Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

Mellor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Merriam Webster

Definition of suspension
1: the act of suspending : the state or period of being suspended: such as
a: temporary removal (as from office or privileges)
b: temporary withholding (as of belief or decision)
c: temporary abrogation of a law or rule


ban noun (1)
Definition of ban (Entry 2 of 3)
1: legal or formal prohibition

So which one is it? Obviously these words have two clear separate meanings???

Both can apply in many situations. They are not mutually exclusive terms. At no point did I say it wasn’t a suspension.

Nothing it that definition suggests ban is incorrect.

A suspension would suggest a set time limit on an activity,a ban suggests something a lot more permanent. Ergo they do not have the same meaning.

Nothing in the definition you posted for ban suggests it needs to be permanent.

Besides, the order Biden reversed wasn’t temporary.

Correctly they would have been suspended from driving for 6months. In common parlance, a ban is considered a permanent feature.

The example I gave was common parlance.
People refer to sports stars be banned all the time.
Ban is commonly used informally for suspensions.

I’ve no idea why you are arguing otherwise. You can stick to that as much as you like. But as I said, it’s petty semantics. And incorrect.

You didn't understand the point made about the no-fly list or are taking it out of context.I

I understood it fine. People will get falsely flagged.
A travel ban doesn’t help those people.
And are you really concerned people from terrorist sponsoring countries who are incorrectly flagged.

Mellor

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Also apparently the trading app RobinHood started selling some people's GameStop shares to drive down the price and they even withdrew funds from some people's account, effectively robbing them.

I don’t think they sold actual shares on people. I know some headlines said that. But I think the reporter misunderstood up the trading terms. It’s all a bit muddy

I believe it was options rather than shares. People held call options on GME. Robinhood closed the option early.

Cass wrote: »

Didn't hear about them selling stocks but they did stop people trading them.

I believe they are putting together a class action suit against RobinHood.

They halted buying and selling of stocks, and also new options. But they allowed the closing of open positions. I think it’s forced closing of options that people are mostly up in arms over.
Be interested to see how it plays out. The options were becoming an increasing liability for the Hedge funds. They could end up owing much more money than they have. If they are bankrupted, the extra money would still be owed.
It’s reasonable that brokers don’t let accounts occur losses beyond what they could ever repay. But the question here is whether they stepped in collusion with the hedge funds.

Munsterlad102

Mellor wrote: »

I don’t think they sold actual shares on people. I know some headlines said that. But I think the reporter misunderstood up the trading terms. It’s all a bit muddy

I believe it was options rather than shares. People held call options on GME. Robinhood closed the option early.

Ah that makes sense. I read it somewhere about them selling shares, so it's very possible they got it wrong.

Grizzly 45

Mellor wrote: »

Both can apply in many situations. They are not mutually exclusive terms. At no point did I say it wasn’t a suspension.

Ok so words can obvipusly now have two or more multiple meanings...
Looks pretty different meansings and definitions to me


Nothing in the definition you posted for ban suggests it needs to be permanent.

Besides, the order Biden reversed wasn’t temporary.

According to this definition, it obviously was reversible therefore not a permanent ban.Operative word permanent

The example I gave was common parlance.
People refer to sports stars be banned all the time.
Ban is commonly used informally for suspensions.

Then its incorrect English,ergo it has a different meaning. unless prefixed by permanent or ,explained further by the time of duration.

I’ve no idea why you are arguing otherwise. You can stick to that as much as you like. But as I said, it’s petty semantics. And incorrect.

Simply because it is incorrect English that changes the meaning of what a piece of legislation is and because it is being used as another "orange man bad" balliwick.

I understood it fine. People will get falsely flagged.
A travel ban doesn’t help those people.
And are you really concerned people from terrorist-sponsoring countries who are incorrectly flagged

.

Not really, as most of them cant leave or afford to leave their workers or Islamist paradises anyway, and those that do are either Govt officials under diplomatic passports or the odd sponsored refugee with family connections in the US. Not like there are millions able to come up for the 2 weeks hols in Florida or Disneyworld and are being denied visas.

Rows Grower

A pleasant change to see the man with possibly the most important job in the world getting on with it without all the narcissistic attention seeking dramatics and theatrics.

Poor Donald must be doing his nut that he hasn't made a headline in weeks.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/31/joe-biden-spotlight-464003

Munsterlad102

Rows Grower wrote: »

A pleasant change to see the man with possibly the most important job in the world getting on with it without all the narcissistic attention seeking dramatics and theatrics.

