When will this shit end?

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

1 minute ago, Mellotr0n said:

Says the person who just completely shat on someone having one of their happiest days in the past shit year, using a really stupid argument to try and make someone feel guilty for doing a good deed. 

Your first post says you can do it for over 65's even though the website states you should be over 70! 

Your moving the goalposts with each reply. 

I'm not making anyone feeling guilty, if you feel guilty perhaps there is a small part of you that thinks shit maybe I did something wrong there? 

For what's its worth I'm please for you and your mum that she's been jabbed - she would have been shortly anyway. 

 

[hodgey123]

Thanks to those who posted about over 65s, just booked my girlfriend's mum in for Monday morning!

[Mellotr0n]

5 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Your first post says you can do it for over 65's even though the website states you should be over 70! 

Your moving the goalposts with each reply. 

I'm not making anyone feeling guilty, if you feel guilty perhaps there is a small part of you that thinks shit maybe I did something wrong there? 

For what's its worth I'm please for you and your mum that she's been jabbed - she would have been shortly anyway. 

 

It’s quite obvious the website was shortly going to be updated, as it now has. I was aware that under 70s were now being contacted in many areas. 

A 25-year-old trying to use a loophole to get a vaccine, I’d totally agree with you. But this is a 69 year old, getting a vaccine later than many people younger than her.

Also, I made sure there was a huge amount of availability for tomorrow, hence she isn’t taking someone else’s place.

No, I’m fully aware I did nothing wrong (you may notice that numerous people have agreed with me, but sure they’re all evil too), just think perhaps it could say something about you that you see news like that and immediately look for the negative/attempt to make the poster feel bad. 
 

TL;DR - you got it wrong, that’s ok, maybe stop digging now. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[HalfAnIdiot]

2 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Your first post says you can do it for over 65's even though the website states you should be over 70! 

Your moving the goalposts with each reply. 

I'm not making anyone feeling guilty, if you feel guilty perhaps there is a small part of you that thinks shit maybe I did something wrong there? 

For what's its worth I'm please for you and your mum that she's been jabbed - she would have been shortly anyway. 

 

For what it's worth I think you may have made an error here. 

[xxialac]

Immigration officials have yet to receive any operational instructions on how the measures for quarantine hotels will work, despite the rules coming into force on Monday.

Officers still have questions about what to do with people who have come from a red-list country, what level of checks they are supposed to be conducting and whether to chase someone they are checking if they run away.

"They have had no operational instructions so far at all."

[gizmoman]

1 minute ago, august1 said:

 

But that's not what it said when mellotron booked, at that time it was for 70 years plus only, they were clearly in the process of changing over to 65+ but mellotron didn't know that, at the time he booked he was not following the rules on the site, I wouldn't have called it queue-jumping myself and think this a storm in a teacup, but RPL's argument does have some basis.

[Mellotr0n]

2 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

But that's not what it said when mellotron booked, at that time it was for 70 years plus only, they were clearly in the process of changing over to 65+ but mellotron didn't know that, at the time he booked he was not following the rules on the site, I wouldn't have called it queue-jumping myself and think this a storm in a teacup, but RPL's argument does have some basis.

Actually I did it on two basis - 1) that it had been reported in the Independent today over65s were being called forward in the near future (by Monday if not before is what they said) and it simply hadn’t been announced yet but was obviously being allowed on the NHS site. And 2) on the basis there was a HUGE number of spare slots which means realistically there is going to still be plenty of space tomorrow, so no one is being jumped ahead of. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[steviewevie]

33 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Isn’t it funny that our resident “lockdown sceptics” are among the few regulars on here that have been vaccinated? Maybe we can put to bed the myth that conflated lockdown scepticism with anti vaccination views. 

ro maybe they're just selfish?

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

But that's not what it said when mellotron booked, at that time it was for 70 years plus only, they were clearly in the process of changing over to 65+ but mellotron didn't know that, at the time he booked he was not following the rules on the site, I wouldn't have called it queue-jumping myself and think this a storm in a teacup, but RPL's argument does have some basis.

Exactly that and bygones would have been bygones but for the nature and vindictiveness of the replies. 

[Punksnotdead]

Come on fellas - it's Friday night, have a drink, a spliff, a cup of tea or whatever floats your boat & let's stop arguing!

[xxialac]

Trouble is, no longer possible to have a fight whilst being socially distanced.

Ah, what about an old school duel?!

Edited February 12, 2021 by xxialac

[Mellotr0n]

10 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Exactly that and bygones would have been bygones but for the nature and vindictiveness of the replies. 

Yeah let’s not pretend it wasn’t you that started all this fella. 

You’ve ignored one of the main points which destroys your argument - there was a MASSIVE amount of free slots for TOMORROW.

So therefore you are genuinely arguing that it’s better no one gets vaccinated than if we don’t manage to do things quite perfectly in order, aren’t you?

In no genuine meaning of the phrase was it “queue jumping”. Perhaps you weren’t aware of that in your first comment, but now that you are, surely it’s the time to finally stop digging?

Edited February 12, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[zahidf]

44 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Isn’t it funny that our resident “lockdown sceptics” are among the few regulars on here that have been vaccinated? Maybe we can put to bed the myth that conflated lockdown scepticism with anti vaccination views. 

