Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - AllAroundTheWorld

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 168  Next >
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 20, 2021, 06:08:05 AM »
I had to get the vaccine. The clock is ticking. I can feel the devil trying to grab my soul.

There's still time.  Quick!  Get some Ivermectin and a salt lick to alleviate the deadly symptoms of the vaccine!
Ivermectin doesn’t cure all the symptoms of Covid.

It’s quite good if you’re a little horse though.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 17, 2021, 07:50:10 PM »
The lawyer says that federal law states that it should have become immediately available when it was licensed.
And stack has provided the legal definition of what that means.
And a different lawyer - who is also a lawyer - is saying that there is no need to expedite this request. It’s interesting how selectively you regard people’s qualifications as significant depending on whether they say something which fits your agenda.

Are you a lawyer? Please answer with only a yes or no.


Are you?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 17, 2021, 07:11:39 PM »
Holy shit.
It’s genuinely incredible how much pointless debate Tom can spin out of the slightest semantic subtlety.
It’s baffling that people continue to engage with it.

It’s clear this request is being dealt with.
It’s equally clear that the only dispute is whether it’s a request they should expedite. That’s about it.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 16, 2021, 09:13:37 PM »
The materials are available for disclosure, it’s just not being expedited. Whats so hard to understand here?
I’m honestly wondering if this whole exchange is rooted in Tom not understanding what “expedite” means.

Thorks got a point.
Not really. He’s got a bad case of confirmation bias and he’s operating in the sceptical context. Something which he and other FE people do very selectively. They don’t apply that much scrutiny to anything else.

What possible need do people have that need them to go 100km vertically into the air?
No one “needs” to climb Everest, or go to Antarctica. But humans have something in them, a spirit of adventure which drives us to do these things. To boldly go, to coin a phrase.

And what do they see apart from the sky going from blue to black?
They see the globe earth as it really is. They get the experience of weightlessness. They get a perspective on the earth which still very few people get. I think a lot of people would want that experience if they could.

And if people think space tourism is going to convince flat earthers that the earth is round
I don’t think that. Some people’s cognitive dissonance is off the charts and they’re never going to accept the truth of the shape of the earth. Space tourism is another reason their position is untenable but as we see in this thread some people will dismiss any evidence which contradicts their worldview.

Going forward, humanity should concentrate on ways to travel that reduce our dependence on finite resources. Not waste them all and pollute our planet just to satisfy the wet dreams of a few
I largely agree, but I believe that as these things go Bezos’ rocket is relatively “green”.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 14, 2021, 07:53:17 AM »
Congratulations on scouring the internet for a source which backs up what you want to believe and ignoring the actual crux of the argument.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 14, 2021, 06:48:41 AM »
Yet you have been shown numerous times that they are counting people who died "with" Covid and not of Covid, unlike previous diseases.
And every time you have “shown” that it has been patiently explained to you that this is exactly how it works with other diseases.
It’s common for multiple causes to be recorded. In a regular flu season you don’t get young healthy people dying - or it’s incredibly rare. Do you grumble every year that all these flu deaths are really old, ill people who would have died anyway? If they were ill anyway and flu helped kick them out the door then it’s perfectly legitimate to record flu as one of the causes of death even if it was only a contributing factor. A person often has other diseases which will kill them at some point and then they then catch Covid and die. It’s true to say that were it not for the other diseases Covid wouldn’t have killed them. It’s also true to say that Covid was a factor in them dying sooner than they would otherwise have.
These Covid deaths aren’t all people having motorcycle crashes, it’s mostly people who have other conditions and Covid is a factor in them dying sooner than those other conditions would have killed them. Just like in a regular flu season. The difference is that flu has a significantly lower CFR in all age groups than Covid, which is why the data on excess deaths over the last 18 months is so clear.

But you can keep pretending not to understand any of this if you must.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: 2022 FIFA World Cup
« on: October 12, 2021, 09:45:35 AM »
Netherlands 6 – 0 Gibraltar

Goed zo, jongens.
You get that you played a "country" so small that if Thork lived there he'd probably get a game, right?

