onewheeldave

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

This is disingenuous at best.

 

Let's look at the facts :

1 - This thread was started by someone who has as his signature "Tens of thousands of people died who didn't need to die." (he means of/with Covid).

2 - Covid is mentioned TWICE in the opener, saying there is misinformation about Covid (Carbuncle is clear he means information challenging the Covid suppression narrative)

3 - The opener was neither deleted, not "pruned of Covid references, nor moved to the Covid forum.

4 - I put a post on demonstrating misinformation about Covid by the government, with evidence.

5 - The post was deleted.

 

Anyone even suggesting this is not bias is blinkered in the extreme.

 

 

a very succinct and accurate summing up of the issue. 

The original post clearly breaks the board rules.

3 hours ago, Hecate said:

It's deeply amusing that those who cry the most about over-moderation and censorship now actually propose that someone's post be edited to remove the information from that post that triggered them into fresh cries about over-moderation and censorship.  Utterly fascinating.

No. I'm happy to leave the thread unmoderated and uncensored.

But it has been decided that any attempt to challenge the pro-orthodox narrative claims in the original post are not allowed.

This is a clear bias- if a censorship free thread is not to be allowed, then the only way to remove the bias is to edit it out of the original post [hopefully that would be done by the poster themselves].

2 hours ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm...

I'll tell you what has happened in the last few weeks...

 

A few posters have taken advantage of the fact that the forum is now treating everyone as adults, and has been (perhaps foolishly?) expecting everyone to behave as such.

 

These 'one trick ponies' rarely contribute to any subject not on their agenda, and when they fail to get a response on their dedicated threads (which many people are avoiding because of the repetitive rubbish that's posted) are forced to branch out onto other threads using the remotest excuse to get their 'message' across.

 

 

The part in bold is clearly and outrageously untrue

I've seen not a single post challenging the orthodox narrative go ignored- in fact every one has been descended upon by a veritable horde of pro-official narrative posters resembling a swarm of bees.

As for the 'repetitive' posts and stats, they are generally in response to the equally repetitive but rationally unsound posts and stats of the pro-official narrative posters concerning the efficacy of masks, coerced vaccines etc, etc.

Looking at what seems to be the main focus of hostility, which is Chekhovs robust rebuttal of the 'masks are definitley really effective' pro ON [pro-official narrative] stance- some of the alleged 'repetition' has been in fact, addressals of the various criticisms raised by pro-ON posters. The rest have generally come soon after yet another [i.e. repeated] pro-ON claim that,  'masks are definitley really effective.

i.e. it's a discussion- not such a strange thing on a discussion board.

The reality is,some people on both sides, can't deal well with the fact that some on the other side listen to what they say, and find it sufficiently unsatisfactory, that they [shock, horror] don't change their mind.

5 minutes ago, SFBeca said:

@onewheeldave not deleted, merged into one covid thread, and then a new thread started as the other was over 1000 pages. this happens with other threads too, if there are numerous of the same topic, no change in moderation at all. 

similar to the no change in moderation - if a report is put in it is looked into and appropriate action taken, I don't go actively moderating as it always has been. 

As an autistic person it is extremely disorientating when threads I'm involved in are locked, even if they are later merged with another thread. Personally I have no issue with multiple threads that include to some extent the same topic. The threads in question were all on sufficuently different emphases to justify being seperate, and, for me, easy to keep up with- unlike the situation now.

As for moderation- I have used sf for several years and basically quit for a stretch purely due to the abysmal moderation [moderators not addressing the spiteful name calling/ad hominem attacks until the thread got well out of hand, and then locking/deleting/merging them].

Recently, since the change in ownership, things have been improved with no apparent moderation team and little evidence of any moderation.

The last few weeks that has clearly changed, especially with the covid threads, and we seem to be heading right back to the old model.

2 minutes ago, Hecate said:

 

No, that was humour.

They're not mutually exclusive. Generally goading is seen as humerous by the person/group doing it- it is still goading.

1 hour ago, Hecate said:

 

 

There is no increase in moderation.  There's coronavirus misinformation aplenty to be had on the coronavirus threads, hundreds of pages of the stuff ready and waiting to be discussed.  Can you hear it crying out? It's calling to you, Chekhov.  Can you hear it? Come over to the Coronavirus thread, Chekhov.  It's lonely over here without you, Chekhov.  Please post that graph again, Chekhov...

Yes there is- multiple covid related threads have been locked or deleted.

The rest of your paragraph is pure goading.

36 minutes ago, Kidorry said:

Looks like this topic will be closed as well.

Am I right in saying that, as far as the people here who are critical of the orthodox covid narrative go- if the covid reference in the original post is edited out, they will be totally happy, and content to not post covid stuff in this thread? 

