Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

dilligaf

Regulars
  • Content Count

    18,160
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    28

Posts posted by dilligaf


  1. 2 minutes ago, Declan said:

    It's a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of dyslexia to blame it for these errors. Handwriting at speed I may write "claer" instead of "clear", but not slowly painting it on a road. I may not spot the error in a dense typed paragraph but not in four foot letters!

    Is there an error in that last bit ?


  2. I didn’t post  this earlier as I thought it was fake. Having now seen the pic from a different angle I am guessing it is actually a fuck up

    9EBCC659-B5D7-4ECE-B35E-48B957748464.png


  3. 8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

    But we don't know if he was correct with his figures or not because he doesn't say what they were about or where they came from.  The nearest I could find out was that they might come from a tweet that was supposed to be from Mike Tyson and turned out not to be.  Reuters' fact check on the story and the actual figures is here.  In any case you also need to consider White on White violence as well, which that 'tweet' didn't.

    Of course if your main concern is whether you agree or disagree with something rather than whether it is true or not, these things don't matter and you can live your life untouched by reality.

    Google again and you may find the figures are accurate 


  4. 15 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

    The only person who set Stu Peters up was a certain Stu Peters.  And he did it by posting on an obscure website called Manx Forums:

    And then people rang up later to challenge what he had written and he was unable to deal with it.  Partly of course because he literally didn't know what he was talking about.  If you start quoting as definite 'facts' something you only vaguely remember and didn't bother to check[1], but which conveniently happen to match your own prejudices, then you're not going to be able to defend those facts whether they are true or not.

    Stu may or may not have realised he was dropping himself in it[2], but a broadcaster as experienced as he is should really know that if you write something controversial on social media, then people may challenge you on it where they can.  There have been ridiculous defences that some people have been making of him, either by suggesting that he's a decrepit old pensioner who should be left alone or that it's somehow unfair that people ringing in shouldn't be better prepared than he was.  Both these are simply implying that he isn't up to his job and insulting his professionalism.

     

    [1]  I'm not sure that he even wrote most of that post himself.  The faint blue highlight behind the second and third paragraphs suggests that those were copied from another source.

    [2] Others did.  The next comment after that was @TheTeapot saying "Fucking hell".

    But Stu was correct with his figures wasn’t he ?

    Surely the fact that it did not fit the latest mold , says more. 

    Think I will buy a couple of bandwagons as they seem to be always full

     


  5. 5 hours ago, Declan said:

    That would be an absurdity. There's a clear distinction between removing a statue meant to glorify and honour an individual and tearing down a building that is still in use.

    But then that's what people have been doing throughout this discussion. Taking a reasonable argument like removing slave owners statues and saying that's the same as razing Liverpool to the ground ... then producing a absurd example that isn't the same. People say George Floyd shouldn't have been killed and you say "what about..." and name some unrelated death; people say "you shouldn't say coloured" and you say "ahh what about people of colour". People say "the protest yesterday was peaceful" and people say "what about social distancing" so they say "we were socially distanced" and it's "what about people who can't go to funerals".  It's like people want to kill off anti-racist action by a thousand nitpicks and whatabouts. Who would want to do that?

    So just how old are you ? You sound like student.

    • Like 1

  6. 1 hour ago, Mr Newbie said:

    If you’ve heard the clip (it’s on FB now) it isn’t really that controversial. It seems like some sad teenager full of her own self righteousness and her silly student mates who have nothing to do currently have blown it up out of all proportion. It wasn’t a classic Stu Peters fauxpar of the inferior Jeremy Clarkson variety sadly. He even agreed with her at one point. This has all the classic signals of a #metoo “2” style social media trend about it. Everyone is jumping on board claiming they’ve been affected even if they’re very clearly white. 

    Absolutely agree. We won’t even be allowed to call them “snowflakes” soon, 

    • Like 2
    • Haha 2

  7. 2 minutes ago, Mr Newbie said:

    But you understand that a care home is Gods waiting room? So many things will ultimately get you including Covid-19? 