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 09, 2021, 03:06:48 PM »
and if this was someone else's idea, AATW would be starting thread after thread about how much he hates new rules
Wow. So you really think that if someone else suggested something which I clearly agree with - given that it was my suggestion - then I’d disagree with it? ???
Seriously, why do you think so dimly of me?
You have posted publicly about how I was initially a pain in the arse but settled down to become a reasonable member of the forum.
And yet when I make what I think is a reasonable suggestion - one which you actually agree with - you start accusing me of trolling and “starting pointless drama”.
All I’ve done is start a thread in S&C, isn’t that’s the right thing to do in this situation?

You can still see the posts of someone you ignored - you just have to click on them to reveal them.
This answers the question I asked in my other thread - I saw this post after I wrote mine.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 09, 2021, 02:25:29 PM »
you need to keep in mind that imposing restrictions on users is something we don't do lightly. As one of our main champions of the "mods shouldn't do anything ever" cause, I'm sure you can see why.

You’re slightly misrepresenting me but I do think you are prone to be a little trigger happy at times. The board I run is a football one and someone on there compared the mods to referees. You need to let the game flow, so to speak, but it can’t be a free for all. Getting the balance right between whistling every 2 minutes and spoiling the game and being so lenient that it ends up in a brawl is a tricky one. There are certain decisions you make which I disagree with. But I’ve been on the other end of that on the other board so I get that there are judgement calls to be made and whatever you do you’re going to have someone moan at you. Such is the life of a mod.

The "why" is very important here. When two members were complaining about abusive PMs, it seemed likely that this would grow into a widespread issue. If it does, then it becomes pretty obvious that something should be done. However, if you actively choose for your problems to continue (for example, by not choosing to ignore the one person that's annoying you), who are we to make you happy against your own will?
My problem hasn’t been one for a while. I started this thread 2 months ago and hadn’t had any abuse from said member since then so I thought the issue had been dealt with. The recent abusive DM suggests not.
If I do “ignore” then what does that do? Does that just mean the person can’t DM me or does it also mean I don’t see their posts in the fora? Because I do want to see their posts. I mean, I find them a bit irritating but sometimes they post something I feel I should reply to. Asking me to take the action feels like “victim blaming” (a phrase I generally can’t stand). Especially if you’re suggesting I take action which isn’t quite what I’m asking. I don’t want to “ignore” this poster, I want them to stop sending me abusive DMs. And I can’t think why closing this loophole where someone isn’t allowed to harass others on any of the the fora but can do so by DM with impunity is a bad idea.

Sorry - that's never going to happen. Rule change or not, it would always be down to you to do something.
Ok, fine. I would have to do something. I’d have to report the problem. Because you can’t see DMs. And I’m not asking you to build a whole mechanism where people can report DMs as they would a post, I just think your suggestion to extending that rule to DMs is the right thing to do.

You are asking for a more complicated process to be implemented, for your sole benefit
I am not. I think that rule 2 is a reasonable one and should extend to DMs. Why should someone be able to harass another poster by DM? How is that a good thing for the board? Even if we agree it’s rare, is there any up side to people being able to do that?

It is difficult to believe that you're doing it for anything else than drama or, as Thork suggested, revenge.
We’ve had the conversation about you thinking the worst of me, I thought we were past that. It’s not about “drama” because I’m not a teenager. And it’s not about revenge because I’m not asking for this poster to be banned or warned. I’m not asking for any action to be taken against them but I am asking for your help to stop them harassing me.
IF the ignore feature blocks said poster from sending me DMs but still allows me to see their posts then I guess that’s an acceptable solution. But I still think that extending Rule 2 to DMs is the right thing. Yes it would benefit me but I also think it’s the right thing to do.

there's not enough evidence of this being a big enough issue to restrict everyone's use of the forum for the future.
Is it restrictive though? Is there any up side to allowing posters to be harassed by DM? Note the difference between abused and harassed. The thread about Tom was there for ages before it was locked. It only became against the rules when he felt he was being harassed. This is the same. I’ve had several abusive messages from this post. I now feel he has crossed the line between abuse and harassment.

I believed you until the post I just quoted. You now made it clear that this is just another complaint about that one time you weren't allowed to break the rules.