Poor Donald must be doing his nut that he hasn't made a headline in weeks.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/31/joe-biden-spotlight-464003

Pool aul Joe probably doesn't want anyone to see what he or Hunter are doing:D:D:D

Rows Grower

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Pool aul Joe probably doesn't want anyone to see what he or Hunter are going:D:D:D

I'm sure that made perfect sense to you, but you've got me lost.

Munsterlad102

Rows Grower wrote: »

I'm sure that made perfect sense to you, but you've got me lost.

Sorry, I made a typo

Rows Grower

Forbes have an interesting article on Donald Trump Jr. and the Reddit plot..

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2021/01/28/why-aoc-and-donald-trump-jr-both-back-the-reddit-investing-craze/

Mellor

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Ah that makes sense. I read it somewhere about them selling shares, so it's very possible they got it wrong.

There was some claims of shares sold, but there weren't substantiated.
The article I read said shares were some, but in the text it was clear they were actually talking about the forced closure of options. They are claim its the equivalent of a margin call.
Monday trading will be interested. If the share price was still in a dip I'd be tempted. But it it crunch time and I'm not sure how much longer the WSB guys will hold.

Cerveza

Anyone watching Life below zero Canada and the two boys shooting a moose. Maybe it was the camera but how close did they need.
It’s on quest 144

Mellor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Ok so words can obvipusly now have two or more multiple meanings...
Looks pretty different meansings and definitions to me

Yes words have different meanings. That doesn't mean that both words can't correct.

According to this definition, it obviously was reversible therefore not a permanent ban.Operative word permanent

So because Biden could reverse it, it wasn't permanent. This is absolutely clutching at straws.
If it stays in place until there is an intervention, it is permanent.

Not really, as most of them cant leave or afford to leave their workers or Islamist paradises anyway, and those that do are either Govt officials under diplomatic passports or the odd sponsored refugee with family connections in the US. Not like there are millions able to come up for the 2 weeks hols in Florida or Disneyworld and are being denied visas.

The volume of passengers doesn't change the point.
You said that innocents they were being put on no-fly lists incorrectly. That may be true for a tiny percentage. But I don't see how a ban improves that? A bit baffled that you even suggested it.

I've no issue with block undesirables or suspects flying. Obviously.
I just think it better if that's based on actual intelligence information. A blanket ban mostly affects innocent civilians. As terrorists will just select somebody who has a passport to skirt the ban. Just like the example you gave there it was carried out by a US citizen.
A law that blocks people who are law abiding citizens, but not criminals is a pretty sloppy law. This is literally the argument we used against gun control blanket laws that the criminals can ignore.

Rows Grower

Donald is back in the news again and for all the wrong reasons again....

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/trump-names-two-lawyers-for-impeachment-defence-1073480.html

Mellor

Rows Grower wrote: »

Donald is back in the news again and for all the wrong reasons again....

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/trump-names-two-lawyers-for-impeachment-defence-1073480.html

I’m not familiar enough with the constitution to make an call on the validity of the unconstitutional defence. But it’s seems like a pretty lax approach to defending. More suited to a footnote than the main body.
The arguments may actually be irrelevant of course.

Rows Grower

Mellor wrote: »

I’m not familiar enough with the constitution to make an call on the validity of the unconstitutional defence. But it’s seems like a pretty lax approach to defending. More suited to a footnote than the main body.
The arguments may actually be irrelevant of course.

Reads like he knows he's guilty as sin but his attitude is, it's too late to catch me for it.

Feisar

Jaysus this lockdown craic is starting to wear a bit thin.

Any thoughts on what'll happen come March 5th? Inter county travel and ranges open?

BattleCorp

Feisar wrote: »

Jaysus this lockdown craic is starting to wear a bit thin.

Any thoughts on what'll happen come March 5th? Inter county travel and ranges open?

I doubt it. Some businesses will open but we won't see much freedom.

Feisar

BattleCorp wrote: »

I doubt it. Some businesses will open but we won't see much freedom.

I'm fairly stoic however I'm getting sick of it at this stage.

BattleCorp

Feisar wrote: »

I'm fairly stoic however I'm getting sick of it at this stage.

Everyone is fcuked up of it at this stage. I went through a bad patch in December where I was really fed up of it but I'm not too bad now. Nothing much we can do though except keep plodding on. Things will eventually improve, but not today or tomorrow.

Cass

Hate to start this argument all over, but according to the news the vaccination is now said to not stop you catching it or spreading it, you still have to mask up, keep up the separation, and limit travel. Not tot mention it'll allow the Government to keep passing legislation without proper debate and the Gardaí to keep their massive new powers.

What is the fecking point of a "vaccination" if it changes nothing?

