Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[superbigal]

31 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Yes, double jagged. He a) isn't sure of the rules and b) is worried about being patient zero handing the bug out to students.

How can someone who teaches/lectures not know simple self isolation rules ?

As you are a colleague presumably you do not know the rules either ?

I despair.

[scottsdad]

2 minutes ago, superbigal said:

How can someone who teaches/lectures not know simple self isolation rules ?

As you are a colleague presumably you do not know the rules either ?

I despair.

I cannot speak for him. For me, if I was in his situation, I'd have to look them up. They have changed so many times. 

The key point for him was that (despite his own original test result) was was in a car for an extended time with a person with Covid. So he may have tested negative and then immediately caught it. That is his thinking. In that circumstance, are the rules simple?

[The Moonster]

57 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

A colleague of mine is self isolating. He took his son for a PCR test at the weekend. The results came back - his son was positive and he was negative. What's getting him confused/curious is that after taking the test, he drove his son to his ex-wife's house. He was in the car with the germ factory for a while. 

He has taken a LF test yesterday morning (negative) and went for a new PCR test today. He isn't 100% sure of the rules in his case but doesn't want to come and potentially spread it to students. 

If he's negative and double vaccinated he can continue going to work and should take a LFT every two days to ensure he is remaining negative. Guys in my work been doing the same whilst their kids have it at home. He can share a house or a car with the wean and not get it because vaccines work. 

[Todd_is_God]

So what's the point, then?

“In legal terms, venues will be required to take ‘all reasonable measures’ to implement the scheme – in plain terms, that boils down to using common sense.

“So, for example, a venue that has a dancefloor operating after midnight – and meets the other criteria – will have to operate the certification scheme. 

“However, they won’t need to check people coming in for a pub lunch twelve hours earlier, that clearly wouldn’t be reasonable.

“But by the evening, it would be reasonable to check customers as they arrive. That’s what we mean by common sense."

You'd be forgiven for thinking they had learned nothing from the nightclub masking nonsense.

Common sense, indeed.

[Lyle Lanley]

19 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

So what's the point, then?

“In legal terms, venues will be required to take ‘all reasonable measures’ to implement the scheme – in plain terms, that boils down to using common sense.

“So, for example, a venue that has a dancefloor operating after midnight – and meets the other criteria – will have to operate the certification scheme. 

“However, they won’t need to check people coming in for a pub lunch twelve hours earlier, that clearly wouldn’t be reasonable.

“But by the evening, it would be reasonable to check customers as they arrive. That’s what we mean by common sense."

You'd be forgiven for thinking they had learned nothing from the nightclub masking nonsense.

Common sense, indeed.

Makes no sense. They will be binned in due course. 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Lyle Lanley

[Todd_is_God]

12 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

Makes no sense. They will binned in due course. 

I'm also thinking about venues I have been in that are open throughout the day, serve food and have an area for dancing. There aren't many, but any time i've been in them I, and many others, have gone for dinner and drinks earlier in the evening first then remained there. Under this approach, the majority of patrons would not be checked.

If the police etc spot checked the venue after midnight and found someone there that shouldn't be, they would have no way of knowing if the venue had failed to complete checks.

As predicted, the lack of a Blueprint to adapt to be more carey has resulted in short-sighted, impractical and, effectively unenforceable rules and guidelines.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[effeffsee_the2nd]

10 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

Makes no sense. They will be binned in due course. 

That statements is a face saving way of them getting binned for all intents and purposes . theyd be existing in name only with that sort of enforcement 

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, superbigal said:

How can someone who teaches/lectures not know simple self isolation rules ?

As you are a colleague presumably you do not know the rules either ?

I despair.

Maybe they don't obsessively check them and/or give a f**k?

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

That statements is a face saving way of them getting binned for all intents and purposes . theyd be existing in name only with that sort of enforcement 

The only venues that would be impacted would be nightclubs, where they would be expected to check every patron, and police spot checks could confidently identify any venue not complying.

I'm not sure why the SG have it in for nightclubs, especially with cases falling now despite them having been open for about 6 weeks.

[Elixir]

32 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

So what's the point, then?

“In legal terms, venues will be required to take ‘all reasonable measures’ to implement the scheme – in plain terms, that boils down to using common sense.

“So, for example, a venue that has a dancefloor operating after midnight – and meets the other criteria – will have to operate the certification scheme. 

“However, they won’t need to check people coming in for a pub lunch twelve hours earlier, that clearly wouldn’t be reasonable.

“But by the evening, it would be reasonable to check customers as they arrive. That’s what we mean by common sense."

You'd be forgiven for thinking they had learned nothing from the nightclub masking nonsense.

Common sense, indeed.

This doesn't sound like the conspiracy Detournement warned us about!

Pointless nonsense like this is the reason why it just isn't going to be a thing long term.

[Elixir]

3 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

The only venues that would be impacted would be nightclubs, where they would be expected to check every patron, and police spot checks could confidently identify any venue not complying.

I'm not sure why the SG have it in for nightclubs, especially with cases falling now despite them having been open for about 6 weeks.

Sturgeon even highlighted in her statement today how much they're dropping in 20 to 24-year-olds as well. Laughable.

[Detournement]

8 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

 

I'm not sure why the SG have it in for nightclubs, especially with cases falling now despite them having been open for about 6 weeks.

Because they are miserable puritans.

[Elixir]

Remember that unethical experiment? The actual unethical experiment would have been keeping us in lockdown like the psychos were pining for. Cannot express enough how much contempt I have for such people.

 

[NotThePars]

I've been to three major events in Manchester the last few weeks that required vaccine passports and it was a doddle tbh. Open the app, cursory glance and in you go. Barely added 5 seconds to the general rigmarole of doing anything fun in this country.

[Thereisalight..]

41 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

Makes no sense. They will be binned in due course. 

The SG will dig their heels in and keep them until at least Apr imo. 

[Elixir]

Quote

Only 20% of rail passengers are still wearing masks at train stations now that it is no longer compulsory, according to Network Rail.

That compares with 80% before restrictions were lifted on 19 July.

On buses and Tubes, Transport for London has retained mask-wearing as a condition of carriage in the capital.

There is no legal requirement to wear one on public transport in England, although it remains the case in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

[Wee-Bey]

Managed to get a new job as a vaccine passport checker for major events, the boss has said we've not to check everyone, only overweight, catastrophically bald, seething middle aged men.

[ddfg]

After 18 months of what will hopefully be the most prescriptive and restrictive conditions any of us will ever have to live under  common sense is finally applied. Shame it is only being used as a cover for the SG failing to come up with a workable plan, instead of taking responsibility for implementing a policy decision they have passed the buck. Why not just do the adult thing and say we've had a look and this is unworkable? 

Edited September 21, 2021 by ddfg

[Hard Graft]

7 minutes ago, ddfg said:

After 18 months of what will hopefully be the most prescriptive and restrictive conditions any of us will ever have to live under  common sense is finally applied. Shame it is only being used as a cover for the SG failing to come up with a workable plan, instead of taking responsibility for implementing a policy decision they have passed the buck. Why not just do the adult thing and say we've had a look and this is unworkable? 

And admit they were wrong .......... you will be waiting a long time for that.

[Detournement]

15 minutes ago, Namond Brice said:

Managed to get a new job as a vaccine passport checker for major events, the boss has said we've not to check everyone, only overweight, catastrophically bald, seething middle aged men.

Unhealthy people seem to be the ones who are very much in favour of vaccine passports. The idea of someone else getting an injection negating the fact that their arteries are clogged and they have the lung capacity of a guinea pig is obviously very appealing.

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Detournement