No it isn’t. Why do you insist on thinking I have an ulterior motive all the time? I spent a fair amount of time here. I came here initially out of a sense of incredulity and I’ll admit my initial posts here were mostly “FE bad” because I thought you were all crackers. But when I got in to the culture of the place I settled down more and now mostly pass the time of day in the lower fora. It’s a reasonable way of wasting time during down time at work. It’s obviously in my interest that this place is better for me and for others. I don’t believe that a poster should be able to harass other posters in any way. I’ve yet to hear any good reason why this should be allowed.

If you could clarify whether ignore only blocks DMs, it it does then ok, that does solve my issue. If it affects my experience of the fora then it does not.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 09, 2021, 08:27:05 AM »
We currently have no rules governing PMs.

I know. I am suggesting you do. And above you seemed to agree that it would be a good idea:

My proposal would be to extend rule 2 - which already applies in CN, AR, etc. - to also encompass PMs. That way, if Thork wants to message me about his fetishes, he can, because it doesn't bother me, but the moment someone makes it clear they're feeling harassed, the sender should back off. Of course, this wouldn't apply retroactively, so anyone currently engaging in such cheerful exchanges would have time to adjust.

your case was much stronger before you revealed your true intentions just now).

I don’t know what that mean. My intention is to improve the board’s experience. Not just for me. A certain poster circumvents the rules about abusing other posters by sending them abusive PMs. I don’t believe that should be allowed. You have previously indicated you agree with me.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 08, 2021, 11:23:55 PM »
He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.
No, it's a stop to the messages I want.
I already told you how to do that. You weren't interested.
And I explained why. And I just have again.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 08, 2021, 10:08:50 PM »
He doesn't want to. He wants someone to use moderator powers on the perpetrator. Its not a stop to the messages he wants. It is revenge.
No, it's a stop to the messages I want. And as I said above I don't think I should have to do anything to make that happen.
When Tom ran crying to the mods to say that the bigger boys were being mean to him - in AR, which was within the rules - the mods did something. They didn't tell him that he should deal with it by keeping out of the thread in question. That was an option, but they took action to stop someone being harassed and as big a baby as I think Tom was being, that was probably the right thing to do.
I'm asking for the same here.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: October 08, 2021, 03:49:47 PM »
Oops, he did it again...

To be clear, I don't want a certain poster to be sending me abusive PMs because he can't control his toddler-like tendencies.

Please tell him to desist.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: October 08, 2021, 12:32:00 PM »
Jesus, the fact you think setting up fake scenery is somehow encouraging people to get this shot

I don't think that. I think the fact of him having the shot could encourage people to.
The set was just window dressing, it's completely irrelevant. And it's not the first time it's been used

What's your actual point here?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: October 08, 2021, 10:44:13 AM »
Why wouldn't he get the booster in the White House?
You think the people who do boosters go door to door?
I guess the set is for show, but I don't think the point of this was that he was doing it at the White House or wherever that's meant to be, but that he was having it at all - the point being to encourage others to.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: October 08, 2021, 10:20:55 AM »
You seriously think that the fact he's not actually having the booster in the White House (if that's what that is supposed to be) is a real zinger?

OK, dude...

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: October 08, 2021, 09:58:55 AM »
Remember the green screen presser outside? They are now just building sets.
Literally no idea what point you think you're making here.
Are you claiming they were trying to be deceptive? Pretty dumb to invite the press if so.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: October 05, 2021, 09:28:51 AM »
I'm positive you have the stats to support the statement that seatbelts did not reduce deaths
Look it up yourself.

Don't take my word for it.

The trendline for number of motor vehicle fatalities has remained relatively unchanged over the past 70 years.
Well, when you're right, you're right.
33,186 deaths in 1950, 36,56 in 2018.
Case closed!

...except of course you're ignoring that over that period car use went up 7 times and the population more than doubled.
And you're ignoring the big rise in deaths from 1950 to 1980 which has been going down ever since despite the continued increase in population and car usage. Are seatbelts solely responsible for that? No, cars have got safer in lot of other ways too with better design and testing. But it's undoubtably a factor

I can't tell if you're just being dishonest here or are terrible at analysing data.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 168  Next >