When will this shit end?

[steviewevie]

This guy's live tweets of parliamentary debates/votes are always good entertainment...

 

[squirrelarmy]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Why do you feel so strongly about using exclusive language?

I don’t but you obviously do. 

[ace56blaa]

36 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's one of those things where my opinion doesn't really feel represented, because it's not clearly one side of the political spectrum or the other. I'm concerned at the erosions of some of our rights. I'm really concerned at the idea that we can't meet more than six people in our own home, but basically can in a pub (as long as we don't arrive together). I understand why: one contributes to the economy, the other doesn't. But it's basically saying "you can see people as long as you can afford to pay" and that's a slippery slope. I feel the government would be just as happy for me to host 12 people at home if I sent the local pub £200. I am happy to given up some of liberty because of public health issues. I'm less okay with it for commercial interests.

But of course, all the "small government" agitators that don't like this stuff are mostly huge fans of big business and don't want to complain about the way they are being propped up. So the argument is only every made to say why we should still be able to meet at home, and not that we shouldn't be able to meet in pubs either.

 

Yeah I definitely agree on a lot of this point, as someone who doesn't particularly like pubs and can't afford restaurants at the moment, as well as not really being ready to return to either, I think it is concerning that the government has consistently treated these places like they need to protected at all costs, while caring less about you meeting your family or other industries like theatre and film. 

However the rule of six, still applies inside pubs etc, and if a establishment is following the rules you will still be social distanced from the other customers and wearing mask in some places etc. Also the fact is that you can still all your friends, all your family, anyone you want to see. You just have to make choices about who you see and when, yes it's annoying but feels like a minor inconvenience to most. 

To me, it's less restrictive than I'm currently acting, as we haven't started having friends in our house and I've only met up with more than six people outside once. (and tbh that occasion was troubling, because friends were hugging and sharing snacks, so I didn't really think it was a good idea in hindsight)

But yeah the government's economic priorities are very concerning. Considering that we are getting outbreaks in pubs and restaurants, and the eat out to help out may have caused this spike, but I don't think the rule of 6 is a bad idea, just short of what is needed to stop the spread
 

[Fuzzy Afro]

8 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

I don’t but you obviously do. 

 

I just want people to use the appropriate language, which is face coverings. Look at any UK government document, you can choose to wear a mask (and most people including me do take this option), but you can also use a "scarf, bandana, religious garment or hand made cloth covering" instead of an actual mask.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own

 

 

[Ozanne]

11 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

I don’t but you obviously do. 

Haha I was thinking the same thing. We know what we are supposed to wear, saying mask or covering doesn’t change that. What a strange hill to die on. 

[DeanoL]

2 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

However the rule of six, still applies inside pubs etc, and if a establishment is following the rules you will still be social distanced from the other customers and wearing mask in some places etc. Also the fact is that you can still all your friends, all your family, anyone you want to see. You just have to make choices about who you see and when, yes it's annoying but feels like a minor inconvenience to most. 
 

I think even the best pubs, that are "following the rules" though are still seating everyone that arrives together, together. There's no way 6 of you from 6 different households can meet at a pub or restaurant and get seated in such a way that you're 2m away from everyone else. Or even 1m away. If anyone knows a restaurant in the Midlands that offers that please let me know!

Yet even if I had a lounge large enough to do that for 8 people, I wouldn't be allowed. 

I agree though, I'd find it more logical if they were actually enforcing the rules properly in pubs and restaurants - like going around and properly checking up and shutting places down for seating people together. As then you could argue it makes sense as they can't realistically enforce homes in the same way, so have to set an arbitrary limit.

[Fuzzy Afro]

Just now, Ozanne said:

Haha I was thinking the same thing. We know what we are supposed to wear, saying mask or covering doesn’t change that. What a strange hill to die on. 

 

Instead of a mask you can wear a "scarf, bandana, religious garment or hand made cloth covering" instead of an actual mask.

[squirrelarmy]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

Instead of a mask you can wear a "scarf, bandana, religious garment or hand made cloth covering" instead of an actual mask.

Can I wear the skin of my vanquished foes as long as it covers my face?

[Fuzzy Afro]

Just now, squirrelarmy said:

Can I wear the skin of my vanquished foes as long as it covers my face?

Ask Priti Patel

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

Instead of a mask you can wear a "scarf, bandana, religious garment or hand made cloth covering" instead of an actual mask.

People are using the word ‘mask’ as an all encompassing term for all face masks and coverings. It’s really not such a strange thing. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

People are using the word ‘mask’ as an all encompassing term for all face masks and coverings. It’s really not such a strange thing. 

Why not just say face covering then?

