Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

I’m going to assume it will be 3 in total. 
 

I’ll be doing the usual plan with my housemate and we’ll invite over a mate or two who would otherwise be spending their Christmas alone. 
 

This will fall within the allowed rules and keep things chilled without it being a mental party. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

I’m going to assume it will be 3 in total. 
 

I’ll be doing the usual plan with my housemate and we’ll invite over a mate or two who would otherwise be spending their Christmas alone. 
 

This will fall within the allowed rules and keep things chilled without it being a mental party. 

Yeah so for example you can't see household A and household B at the same time if household A is also seeing household C? If sticking to the rules anyway. This shit fries my brain!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zoo Music Girl said:

Yeah so for example you can't see household A and household B at the same time if household A is also seeing household C? If sticking to the rules anyway. This shit fries my brain!

I’m hoping I can invite over households B & C at the same time. But they’ll be the only households I’ll be mixing with during the allowed days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Yeah so for example you can't see household A and household B at the same time if household A is also seeing household C? If sticking to the rules anyway. This shit fries my brain!

Sounds like once 3 households selected it's only these 3 you can see over the 5 covid free days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

And presumably if the household you see sees another household then they are part of your bubble regardless of whether you see them. If you see what I mean.

I would say so, otherwise the mixing could get a lot bigger if each household has 3 different bubbles each

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

And presumably if the household you see sees another household then they are part of your bubble regardless of whether you see them. If you see what I mean.

Yeah I know exactly what you mean.

A lot of our friends are ex-students who have stayed in the local area after uni but because of their work shifts they usually can’t go back home for Christmas.

We’ll still be able to invite a couple of people over as long as they don’t have anyone else to see in the same period. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

And presumably if the household you see sees another household then they are part of your bubble regardless of whether you see them. If you see what I mean.

So if A sees B and B sees C, A and C are in a bubble even if they don’t see each other? That’s how I understand it. 

Think this might actually get adhered to by and large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jparx said:

How does this work with tiers though? If you’re in their 1, presumably you can still see up to 6 indoors. So Is this bubble thing just for tiers 2 and 3?

in theory it would mean more than 6 people across 3 households so I see it applicable for all tiers over the 5 days and then revert back to tier rules before/after

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

So if A sees B and B sees C, A and C are in a bubble even if they don’t see each other? That’s how I understand it. 

Think this might actually get adhered to by and large.

That's how I see it too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shoptildrop said:

in theory it would mean more than 6 people across 3 households so I see it applicable for all tiers over the 5 days and then revert back to tier rules before/after

I guess. So I suppose if you’re in tier 1 you may well be able to see some family before Christmas, then two different households over Christmas?

Not that I’m too bothered! Two households is fine by me - just means a lovely quiet Christmas 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jparx said:

Not that I’m too bothered! Two households is fine by me - just means a lovely quiet Christmas 😂

My mum will be able to see both of my sisters and all of their noisy kids and unfortunately I’m going to have to avoid all those tantrums and squabbles. I’m gutted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

So if A sees B and B sees C, A and C are in a bubble even if they don’t see each other? That’s how I understand it. 

Think this might actually get adhered to by and large.

Doesn’t really work too well with in-laws does it? If me and my partner both select our parents, then our parents will also be grouped together and can’t see anyone else.

Not sure people will follow that. People will pick two households and not worry any more about it. So we’ll pick our parents, and our parents will pick us + another household etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jparx said:

I guess. So I suppose if you’re in tier 1 you may well be able to see some family before Christmas, then two different households over Christmas?

Not that I’m too bothered! Two households is fine by me - just means a lovely quiet Christmas 😂

Yeah I suppose you would... tbh I've been in tier 2, tier 2+, tier 3 and then lockdown, I've actually forgot what it was like to meet people freely and w/out worry :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

Would the rules imply that if I've bubbled with 2 other households I wouldn't be allowed to see another friend 1:1 on a socially distanced walk during the period? 

Why not just use your common sense? Better that than wait for precise instructions from the state about minutia of detail about what you can do with every single aspect of your life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jparx said:

Doesn’t really work too well with in-laws does it? If me and my partner both select our parents, then our parents will also be grouped together and can’t see anyone else.

Not sure people will follow that. People will pick two households and not worry any more about it. So we’ll pick our parents, and our parents will pick us + another household etc

Think the rationale is everyone gets someone to bubble up with rather than everyone meeting.

Its the balance between being so restrictive it’ll gets wholesale disobeyed and so lax it’s open to abuse- if everyone gets to pick 2 other households you may as well not bother really given the amount of potential transmissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...