He's clearly just trolling.

Well given the generalised definition of an internet troll is this.

 

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

 

One could reasonably take that comment as the very essence of it. So I would be careful about throwing such comments around.

 

However as the definition has more recently morphed into it being something much more sinister and serious my comment, (and yours too) could in no way be defined as such.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by The Happy Nomad

[doratheexplorer]

6 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

Well given the generalised definition of an internet troll is this.

 

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

 

One could reasonably take that comment is the very essence of it. So I would be careful about throwing such comments around.

 

However as the definition has more recently morphed into it being something much more sinister and serious my comment, (and yours too) could in no way be defined as such.

 

 

Trolling as in trying to wind up other posters.  Posting inflammatory things and then claiming it's all a joke.

 

Nothing sinister, just a bit pathetic.

[Guest]

Just now, doratheexplorer said:

Trolling as in trying to wind up other posters.  Posting inflammatory things and then claiming it's all a joke.

 

Nothing sinister, just a bit pathetic.

There is a huge amount of that on here.

 

Just as there is calling somebody that posts anything remotely controversial a 'troll' either because they cannot respond to it or just don't like it.

 

 

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

Just now, The Happy Nomad said:

There is a huge amount of that on here.

Yes there is.

Just as there is calling somebody that posts anything remotely controversial a 'troll' either because they cannot respond to it or just don't like it.

I rarely use the term.  You deserved it today, but you've seemingly stopped for now, which is nice ?

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

 

Somebody will be along shortly to tell you stop feeding the troll.

 

 

??

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

Posting inflammatory things and then claiming it's all a joke.

That's one of the things that gaslighters do. Make something very serious, then either make out it was either in jest, trivial, or not said at all.

 

My perception is that, when he posted the accusation of "fake news", he was being serious. He certainly appeared to be... even asked for proof by way of a link.

 

He did a similar thing with me the first time I became aware of his existence.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, MartynG said:

That's what a lot of people seem to be thinking.

However I suggest you dont drop your guard

 

It's what the numbers suggest.  But I agree, I want to minimise my chances of catching it (though in fact I may already have had it), but that's no hardship as I live in a town where I know few people, all my usual leisure activities are stopped for the foreseeable future and the only thing I'm likely to do is go off on the boat either on my own or with the wife, closed pubs don't affect me as I don't go in them even when they're open...

If there is a second wave, it will start in schools, kids infecting teachers and parents. Almost all of them are in the relatively safe age range.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Arthur Marshall

[doratheexplorer]

4 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It's what the numbers suggest.  But I agree, I want to minimise my chances of catching it (though in fact I may already have had it), but that's no hardship as I live in a town where I know few people, all my usual leisure activities are stopped for the foreseeable future and the only thing I'm likely to do is go off on the boat either on my own or with the wife, closed pubs don't affect me as I don't go in them even when they're open...

If there is a second wave, it will start in schools, kids infecting teachers and parents. Almost all of them are in the relatively safe age range.

Latest evidence seems to point towards children not being infectious, even when they are infected.  Seems odd, but that's the rationale for reopening schools.

[Machpoint005]

20 hours ago, matty40s said:

 

 

BBC just now....

"

Matt Hancock says ....

"We think there is very strong instinct from the British people to follow the rules," he says."

 

BBC after the garden party

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Latest evidence seems to point towards children not being infectious, even when they are infected.  Seems odd, but that's the rationale for reopening schools.

I see that France reopened schools on 11th May and have now closed 50 of them due 70 confirmed cases of C19 within the schools

[Machpoint005]

16 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

There aren't enough tests coming in to need two shifts, never mind three. Whatever is stopping them from reaching the targets, it ain't shortage of  lab capacity.

 

Strangely enough that's the exact opposite of what Johnson told the committee yesterday.

[MoominPapa]

Just now, Machpoint005 said:

 

Strangely enough that's the exact opposite of what Johnson told the committee yesterday.

Strange, that. Does anybody here other than MrSmelly believe a word Johnson says?

 

MP.

[Momac]

17 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 

If there is a second wave, it will start in schools, kids infecting teachers and parents. Almost all of them are in the relatively safe age range.

While our older (age nearly 6)  grandchild has been off school everyone (her two younger sisters and parents)  in the house has been healthy

Schools are certainly a breeding ground for any virus /disease . I don't see a reason to think  this one might  be an exception.

[Machpoint005]

41 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

Strange, that. Does anybody here other than MrSmelly believe a word Johnson says?

 

MP.

 

If they do, none of them has come out of the woodwork to admit it.

 

 

[mrsmelly]

1 hour ago, MoominPapa said:

Strange, that. Does anybody here other than MrSmelly believe a word Johnson says?

 

MP.

Hes on telly now looking good as always and giving the FACTS, perhaps David Icke would be a better news feed for many on the forum?

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

Latest evidence seems to point towards children not being infectious, even when they are infected.  Seems odd, but that's the rationale for reopening schools.

I think the word "evidence" should be in inverted commas.  The only scientific comment I've seen is that kids don't get the full symptoms but while there hasn't been enough study to tell whether they pass it on or not, there is no reason to suppose they don;t.  Never mind, we'll soon find out if teachers start following health workers into the graveyards.  Then we can call them heroes and start clapping again.

[MoominPapa]

2 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Hes on telly now looking good as always and giving the FACTS, perhaps David Icke would be a better news feed for many on the forum?

I didn't watch the whole of the Liaison committee meeting yesterday, so I'm relying on Machpoint's information that Johnson said the "exact opposite" of the facts as I reported them. If Johnson didn't lie, either Machpoint or I did. Would you care to say which of us you're accusing?

 

MP.

 

[mrsmelly]

Just now, MoominPapa said:

I didn't watch the whole of the Liaison committee meeting yesterday, so I'm relying on Machpoint's information that Johnson said the "exact opposite" of the facts as I reported them. If Johnson didn't lie, either Machpoint or I did. Would you care to say which of us you're accusing?

 

MP.

 

Im accusing no body of anything. Boris is on giving us the FACTS about the virus as we speak having been giving his advice by proffesionals, you , I and Ian only have an opinion and that opinion will be dare I say obvious on how we vote or are you saying that isnt obvious on each and every point being made by people on theses ongoing threads. Boris is still doing a stirling job under conditions no PM has ever had before, we are all still at the early learning stage. Having a beer with close friends here on monday night as he says we can. Of course anyone who wants to stay locked up in their house or boat boxes in entitled to do so innitt.

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

Latest evidence seems to point towards children not being infectious, even when they are infected.  Seems odd, but that's the rationale for reopening schools.

The latest evidence also states that, if you have no symptoms and have a negative test for the virus, you are not necessarily negative but, if you have symptoms, and have a negative test, you are definitely negative.

 

How many people have had a negative test for the virus, and gone on to be positive a few days later?

30 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Hes on telly now looking good as always and giving the FACTS, perhaps David Icke would be a better news feed for many on the forum?

He wouldn't know a FACT if it smacked him in the face like a wet fish... except in the same way that a stopped clock is right twice a day.

 

Yet you lap it up like his little lap dog would.