Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DeanoL last won the day on July 7 2014

DeanoL had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

460 Excellent

About DeanoL

  • Rank
    staying out for the summer

Recent Profile Visitors

3,731 profile views
  1. Depends on what details are available about what it is and how it's developed. I don't think it's immediately problematic because it's Russian.
  2. That fair enough, and I may be in a similar position myself to be honest. But equally, just because people like us might not be willing to go take the vaccine just to get into festivals, plenty of people will. Enough people to keep the festival and live music industry alive I'd wager. So they'll still be there when we feel comfortable going again. But yeah there's no getting around the fact that we can't know the long term consequences of a vaccine for sure until the long term has passed, so that's 5-10 years. So at some points decisons will have to be made as to what we do. For many, work requirements will make those decisions for them I'd imagine - I might be willing to skip Glastonbury to stay a bit safer but I'm not willing to quit my job.
  3. It all depends on why you're social distancing. If it's just to follow the rules, you're more likely to do it in a pub because other people can judge you and you can be seen to be breaking the rules. But if you're doing it because you want to avoid putting yourself and other people at risk of catching it, then there's no reason to behave different in a pub or a home.
  4. The big difference between pubs and a friend's house is control. I know my friends are treating the virus in the same way I am - they're worried about it and following the guidance so they don't catch it or spread it. If I go to the pub, there's nothing to stop some random brushing up against me or shouting loudly over everyone because he genuinely believes the virus is spread by 5G waves anyway so he can't be doing any harm.
  5. The problem is companies have weighed up the balance of risk. And many have realised that if someone in the office does get it, most other people are going to get it too, and while those people probably won't die, they'll be off work for weeks or months. Having most of your workforce out of commission for a few weeks is an existential risk for most organisations - it's not something they could recover from. The current approach with homeworking isn't driven by benevolent employers, it's driven by risk managers making an assessment that it's just too dangerous. It'd still be too dangerous even if COVID 19 had a 0% mortality rate. The other factor is that productivity has barely dropped with homeworking. So there's no incentive to get folk back in to offices. It's an economic correction, rather than a consequence of COVID 19. The assumption had been workers were less productive at home. That's been proven not to be the case. Regular home-working will become a thing, and it'll create economic upheaval, but not collapse. City centre pubs, restaurants and gyms will see usage plummet. Suburban pubs, restaurants and gyms will see usage spike massively. Demand for the same services is still there, just in different places. If you've always wanted to run your own business, now is the time to find a residential suburban area in a commuter belt without a decent cafe and open one.
  6. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53578188
  7. There's two problems. First the statistical one: if some people aren't wearing masks, and it's made clear there are no consequences to that, then other people will stop wearing masks. To the point that it will become a statistical problem. We know people don't want to wear masks - we know that by comparing how many were wearing masks the week before it became law compared to now. It was a lot. If it's made clear to those people that it's not a real law, and there are no consequences for not obeying it, they'll stop wearing them. The second problem is more personal. Sure, statistically it doesn't make much difference if 1 in 100 or 0 in 100 people wear masks to the supermarket. Unless that one person is an asymptomatic carrier of COVID-19. In which case a lot of people have just been put at risk. And while we'll never have that level of contact tracing, if you got ill and ended up in hospital, and it could be shown it you got it from one person in the supermarket because they didn't have a mask on, how would you feel then? And would you feel much different if that person wasn't wearing a mask for medical reasons than if they just didn't want to?
  8. Well I don't think we should be going down the pub either. And as I said supermarkets and public transport are essential services (hence why they continued running during lockdown). But for everything else I do think they should be straight up compulsory - as everything else is non-essential leisure shopping basically. I think part of the issue is we re-opened everywhere first, then said "you need to wear masks now". Had we re-opened shops on the basis that "they're open, but only if you wear a mask" then you'd get far better compliance because it would seem like we were being given something, rather than having something taken away. The fundamental issue is that the virus doesn't care if you have a medical reason for not wearing a mask or you're just an arsehole. You increase your own and everyone elses risk by the exact same amount. I'd at least re-frame the guidelines to something like "if medical conditions prevent you from wearing a mask, you should avoid entering spaces that require a mask unless absolutely necessary". Our government instead is going "if you can't wear a mask then that's fine" and the response to that by a lot of people is "well if it's fine for them not to wear masks I shouldn't need to wear one either".
  9. I think entertainment venues operate under entirely different rules to retail establishments. Same reason a nightclub can turn anyone away for any reason. I have to admit part of me just thinks it should be the same zero tolerance approach we had at the start of lockdown. Supermarkets and public transport are maybe the exception, but I can't help but think if you're medically unable to wear a face mask, maybe you just shouldn't be going in shops for a few months? I mean we've all done that for months already, is it that much to suggest that if you medically can't wear a mask then you continue to not go to Primark? Then things could actually be enforced.
  10. Not sure that's the case - private health care doesn't generally cover you for care when older.
  11. But you understand that it even existing increases the risk of you getting ill, right? If we could all just take personal responsibility for this virus, and catching it was entirely down to our own behaviour then that'd be great. I'd agree 100% - just don't go in the shop, it's clearly a stupid idea, you wouldn't subject yourself to that risk. But that shop existing means other people are going to us it and be at higher risk. And the thing about being at higher risk means you're more likely to get ill. And the thing about being ill means you're more likely to pass it on to other people. You can avoid that shop, but you can't necessarily avoid any interaction with anyone using that shop. Maybe your bus driver used that shop. Your hairdresser used that shop. The person on the supermarket checkout used that shop. This is why it's (finally) been made a law and not just a recommendation, because it needs everyone working together.
  12. What happens if people *do* like it though? What if they start getting more business because they're doing this? Mask wearing is not actively popular. We know this because when it was merely advised bugger all people were actually doing it. Now it's the law, people are complying. These are not people who want to wear masks. Just people that won't break the law. They see a shop where they're being told not to wear a mask, they'll see that a green light. Maybe other shops notice this shop is doing well and so change their policy. And suddenly you're finding lots of shops you can't go it safely. The asbestos comparison is good, another way of looking at it is a pub going "we allow smoking in this pub" - do you just say "live and let live" and let them get on with it?
  13. Arcades seem like a really bad idea to be opening at all given they're all about touching things other people have been touching. Have to admit one of the things I'm most surprised to see back is a mud run! Sounds completely bizarre https://nuclear-races.co.uk/event/blast-covid19/
  14. Yup. Farage took over UKIP in 2006 as a single issue party with two main aims: a) get a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU b) win a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU And in just over ten years he managed both. I think he's unpopular because there's a fear of him - that he managed to entirely change the UK's status in global politics while neither rising to elected office or being stupid rich. And his stated aim for the future actually is massive reform of our entire democratic system, and essential breaking down all those systems the current ruling classes rely on.
  15. I don't think it would be the bank holiday weekend as the locals wouldn't take kindly to their bank holiday being ruined. I can see it being moved though, and honestly for a family festival, not having it during term time makes a lot more sense. It'd certainly be different, but I don't think that would be a bad thing. T&C especially would benefit hugely from having half their regular performers unavailable, so having to actually find new acts, and not just put on the same shows every year. Others would be keen and capable of taking on the SE corner. It definitely wouldn't be the festival we know, but it could still be good. The logistical side is trickier though, and probably where it's most problematic for Glastonbury as an organisation. I don't think they have the knowledge infrastructure in place to bring new logistics people up to speed on how everything works, all the unwritten rules that have been built up in the minds of people that have been doing it for decades.
  • Create New...