The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[maxjam]

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

It's interesting to note that now, 70% of those in hospital are under the age of 65, whereas in January, only 35% were in that age range.

What is the actual number though?  Aren't hospitalizations really low atm?

If the vaccines have prevented a lot of the over 65s (take up has been higher than younger ages) from being hospitalised it is only natural that the percentage of under 65s will go despite not necessarily taking up anymore beds than they did before.

[Archied]

2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

I thought they were supposed to be some revolutionary new media outlet that wasn't afraid to broadcast unpopular opinions?

So the perpetually enraged will be expecting it to be their go-to channel for hearing what they want to hear. Not to have them point out that actually yes, the majority of the general public support extending the lockdown

?

 

Ah there you go , same old stereotypical assumptions ,suppose it’s just easier that way?‍♂️

[Anon]

4 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Despite all the people complaining, not one post was reported. 

Because no one actually wants to censor discussion. I'd bet that the people whinging about this would rather that no topics were out of bounds on this forum. The point is only being raised to highlight the hypocrisy of the situation. I can absolutely guarantee that if the right leaning members started to wander into more political posts your mod inbox would fill up very, very quickly.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Anon

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

Chief NHS guy just said 1% of hospital beds are taken up by COVID  - let that sink in.

Lockdowns and restrictions were to protect the NHS and the most vulnerable.

We've had freedom day for the 21st June, now it's terminus day for the 19th July, I can't wait to see what they label the 16th August.

[RoyMac5]

49 minutes ago, Eddie said:

It's interesting to note that now, 70% of those in hospital are under the age of 65, whereas in January, only 35% were in that age range.

Hardly surprising as they are the ones mostly least vaccinated. And as I previously posted:

From the Beeb 5 days ago:

"There are just under 1,000 people with coronavirus in hospitals in the UK, up about 5% from a low point a week ago.

That's far below the peak of nearly 40,000 people in January. And NHS Providers say the people who are going in aren't as seriously ill as they were in early waves. They are younger, or don't require intensive care as much - and they're coming out sooner."

Edited June 15, 2021 by RoyMac5

[GboroRam]

24 minutes ago, Anon said:

Because no one actually wants to censor discussion. I'd bet that the people whinging about this would rather that no topics were out of bounds on this forum. The point is only being raised to highlight the hypocrisy of the situation. I can absolutely guarantee that if the right leaning members started to wander into more political posts your mod inbox would fill up very, very quickly.

What I'm saying is, if anything objectionable is posted, the report button is the fastest way to sort it. 

It's fine to think the politics should be removed. It's fine to report it. 

It's less fine to complain but not help the mods by reporting content you feel is not in line with the rules. 

[Eddie]

36 minutes ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

Chief NHS guy just said 1% of hospital beds are taken up by COVID  - let that sink in.

Lockdowns and restrictions were to protect the NHS and the most vulnerable.

We've had freedom day for the 21st June, now it's terminus day for the 19th July, I can't wait to see what they label the 16th August.

"Four days after the start of the grouse-shooting season"?

[Norman]

26 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

What I'm saying is, if anything objectionable is posted, the report button is the fastest way to sort it. 

It's fine to think the politics should be removed. It's fine to report it. 

It's less fine to complain but not help the mods by reporting content you feel is not in line with the rules. 

We don't care for the majotiry of the rules. The rules are bendy and blurry. 

I just don't want the thread shutting because it gets personal, which again is a blurry rule, but one that seems to get enforced. 

Last night was just the same posters trying to get a reaction. So I challenged it. No point reporting it.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Norman

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

What is the actual number though?  Aren't hospitalizations really low atm?

If the vaccines have prevented a lot of the over 65s (take up has been higher than younger ages) from being hospitalised it is only natural that the percentage of under 65s will go despite not necessarily taking up anymore beds than they did before.

Just over a thousand.

I'm certainly not 'supporting' the government on this - I was as dismayed as everyone else that the so-called 'lockdown' (it isn't, and hasn't been a lockdown for months - that term is emotive to the point of being hysterical) would continue for a further 4 weeks - I'm just pointing out the statistical reasoning behind the decision.

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

7 minutes ago, Eddie said:

"Four days after the start of the grouse-shooting season"?

He's not like that, Bojo loves birds

[Stive Pesley]

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

'Woke loonies' are the idiot twitter minority that try to cancel things before they have even aired a minute of content or go after advertisers when thay doesn't work. 

Which they are perfectly entitled to do

I think they are idiots too, and I frequently roll my eyes at the cliched loony leftwingers trying to police everything they disagree with online

But I don't let it bother me like you do. Because you're too busy supporting free speech ?

 

 

 

[G STAR RAM]

3 hours ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Perhaps folk who are so vehemently opposed to this extension might wish to consider writing to their MP about it? It occurs to me that this would be a more productive use of their time than spending all day, every day moaning about it on a football forum.

As an industry we have been lobbying our local MPs on and off for 14 months. 

Generic responses and regular refusals to provide any evidence requested to support the measures in place.

Just 'we've seen the evidence to support our stance' type responses. 