    So my first assessment was correct. You are a twat. How do you sleep at night?


  8. Just now, Mr Newbie said:

    So did they not expect relatives in a care home not to die of something at some time? 

    You are a twat. I just hope to hell I don’t know you in “ real life “ Now fucking dare  you :pinch:

    • Like 2
    • Confused 2

  9. 13 minutes ago, wrighty said:

    There's a lot of difficult concepts and difficult decisions being made here.  I'll have a go at a further explanation.  Possible long post ahead.

    First the difference between 'public health' and what is generally known to be a medical consultation.  During this pandemic so far I've been involved in a fair bit of the former - modelling the numbers, trying to predict how many patients we'll have to look after, what to do if we get overwhelmed - how, for example, you decide on who gets the last ventilator if more than one person needs it - predicting how much oxygen we'll need... For this function I'm not thinking about individual patients - it's all numbers.  Sorry if that sounds dispassionate, but it has to be otherwise you'd go mad! We have about 5.2% of our population over 80, that's 4000 odd people.  I'm estimating how many of them might be frail, and what the fatality rate will be if they catch covid.  Numbers, numbers, numbers.  No people.  In my regular day job I frequently see patients over 80 - in that case they're individuals and I'll try to do my best for them, as if they were my mother or father.  But in the public health function it's all about maximising the health of the whole population, even though you know some will get ill and some will die.  Which is why we talk, perhaps insensitively, about blips, and clusters, and outbreaks etc.  I realise that all these 'cases' are somebody's mother/father/brother/sister but it doesn't help to dwell on that when doing the numbers.

    Covid is not the only threat to health.  It may be the most prominent one at the moment, but there's so much happening that doesn't make the news much that when trying to balance the overall health of the population you have to take into consideration.  On Radio 4 today there was a top UK cancer doctor saying how more people would be dying of cancer later on than will die of covid.  Many of the people dying of covid would be dead within a year or so anyway.  Once again, sorry to be blunt, and I know they're all important to their families etc, but so are the patients not getting proper treatment for their cancer because of all the covid preparations, or suffering with their arthritis because they can't have their hips replaced, or going blind because their cataracts can't be extracted...

    Then there's the economics.  Nobody likes to think that money is put before lives, but that's an emotional reaction, and emotions are best kept out of public policy decisions - it invariably leads to bad ones.  The fact is that if the economy tanks, with mass unemployment, nobody spending, nobody paying tax etc then we won't be able to afford a health service, or anything else.That will obviously have health consequences in the future and result in worse outcomes for individuals.

    There are of course other aspects - society, domestic violence, mental health, suicides... All of these things have to be considered when making decisions as to how to manage this pandemic to minimise the overall harm to the population.

    All the indications are that spread of coronavirus in the wider community here has slowed considerably and almost stopped. Nobody wanted an outbreak in a Nursing Home, and when that happens given the demographic that lives there it's inevitable that there will be multiple deaths.  But that doesn't mean you should continue the full lockdown based on the emotional reaction to that very (for many families) sad and distressing situation.  For the greater long-term good we have to get things going ASAP, while ensuring, by continuing the testing, tracing and isolation, that the spread remains minimal and manageable for the health service, and we never have to invoke the policy on ethical allocation of limited ITU resources that we were discussing the other day.

    This island is doing pretty well here.  There will inevitably be mistakes made at press conferences, there will inevitably be measures brought in which haven't necessarily been fully thought through because we simply don't have the luxury of a 3 month consultation period and multiple Tynwald debates on every single thing that is decided.  Everyone is doing their best, no-one is making decisions lightly, and we're using the best multi-source evidence we can get.  I'm not sure what else we could be doing.