[as long as the pro-orthodox narrative people also refrain from bringing it in]

If so, that would seem to be a solution.

49 minutes ago, SFBeca said:

It really isn't. It is me as the Moderator saying keep coronavirus discussions on the coronavirus thread. The graph you just posted was posted yesterday on the coronavirus thread, does it need to be posted here too. 

 

Note not as mod: am I the only one tired of all this coronavirus talk?! It's taking over the Forum it feels! 

From the opening post

On 09/12/2021 at 12:18, Carbuncle said:

The spread of misinformation has been causing a lot of problems recently. Politics in the US would seem to have been polarising in an alarming manner driven by the misperception that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen amongst other things. In regards to covid a small but significant fraction of people would appear to believe that the disease is an order of magnitude less deadly than it actually is ('it's just the sniffles'). An overlapping segment believe that the fantastic covid vaccines that we now have are either very much less effective or very much less safe than they actually are. The consequences of belief in this covid misinformation in terms of death and disease are terrible.

 

 

If you are going to ban talk of covid/measures on this thread, then I fully agree with Chekhov's suggestion here-

43 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

So why is the thread allowed when it's about Covid, but we aren't allowed to answer it, err, talking about Covid !

At the very least the opener should be edited to delete all references to Covid, or the thread should be moved to the Covid thread to allow people to answer it.

As that would remove the problem. Otherwise there is clear bias.

8 minutes ago, SFBeca said:

Wait if I were showing bias wouldn't I be removing all comments I don't agree with on the covid thread? Or is debate encouraged here? 

 

 

No. The bias comes from disallowing covid discussion on a thread whose opening post not only mentions it, but is clearly from the orthodox narrative perspective, and, makes a claim that most from the non-orhtodox perspective would dispute heavily i.e. 

'The consequences of belief in this covid misinformation in terms of death and disease are terrible.'

The bias can be easily removed by editing the reference to covid from the opening post.

2 hours ago, fools said:

You can post it until the cows come home if you like, it doesn't make you look good though. Every time I see your stats splattered all over the thread (for the 5th 6th 7th time!), I scroll past and ignore the whole post.

 

the data isn't convenient for my "pro-mask agenda", there is no link to mask use and you know it.

You missed something important out- it should be- 'You can post it until the cows come home if you like, it doesn't make you look good to me though'

as presumably you're not claiming everyone views things like you? 

If you were you're manifestly wrong as I'm happy to see it posted, repeatedly, because-

1. it makes a very good point

2. on the few occasions the opposition has tackled it in a rational matter, it has been well defended and sometimes, consolidated [eg pointing out that unlike similar comparisons between different countries, these stats are unusual in that the regions used the same testing criteria]

3. Generally it is only posted again in response to claims that masks are ore effective than there is evidence for- and those claims are constantly being posted and reposted themselves [for whatever reason you don't seem to complain about repeat postings of stuff you agree with]

6 hours ago, Anna B said:

 

 

In other words are we allowing ourselves to be lead gently by the hand, but innevitably towards Fascism?

 

Sadly, I think your answer to that lies in the post below

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Well I can't see my life changing much.  Double vaccinated with a booster due on 17th December.  All vaccinated up, all the paperwork in place.  I'll be able to go anywhere I like in the UK. 

 

No sympathy for those who will be moaning in the coming weeks, who chose not to be vaccinated, about having their 'human rights & liberties' curtailed. 

A.K.A 'I'm alright Jack'; and, an attitude very common amongst German citizens towards the Jews who were being subjected to compulsory armbands, restricted travel and other civil liberty removals.

8 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Only like calling people sheep.

 

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/search/?&q=sheep&type=forums_topic&author=onewheeldave&nodes=6&search_and_or=or&start_after=year

 

 

 

 

It's an analogy. Some people are very inclined to blindly follow the majority, or an authority, without thought- much like sheep. 

Historically it has led to a lot of problems. Pretty much all wars for example. And fashion

5 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

Dave , after all my time on this forum , even after being accused of things , called vile names and banned, I have never reported anyone or put anyone on ignore . I am not going to let an idiot change that 

I don't really understand what this 'post changing' thing is.

[I do know that calling people 'an idiot' is not going to help anything]

Is anything happening here other than he's simply quoting your words?

1 minute ago, hackey lad said:

What do you expect when someone is changing your posts?

If the accusation is correct, then do as the person themselves suggested, and contact the mods.

11 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

I think there has been a misunderstanding. I think an analysis of the kind proposed will always be weak ... even with the inclusion of the full data set. However if one is going to attempt an analysis of this kind one should not take an arbitrary subset of the data such as the values for just England, Scotland and Wales on one specific day.

This is a strawman. I did not describe these particular posts as misinformation indeed I conceded that they were evidence albeit of an incredibly weak kind.