[maxjam]

37 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Which they are perfectly entitled to do

I think they are idiots too, and I frequently roll my eyes at the cliched loony leftwingers trying to police everything they disagree with online

But I don't let it bother me like you do. Because you're too busy supporting free speech ?

 

I can see the irony in calling out the woke loonies for using their free speech prevent someone elses free speech - but there are obviously caveats.  You can't yell 'fire!' in a crowded building or go around slandering people etc.

If you don't support free speech, especially in the current climate then you run the risk of losing it.  If you let the march of censorship progress thinking it doesn't effect you - you'll only discover its to late personally when there is no one left to defend you. 

I think the tide is slowly starting to turn now as more and more people are becoming aware of how powerful the twitter minority are.  It's not a discussion for this thread but it is good to see things like this start to happen;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-57076093

[Archied]

4 hours ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

So much for your supposed apolitical standpoint ?

In answer to your question, maybe it's because it would involve interacting with people like you who constantly label them as 'woke' or 'loonies' or other such puerile terms, whilst prattling on about other folk being incapable of holding an 'adult conversations'. 

 

Is that any different from labelling people right wing , racist , homophobic and the like , sad state of affairs really ,which came first the chicken or the egg??‍♂️, seems we are stuck with it and maybe it is social media , in all reality I’m pretty sure that there’s people on here that  would seem very different to each other in a proper sat face to face conversation 

[Comrade 86]

2 hours ago, GboroRam said:

What I'm saying is, if anything objectionable is posted, the report button is the fastest way to sort it. 

It's fine to think the politics should be removed. It's fine to report it. 

It's less fine to complain but not help the mods by reporting content you feel is not in line with the rules. 

[Comrade 86]

24 minutes ago, Archied said:

Is that any different from labelling people right wing , racist , homophobic and the like

Isn't that essentially what I've said? In so much, I was addressing the gobsmacking irony of the post in question though that seems to have escaped one or two on here.

27 minutes ago, Archied said:

which came first the chicken or the egg

The egg, clearly. Dinosaurs laid them ?‍♂️

[Gone]

Just 3 weeks to flatten the curve,
Just lockdown to save Xmas,
Just tier 4 to save New Year,
Just until the vulnerable are jabbed,
Just stay home until Easter,
Just wait for June 21st

Just four more weeks………..yeah sure 

[Stive Pesley]

40 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I think the tide is slowly starting to turn now as more and more people are becoming aware of how powerful the twitter minority are.  It's not a discussion for this thread but it is good to see things like this start to happen;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-57076093

Meh - that's just a waste of time. What does it actually add to the situation when Universities already have very stringent policies and procedures in place?

eg 

https://www.Derby.ac.uk/about/governance/policies/freedom-of-speech-policy/
https://www.Derby.ac.uk/about/governance/policies/external-speakers-policy/

Same as this forum has it's rules and policies around what you can and can't say

Would you be happy if the government set up  a system to fine private internet forum owners for not allowing free speech?

 

 

[maxjam]

2 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Meh - that's just a waste of time. What does it actually add to the situation when Universities already have very stringent policies and procedures in place?

eg 

https://www.Derby.ac.uk/about/governance/policies/freedom-of-speech-policy/
https://www.Derby.ac.uk/about/governance/policies/external-speakers-policy/

It has made Universities accountable for the student unions as well - that have been cancelling speakers up and down the country.  

'Under the plans, new freedom of speech and academic duties would be placed on universities and, for the first time, on student unions.

Individuals would be given a right to seek compensation through the courts if the freedom of speech duties of an institution or student union had been breached.'

I have no idea whether all universities are the same, whether Derby have their own policies or whether their policies have recently been updated - but we have all heard stories in the media recently about certain individuals having their speeches cancelled at various universities and this new legislation should help prevent this in the future.

 

14 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Same as this forum has it's rules and policies around what you can and can't say

Would you be happy if the government set up  a system to fine private internet forum owners for not allowing free speech?

 

It depends...

If you join a football forum and politics is banned then you know what you signed up for. 

On the other hand Twitter, Facebook, Youtube etc have grown too large and powerful however and become a worldwide public platforms, to then start enforcing their own agenda and ban people from using the platform along ideological beliefs is a dangerous path to go down.  

Capitalism is a good thing, it has pulled large parts of the world out of poverty.  But unregulated capitalism leads to massive inequality.  Twitter, Facebook, Youtube etc are great inventions but we have more than reached the time that they need to be regulated.

Anyway, this is gonna be my last post in this thread however as we're well off topic, I hope the post stays up long enough for you to read it!  Happy to carry on in PMs should you want to.

[B4ev6is]

8 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

The government have never said they can’t sell season tickets. The problem for many clubs, Derby included, is that if there are restrictions on attendances at the start of the season, they may already have enough/too many rolling over from last season.

Well tell me how come Derby have said they are waiting for goverment approval then.

They cant say like 3 days before season due to start to say you can now start selling season tickets.

They cost the club enough in lost revenue unless lucky enough let supporters in earlier on in last season.