I'm sick to my teeth of it now. At first nothing much changed for me, but with three to four checkpoints just to travel the distance to the nearest town to do the shopping, plus this constant house bound detention, i'm losing my co-operative nature.

Grizzly 45

Meantime sleepy Joe Biden removes 17,00 union jobs from people who were encouraged to vote from him by their trade union in the 1st week in office.

https://www.republicworld.com/technology-news/science/keystone-pipeline-issues-how-many-jobs-have-been-lost-after-biden-revoked-the-permit.html

Which also upsets Mr Tradeau in Canada.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trudeau-biden-keystone-xl-pipeline-b1791756.html

His climate crisis gob "mr Mullet " John Kerry,
,the man who has a bigger carbon footprint than the Irish Republic suggests that theses people could be re employed "making solar panels

https://news.yahoo.com/john-kerry-suggest-oil-workers-211114294.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmllLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAM-cYXKl3eONB8x8_qRRUj5Pi2Vw8fYH4CEAh1Y8PYJLfEBf973oj9penPlrgr-7jgEI1ntlw0JHEMnIY35hTUtGLR4i4cvlIG2g4Ees8OKQ0t7kUQJCxSW2YNYBThFwMk9gXyHuxWKkqRvrXU6Mr8LV2Gyx7H2SN5zqH8MNQCpE

And Kamela has suggestedWest Virginia miners should be employed repairing "landmines"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/harris-west-virginia-will-see-jobs-through-reclaiming-abandoned-land-mines/ar-BB1dgpCO

The Looney Tunes are certainly in control in the White House...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Hate to start this argument all over, but according to the news the vaccination is now said to not stop you catching it or spreading it, you still have to mask up, keep up the separation, and limit travel. Not tot mention it'll allow the Government to keep passing legislation without proper debate and the Gardaí to keep their massive new powers.

What is the fecking point of a "vaccination" if it changes nothing?

I'm sick to my teeth of it now. At first nothing much changed for me, but with three to four checkpoints just to travel the distance to the nearest town to do the shopping, plus this constant house bound detention, i'm losing my co-operative nature.

Meantime, even if you have the second dose...You can still get it!!!
As a US congressman found out.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stephen-lynch-covid-19-positive-vaccine/


If this was a contraceptive vaccine, you would still need a condom and have to pull out?... Asking for a friend.

Mellor

Cass wrote: »

Hate to start this argument all over, but according to the news the vaccination is now said to not stop you catching it or spreading it, ...

That’s essentially how vaccinations work. They give your immune system the blueprint, for want of a better word, to fight the virus. Not block it from getting in.
But it only fights it, after the virus has entered your body, so your carrying a mild load of the virus. The immune system is able to suppress the virus so it won’t blow up into Covid. But you could still pass the virus to others before it’s cleared your system. Different viruses/vaccines will retain different rates of transmission.

It’s less transmissible than in an unvaccinated person obviously. But transmission rates in coronavirus are probably an unknown risk element at this point.

dodderangler

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Meantime sleepy Joe Biden removes 17,00 union jobs from people who were encouraged to vote from him by their trade union in the 1st week in office.

https://www.republicworld.com/technology-news/science/keystone-pipeline-issues-how-many-jobs-have-been-lost-after-biden-revoked-the-permit.html

Which also upsets Mr Tradeau in Canada.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trudeau-biden-keystone-xl-pipeline-b1791756.html

His climate crisis gob "mr Mullet " John Kerry,
,the man who has a bigger carbon footprint than the Irish Republic suggests that theses people could be re employed "making solar panels

https://news.yahoo.com/john-kerry-suggest-oil-workers-211114294.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmllLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAM-cYXKl3eONB8x8_qRRUj5Pi2Vw8fYH4CEAh1Y8PYJLfEBf973oj9penPlrgr-7jgEI1ntlw0JHEMnIY35hTUtGLR4i4cvlIG2g4Ees8OKQ0t7kUQJCxSW2YNYBThFwMk9gXyHuxWKkqRvrXU6Mr8LV2Gyx7H2SN5zqH8MNQCpE

And Kamela has suggestedWest Virginia miners should be employed repairing "landmines"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/harris-west-virginia-will-see-jobs-through-reclaiming-abandoned-land-mines/ar-BB1dgpCO

The Looney Tunes are certainly in control in the White House...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Repairing land mines good jaysus
Some crowd in that white house now.
Its the funniest TV show out there now.

Grizzly 45

Mellor wrote: »

Yes words have different meanings. That doesn't mean that both words can't correct.

So because Biden could reverse it, it wasn't permanent. This is absolutely clutching at straws.