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

People are using the word ‘mask’ as an all encompassing term for all face masks and coverings. It’s really not such a strange thing. 

Same as asking my mates if we’re heading out for beers. We will be on ale, lager, win or gin. Beers is just another way of saying let’s meet for drinks. 
 

“Masks” is a lot quicker to type than “face coverings” too so I’m going to take the easy option. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

In other news, the pfizer CEO says they’ll have a yes/no answer on whether their vaccine is any good by the end of October. Anyone know if that’s one of the vaccines that the UK has preordered doses for?

[Ozanne]

5 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Same as asking my mates if we’re heading out for beers. We will be on ale, lager, win or gin. Beers is just another way of saying let’s meet for drinks. 
 

“Masks” is a lot quicker to type than “face coverings” too so I’m going to take the easy option. 

Exactly. It’s easier to say and type.

[zahidf]

7 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

In other news, the pfizer CEO says they’ll have a yes/no answer on whether their vaccine is any good by the end of October. Anyone know if that’s one of the vaccines that the UK has preordered doses for?

Yup they've got a preorder for that one 

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

Exactly. It’s easier to say and type.

So we can use the word “mask” as a proxy term for all allowable face coverings?

 

In which case I can drop my opposition to the word. 

[incident]

8 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

In other news, the pfizer CEO says they’ll have a yes/no answer on whether their vaccine is any good by the end of October. Anyone know if that’s one of the vaccines that the UK has preordered doses for?

It is. Though I think something like 30 million doses (as opposed to 60 million for the Oxford vaccine).

The US and EU have ordered a shed load of it as well, so I don't know where we would stand in the "queue".

Edited September 14, 2020 by incident

[steviewevie]

9 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

In other news, the pfizer CEO says they’ll have a yes/no answer on whether their vaccine is any good by the end of October. Anyone know if that’s one of the vaccines that the UK has preordered doses for?

think they have, but I think it's pretty feckin dodgy that wealthier countries can preorder this stuff...vaccine nationalim...but entirely predictable I guess.

[steviewevie]

11 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

In other news, the pfizer CEO says they’ll have a yes/no answer on whether their vaccine is any good by the end of October. Anyone know if that’s one of the vaccines that the UK has preordered doses for?

 

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

think they have, but I think it's pretty feckin dodgy that wealthier countries can preorder this stuff...vaccine nationalim...but entirely predictable I guess.

 

but there is this..

https://www.gavi.org/covid19/covax-facility

[DeanoL]

12 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

People are using the word ‘mask’ as an all encompassing term for all face masks and coverings. It’s really not such a strange thing. 

I dunno, I think he has a point actually.

Lots of people will have medical exemptions for "masks" specifically. Whereas the number of exemptions for "face coverings" is going to be a lot lower. I do think there's an element of people thinking they don't have a wear anything because they can't wear a mask.

While I appreciate it's a tad pedantic on here, when it's obvious what someone means, to keep correcting them, but more broadly I think there's a valid point.

Kind of like how we often complain about "Boris" on here, when "Boris" is an artificial construct designed to come across as charmingly bumbling and relatable. When all his actual friends call him "Al". But you don't see me reply "Johnson" or Neil reply "Spaffer" every time someone says "Boris".

[squirrelarmy]

Mask is already a very generic word which can have a wide range of meanings. 
 

When used in this context everyone knows what you mean. You can have specific masks like Gas Mask, Surgical Mask, Gimp Mask but they are all still masks. 
 

The term mask actually means to cover something. It’s used in decorating a lot. I come across it a lot while using illustrator and photoshop. 
 

There’s no confusion from the term apart from those who are looking for an excuse to stir up conversations and create drama where there doesn’t need to be any. 

[stuartbert two hats]

11 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

So we can use the word “mask” as a proxy term for all allowable face coverings?

 

In which case I can drop my opposition to the word. 

That's what we've been doing.

[steviewevie]

 

[Fuzzy Afro]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

think they have, but I think it's pretty feckin dodgy that wealthier countries can preorder this stuff...vaccine nationalim...but entirely predictable I guess.

I mean, if we are all back to normal in the UK next year then no ones going to be complaining. Besides, once we have one or more that works and is approved, they’re going to be churning them out at the rate of knots. Just because the UK and other G20 type countries will get them first doesn’t mean other places won’t get them at all. 
 

I think I read that some investors are effectively paying to manufacture vaccines before they’ve been approved. Usually you wouldn’t bother mass manufacturing them until the regulator gives you the go ahead, but we don’t want to waste time producing them after approval here. This means some investors are gambling by funding the production, knowing that they’ll have wasted their money if their vaccine fails the trials. 

[zahidf]