    I appreciate you mean well and Of course I know how clued up you are.

    however if I  had a family member in Abbottswood ( sp)  I  would be devastated to see what was happening

     

    • Haha 1

  10. 2 minutes ago, quilp said:

    This "many more to come." You're referring to more possible deaths at Abbotswood, I presume, and not in the public domain. Unfortunately, it's quite probable though the sickest residents have wisely been transferred to Nobles and hopefully some will pull through. But for now, the recent spike of deaths have all been residents of the home and an exceptional case. The point in question is the risk to workers returning to their workplace. IoM government seem to think it's worth the perceived risk, and the danger has possibly lessened, as long as precautions are followed. It is a gamble, a tentative move to restoring some normalcy. At what point it would be safe for all is anyone's guess. 

    ££££


  11. 21 minutes ago, Cambon said:

    Sorry Dilli, but when looking at the statistics, only new cases, awaiting testing and active cases (to a degree) are important. Unfortunately, those poor people who have died (two of whom I knew), are unfortunate casualties. 

    Each and everyone of those 12 people were human beings with loving families. They are not just fucking  statistics, they were real people with real families. 
    How dare anyone just talk about them as statistics. 

    What has happened to us  for people to use numbers instead of names. Society has degenerated of late as it seems “social media” has taken over from decency and morals 

    • Like 1

  12. 19 minutes ago, Kopek said:

    You Thommo must have heard something that wasn't said!

    Alex BBC asked...What protection there would be vulnerable people?

    HQ referred to his earlier statement that H&S would police the sites and that one could choose not to work.

    If they came under pressure to work, H&S could step in to resolve safety and distancing concerns the person may have.

    Gary Roberts said the police would not be on the sites, that would be H&S.

    At no time was HQ asked what would happen if the employer fired the worker.

    The remit of H&S is, surprisingly, H&S. It does not have any powers regarding contract law or unfair dismissal .

    HQ was not asked nor did he say what would happen if someone was fired for refusing to work.

     

    Consider........

    A small building firm has been using the Govt scheme to subsidise their wage bill, they have applied for the £3000 grant.

    Now that they have work again, they will not get that subsidy and possibly, not the grant. That puts them under pressure to cut their costs to suit the level of work and the full cost of the wages.

    Do they keep on paying the person who has refused to work £££ to stay at home? or do they fire him because there's not enough work for the full workforce anyway?

    If fired it used to be  that you could not get JSA for xx weeks, has the wage subsidy rule been made to negate this? I doubt it!

    There is nothing the H&S can do about this situation.

    A building firm would not be considered self employed would it. That is what the 3K is aimed at


  13. 34 minutes ago, quilp said:

    "They" are hardly saying it's safe to "ease off." That wasn't the message I got anyway. Something was obviously amiss at Abbotswood and maybe the distancing and isolation rules weren't acted upon soon enough. Who knows, maybe there'll be an inquiry in time. Clusters occur, as with most of the yearly viruses.

    The workforce isn't returning in "droves" either, it is partial returns to some trades and services. The figures would suggest the death toll isn't "rising fast" if anything, it has stabilised, with Abbotswood being up to now an exception.

    Did you actually listen to the broadcast? Not one of them suggested it was "safe" the emphasis actually was on maintaining caution and there'll be a monitored progression of workers returning to their jobs where the risk is considered lower within certain environments.

    As I said earlier, there's another epidemic at large, that is people only hearing what they want to hear and what they don't know they'll make up. 

    I think Cannon fodder was not too far  of the mark.


  14. 10 minutes ago, quilp said:

    Because of the cluster. It seems you're failing to understand the circumstances of that isolated blip. 

    Not a “ blip” to a dozen families though and many more to come.

    • Like 1

  15. 6 minutes ago, quilp said:

    "They" are hardly saying it's safe to "ease off." That wasn't the message I got anyway. Something was obviously amiss at Abbotswood and maybe the distancing and isolation rules weren't acted upon soon enough. Who knows, maybe there'll be an inquiry in time. Clusters occur, as with most of the yearly viruses.