That's your logic that you have been saying. You said a ban isn't permanent,i then unless it is prefixed by some form of permanency its a suspension

If it stays in place until there is an intervention, it is permanent.

The volume of passengers doesn't change the point.
You said that innocents they were being put on no-fly lists incorrectly. That may be true for a tiny percentage. But I don't see how a ban improves that? A bit baffled that you even suggested it.You keep taking it out of context that point.
81,00 people ended up on that list in2016 1,800 are American nationals. Would they rather wait 90/120 days and get a visa or be told nope you cant fly...ever again to the US?

I've no issue with block undesirables or suspects flying. Obviously.
I just think it better if that's based on actual intelligence information. A blanket ban mostly affects innocent civilians. As terrorists will just select somebody who has a passport to skirt the ban.

If you have limited resources on the ground in those countries,its pretty hard to find out whether Abdul from Trehan is a businessman or an actual intelligence asset intent on doing harm. So just stop the problem at the source by restricting travel from those countries?


Just like the example you gave there it was carried out by a US citizen.
Ahem, One was actually a Pakistani on a Green card... So obviously a US intel background check fail there.

A law that blocks people who are law abiding citizens, but not criminals is a pretty sloppy law. This is literally the argument we used against gun control blanket laws that the criminals can ignore

.

Totally fallacious comparison on so many levels

Cass

Mellor wrote: »

That’s essentially how vaccinations work. .

I know all that, it wasn't my point so i'll elaborate.

We were told last year we cannot get back to normal until we have a vaccine. Now there is one (figuratively speaking) we're now being told that is not the case. That things will remain as they are for months, possibly years.

The world health organisation released a document. update if you will, saying how PCR testing is not trustworthy due to the high number of false positives. They also outlined how people with the chinese cirus can actually test negative. couple that with the "elimination" of the flu/cold and it brings into question the numbers were seeing.

To be clear i'm not a denier. I'm also not in the least bit qualified to speak to the science and epidemiology of the china virus. I get my news from the tv and papers like everyone else.

My questions are born from a frustration out of how life has changed and every time it seems there is, not hope, but a chance of normality the goal posts get moved and we are back to step one.

IOW if the vaccinations do not help return us to normality and we have to keep going as we are (masks, distancing, travel limitations, free movement, etc) then there is no "end point" where it can be said we can return to normal life. That is depressing.

civdef

The big positive of the vaccine is it stops most people developing serious illness from the infection.
It’s going to be “like the flu” eventually hopefully. People will still get it, just not die in crazy numbers or put unsustainable pressure on health systems (and even flu pushes the line on this most winters).
The SARS-CoV-2 virus isn’t going away ever probably. But the masks will.

Until Disease X arrives.

Feisar

I presume the kicking the can down the road nature of the way they are curtailing us is seen as the best way of keeping us satiated.

One thing is for sure, I won't be taking my shooting for granted again.

Cass

civdef wrote: »

The big positive of the vaccine is it stops most people developing serious illness from the infection.

I get that, i really do. Not arguing it in the slightest. I'm also not an anti vaxxer.

It’s going to be “like the flu” eventually hopefully. People will still get it, just not die in crazy numbers or put unsustainable pressure on health systems (and even flu pushes the line on this most winters).
The SARS-CoV-2 virus isn’t going away ever probably.

Its this bit, right here. We live with the flu every year. Depending on country/population thousands or tens of thousands die from it or a secondary illness and because of the flu. Did we ever shut a country down for the flu?

Again i'm not getting into conspiracy theories here. This is not about that. Every government including our own has said the same thing you have said. We have to live with it. However with the flu now mysteriously eliminated and the country racking up billions of debt how can we continue to go on like this for another year or possibly longer?

But the masks will.

From your lips.........................

Until Disease X arrives.

God help us if that turns out to be a serious one.

Cass

Feisar wrote: »

I presume the kicking the can down the road nature of the way they are curtailing us is seen as the best way of keeping us satiated.

I'm only arguing this for the sake of argument.

They won't shut down airports because they say it violates EU free movement, but "forbid" us from going on holiday or more importantly traveling more than 5km from our homes. They say we need a vaccine before we can return to normal but now one is here they say we will continue with all the restrictions.

I appreciate things change as does the advice on how to combat it, but the government is saying on one hand we have to, basically, take away your rights to protect you, while on the other hand say/allow others things in the interest of EU law.

I'm not really saying this right and finding it hard to write what i mean.

They are walking the line between bankrupting the country and allowing personal liberties (although i fail to see how being allowed right is a right), but are it wrong on both ends.