I'm not a lockdown sceptic! They definitely work. I just think they'll be a time when it will be counter productive.

[stuartbert two hats]

41 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Fully back you on this. Not a clue what he is on about. I think you did a good thing, infact you objectively did so thank you. Think the other guy needs a lie down.

Upvote.

[stuartbert two hats]

I don't know if anyone else knows anything about running websites at large scale, but there's a principle where if you're trying to maximise throughput, you sacrifice running things in quite the order you would like. 

In other words, if you try to make sure a very strict order is applied, you go slower.

In other words, booking your 68, nearly 69 year old mother a slot when appointments are clearly going out in the 65+ bracket isn't just not-selfish, it's also helping the NHS vaccinate the nation more quickly - a good deed for society as a whole.

[Paul ™]

42 minutes ago, xxialac said:

I've just made a block booking of the biggest site for a Stag Party next weekend.

Just ordered a load of tests for Number 10

[BobWillis]

43 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Do you not see the hypocrisy at play? 

People saying they will break rules are consigning people to death according to some on here. Failing to follow an instruction that leads to a vaccine and your a martyr.

Give your head a wobble. 

[Mellotr0n]

8 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I don't know if anyone else knows anything about running websites at large scale, but there's a principle where if you're trying to maximise throughput, you sacrifice running things in quite the order you would like. 

In other words, if you try to make sure a very strict order is applied, you go slower.

In other words, booking your 68, nearly 69 year old mother a slot when appointments are clearly going out in the 65+ bracket isn't just not-selfish, it's also helping the NHS vaccinate the nation more quickly - a good deed for society as a whole.

Well, quite. I apologise to the thread for my overly emotive reaction but I just couldn’t believe the stance being taken, given the situation. 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

23 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Yeah let’s not pretend it wasn’t you that started all this fella. 

You’ve ignored one of the main points which destroys your argument - there was a MASSIVE amount of free slots for TOMORROW.

So therefore you are genuinely arguing that it’s better no one gets vaccinated than if we don’t manage to do things quite perfectly in order, aren’t you?

I made an observation you didn't like it and you came out swinging. Its nothing about empty slots it's about the hypocrisy of breaking rules and guidance. 

Its not about a fixation on the order it's done it's all about following the guidance. 

We're all in this together except when we're not. 

 

Edited February 12, 2021 by RobertProsineckisLighter

[Mellotr0n]

11 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

I made an observation you didn't like it and you came out swinging. Its nothing about empty slots it's about the hypocrisy of breaking rules and guidance. 

Its not about a fixation on the order it's done it's all about following the guidance. 

We're all in this together except when we're not. 

 

Hypocrisy? You seem to be ascribing views to me about things that I don’t think I’ve taken a stance on?

You said she was queue jumping when she wasn’t.

Please enlighten me on what else I’ve said recently in this thread about sticking/not sticking to the rules.

You appear to have created quite an eloborate strawman in your mind.

The NHS website allowed my mother to book her jab - no rules broken. It was clear the wording simply hadn’t been updated. I was aware that the switch to over 65s was imminent, it seems perhaps you were not, which is obviously not a stick to beat you with. The switch had been made, the press release simply hadn’t been sent yet.   

Again, why not save a little face now and acknowledge that - with the facts you now possess - it was a misjudged and poorly thought-out post? 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[Leyrulion]

Ignore button is there for a reason guys. You don't have to go back and forwards about who's right on the internet all night. 

 

[danmarks]

Its enlightening to read some of these comments. Some people dont come across how they possibly think they do. I genuinely hoped this corona virus would mostly bring out the best in people and maybe a new way of living in slightly more manageable way. Even efests seems to have become a back and forth bickering ground of im shouting loudest i am totally right and all opinions not mine are wrong.

A side effect of this eventually is thst people will stop visiting the forum. Im sure Neil will thank you all for that. 

Its a challenging time for everyone and people need to do what they feel is right but bloody hell allow the fact you might not feel the same without either of you actually being right or wrong on everything

 

 

[danmarks]

And not just the latest spat by the way.  Its becoming quite a theme 

 

[Mellotr0n]

1 minute ago, danmarks said:

And not just the latest spat by the way.  Its becoming quite a theme 

 

Again - I’ve apologised for my part in it - a mum getting the vaccine is an emotive subject and the other person’s stance really set me off.

I don’t apologise at all for my stance, but I do apologise for the way it was put across. Apologies. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

11 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Hypocrisy? You seem to be ascribing views to me about things that I don’t think I’ve taken a stance on?

Please enlighten me on what else I’ve said about sticking/not sticking to the rules.

You appear to have created quite an eloborate strawman in your mind.

The NHS website allowed my mother to book her jab - no rules broken. It was clear the wording simply hadn’t been updated. I was aware that the switch to over 65s was imminent, it seems perhaps you were not, which is obviously not a stick to beat you with.

Again, why not save a little face now and acknowledge that - with the facts you now possess - it was a misjudged and poorly thought-out post? 

This thread is full of hypocrisy when it's ok to break rules and not break rules - perhaps not you specifically. 

I don't need to save any face. At the time what you did was not inline with the current guidance, the way you posted it shows full well you know it was against the guidance you acknowledge that yourself. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by RobertProsineckisLighter