It's not arbitrary- as already pointed out, they share the same testing system, unlike most of the data from differing countries.

3 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

Idiot . Done

Zero content, name calling again.

1 minute ago, Carbuncle said:

More hypocrisy.

No- for the reasons given previously.

Interesting as well, how you neglected to comment on this very clear ad hominem attack which has no actual content other than an insult.

18 minutes ago, West 77 said:

And you're another one who is unlucky in the thinking department.

33 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

That's pretty outrageous, comparing a desire to clampdown on antisocial behaviour to Nazi Germany.

I didn't mention Nazis- I mentioned armbands. The Nazis were the endpoint of a slow, gradual erosion of civil liberties for particular social subgroups.

Interesting that you associate the mention of arbands with that- did they perhaps introduce some kind of identifying armband for a specific social subgroup during the lead up to what was to turn into a slide into totalitarianism?

If so, food for thought- perhaps it could indicate the need for caution when it comes to dehumanising a social subgroup?

7 minutes ago, West 77 said:

And you're another one who is unlucky in the thinking department.

Another bright one  rather than making a point, or criticising a point, just blurts out an insult. Well done- and I love the irony of you refering to 'thinking'

34 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

 

You object to my potentially ambivalent misnominalization and then insult me ("call people names", "confident and well developed intellect"). Surely you recognise you're being hypocritical.

It isn't an insult to point out that you call people names [in this case 'gullible conspirasheeple']

And presumably you would agree that calling people insulting names is fairly contrary to possession of a confident and well developed intellect?

And me pointing out that fact is not an insult.

So yes, I'm failing to see grounds for hypocrisy there.

48 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

The spreading of misinformation needs to be addressed. I am not in favour of censorship but gullible conspirasheeple who merely relay misinformation are a menace.

 

44 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

I agree they don't deserve the freedoms, I think the non vaxers are just keeping this frustrating covid nightmare going and going or not helping matters, selfish lot. 

Ironic, given that it is actually you demanding more and more extreme lockdown style measures.

25 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

I think we need to start taking a tougher line with the faux freedom fighters. Their misplaced petulance is costing us lives and slowing the return to normality.

What do you think you should do- perhaps design a symbol for an armband to be worn by anyone not vaccinated? 

9 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

The spreading of misinformation needs to be addressed. I am not in favour of censorship but gullible conspirasheeple who merely relay misinformation are a menace.

 

That's useful isn't it. Just call people names....always helps- sure sign of a confident and well developed intellect

6 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

The spreading of misinformation needs to be addressed.

There is as much misinformation coming from the official narrative. It's coming from both sides, so don't forget to 'address' the official narrative misinformation as well.

4 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

Yes, it is. People can take their exercise in less antisocial ways.

You're missing the point- people going to gyms does not cause harm- it causes benefits. Many of the conditions that led to there being so many people susceptible to covid, such as being overweight, having type 2 diabetes, heart disease etc, are greatly helped by going to the gym. 

Many people find it hard to exercise- they don't want to run, they don't want to train on their own- but some are motivated to go to the gym, and so they do, and they gain the physical and mental benefits of doing it. And they are more likely to not be the ones 'overwhelming the NHS'. It is win-win. It is 'all good'.

And this is why people have identified you as 'pro-suppression'; because you go well beyond measures that can be argued to be beneficial in tackling the virus, and move onto things that bring no benefits whatsoever, but are all about controlling what people can and can't do, and, in this case, actually make things worse.

1 minute ago, Chekhov said:

It seems a little contradictory.

On the one hand many seem to think that the rules are illogical, and some of them OTT. Many also see the problems much of this is causing, many more do not want to be redeployed. Some are quite upset about it, they feel they joined the NHS to do one job which they have probably spent years training for,  and being moved to another job which they may not have much experience for (or enjoy as much) is not popular.

But, I get the impression, most still tow the line, certainly in what they say to each other : "people should be sticking to the rules, people have died". Whether that's what they actually think, who knows ?

I'm very aware of the fact that any NHS worker speaking out openly to the media about their reservations or disagreements with the measures would be putting their job at risk. 

And right from the start of this there was both widespread censorship [I've personally seen many Youtube/social media channels locked and deleted just for criticising an aspect of the mainstream narrative], and, also the authorites encouraging a 'informant culture' [neighbours ringing the informant lines to tell the authorites that next door had left the house more than once during the first lockdown etc].

So I guess in an institution like the NHS, even expressing doubts to collegues could be a risky endeavour?

3 hours ago, HeHasRisen said:

A law people can easily opt out of with no need to provide proof. An absolute shambles.

Also a God send for many. Including me- my mental health has been at serious risk due to the lockdowns/measures/public acceptance of civil liberty erosion: the fact that it is looking quite possible that in the near future there are going to be compulsory vaccinations is again serious damage to my, and many others, mental health. Having a get out from being pressured to wear a mask has been a great help.