    The workforce isn't returning in "droves" either, it is partial returns to some trades and services. The figures would suggest the death toll isn't "rising fast" if anything, it has stabilised, with Abbotswood being up to now an exception.

    Did you actually listen to the broadcast? Not one of them suggested it was "safe" the emphasis actually was on maintaining caution and there'll be a monitored progression of workers returning to their jobs where the risk is considered lower within certain environments.

    As I said earlier, there's another epidemic at large, that is people only hearing what they want to hear and what they don't know they'll make up. 

    The figure isn’t rising much.? FFS it had almost doubled in two days.


  16. 13 minutes ago, Cambon said:

    You had better re-read my post and troll back through this thread then, because it is all there. It is also fact. 

    Disregarding this thread you have posted some complete crap lately. You never did before, so I am concerned for your state of mind. I always looked up to you and consumed your opinions. Not sure these days and makes me wonder if someone is using your log in.


  17. 3 minutes ago, Cambon said:

    Over the course of the last ten days, or so, it has been announced that one person from Abbotswood died in hospital. It has also been announced that  Abbotswood accounted 37 covid cases at that time. If you look back through this thread, it is all mentioned. At the time, there were 37 Abbotswood, 47 healthcare workers (hospital related), which meant only about 25 active cases in the community (apart from the Abbotswood cluster). This is all part of the reason that the virus is seen as being under control. 

    You are almost always a smart poster, but I am not sure about this latest stuff.


  18. 2 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said:

    I don't think it could have done anything different - That is the problem - it doesn't have the money or the method to get money to help out business in a crisis like this.

    We can’t print money. 
    I have tried, but the reverse does not match the obverse.or whatever

    • Like 1

  19. Just now, Boris Johnson said:

    Looking at the longer term when this is all over, if it ever gets to that stage, I think the biggest problem will be the island attracting new businesses. The gov has shown its hand as to what help it can give and that fact will be around for ever in every internet search anyone does about the island if they were considering setting up here.

    I disagree. What do you think our Gov. could have done differently and why are you not in there sorting them out ?

    • Like 2

  20. 6 minutes ago, gettafa said:

    Social media? Is that like Facebook and stuff? Some of those pages (Hi Vader!) make Manx Forums look like a gentleman's debating society.

    Well not really,.

    I was in the  middle of a project when all this lock down started and was up in arms, but I have to say I've changed my mind somewhat. Yes, I have learned a lot about this virus and have had friends and relations succumbed to it. I'm certainly all for keeping it going a bit longer

    Plus I have rather taken to wondering about the house in me aul undies all day and living off peanut butter sandwiches again.

    We did not want that visual thanks. :lol:

    • Haha 1

  21. I have to say that this curve thing is bollocks. They reckon we are safe now to ease off, at the same time that the  “care” home has them dropping like flies. 
    Ian Wright is nobodies fool and the best poster by a mile on here, but I can’t for the life of me see how it is considered safe to let people back to work in droves. The death toll is rising fast and I can’t see that changing for some time. Maybe letting thousands go back to won’t change the death toll, but to my simple mind, we aren’t even halfway through this pandemic.


  22. 6 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

    They kid you that as voters we elect 24 independent members, then suddenly we end up with a conservative government & a Programme For Government nobody ever voted for

    It is not satisfactory

    Even though I am not wealthy, in business , or have a high IQ, I would vote Conservative every time

    • Like 1

  23. 1 minute ago, Non-Believer said:

    There's a few who we haven't heard a lot from, particularly recently. And is Ann Corlett still even in the House?

    I heard her last week asking a question and thought I recognised the voice.

    I won’t knock her as I know she is a nice lady married to a decent chap. Just maybe she should not have stood in the first place.

    • Like 1

  24. 4 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

    I think it's like then 'l's' in chilli, in the UK you can use one or two

    Others might find them completely useless

    No it isn’t. Acronyms are different
    dilligaf , is obviously, “ do I look like I give a fuck” dilligaf. :thumbsup:.

×
×
  • Create New...