Sadly, not for everyone- I have several autistic clients who, despite being mask exempt, have been unable to use public transport or use some shops due to intimidation from some of the staff and public.

29 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

Okey dokey. I have had enough of being called a pro-suppressionist when I have not advocated any tightening of UK restrictions at any point since I started posting on this thread (other than the very mild measure of quarantine for travelers from southern Africa).

 

I would like more non pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) now or possibly in the very near future if confidence in the enhanced transmissibility of Omicron needs to be firmed up. The best guess seems to be that Omicron's doubling time is 2-4 days. It almost doesn't matter how few cases of Omicron we currently have that kind of doubling time will lead to us being knee deep in Omicron very quickly. Nothing too drastic, do the relatively easier things first. People should be asked to work from home where possible. Shutdown indoor sports venues and gyms. Tighten up on masking in indoor spaces. Re-emphasise social distancing. That kind of thing. My reasoning is that by tightening things up now we may well save on time spent in harsh lockdowns down the road.

 

Oh and just to show I am really not so very pro-suppressionist I think the Government should be re-examining the rules on travelers arriving from abroad with a view to relaxing them. We already know we have Omicron cases in large numbers and we cannot hope to kill its spread with contact tracing so a few more Omis from abroad probably is not going to make much difference.

 

 

I'd say you're not being 'called' a pro-suppressionist- simply identified as one.

You support closing gyms [again!!]. 

That is pro-suppression- it has been well established that in terms of both physical and mental health, the benefits of access to gyms far outweighs negatives of the small potential increase in transmission.

Closing gyms clearly brings no benefits, is clearly counter productive [caused more harm than good] and is clearly a suppressive measure- you support it.

3 hours ago, alchresearch said:

Agree. My local Sainsburys - which used to have mask patrol on the entrance - haven't bothered this time.

3 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Sainsburys near us have staff on the door offering masks and asking people to wear them 

It seems to vary. 

At the start of this latest mask mandate I was hoping to see mass refusal, and was dissapointed to see generally more than 50% of supermarket occupants wearing masks, and also saddened to see some supermarkets putting staff on the door to tell people to put a mask on.

But it is noticable now that there aren't many stores with the staff on the door- presumably because it must be a morale sapping experience, or maybe more of the public are indicating that they are finding it annoying.

Also several branches have done what the Co-op has done and issued a public statement that they will not be enforcing masking.

5 hours ago, Chekhov said:

 

Or do you think that the face mask mandate will be revoked for care homes and hospitals ? If so, particularly in the case of hospitals, I (and my wife who works in one) wish I had your confidence.

Some months back I asked the specialist at my endocronology appointment a question- 'in his experience, what percentage of NHS staff felt that the lockdowns and measures being applied in hospitals  were counter productive [i.e. causing more harm than good]'

His reply actually surprised me, he said 'most'. I expected it to be a significant percentage, but, in his experience, most NHS staff considered the measures to be doing more harm than good. He particularly mentioned the negative effects on mental health.

You may not want to address this on a public forum, but, if you do, with you having a wife who works in the NHS, what percentage of NHS staff would you/she say consider the measures to have done more harm than good?

9 hours ago, Carbuncle said:

Nonsense. Language does not work that way.

 

You have used the terms gullible, sheep and sheeple yourself. I have noticed you bleat about name-calling but are not above behaving similarly yourself.

Language works exactly that way- 'covid sceptic' means 'one who is sceptical about the existence of covid'.

I have never used the term 'sheeple'.

17 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

No, not in the sense of giving a precise definition. In rough terms, I chose to use this as a polite way of referring to the people who are sceptical of the (consensus) science on covid. I don't regard the term sceptic as an insult.

I'd suggest that 'covid mainstream narrative sceptic' would accurately capture the group in question and also be grammatically and logically correct, in a way that 'covid sceptic' doesn't, and isn't.

14 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

I have other terms like 'gullible conspirasheeple' and conspiraloons available for other occasions.

I'm sure you do. Infantile name-calling seems very much in vogue these days.

3 hours ago, Carbuncle said:

More ridiculousness. As usual you want to tell me what I think/ mean. Why should I apologise for the (extreme) interpretation you put on the term 'covid sceptic'? It's not even rude why are you pretending to take offence?

 

Now what about you? Why are you spreading misinformation?

Covid sceptic would mean 'one who is sceptical of the existence of covid' which clearly does not apply to the poster in question as they know covid exists.

If your definition of 'covid sceptic' differs, could you perhaps tell us what you mean by 'covid sceptic'?

3 hours ago, hackey lad said:

As I said before , something suspicious about a poster , that only posts on one subject 

Is there- why?