#11
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 08/06/2020 11:45, TMS320 wrote:
On 08/06/2020 00:27, JNugent wrote: On 07/06/2020 23:09, TMS320 wrote: On 07/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: On 06/06/2020 22:53, TMS320 wrote: On 06/06/2020 15:50, Kelly wrote: TMS320 wrote: With the number of pedestrians complaining about cyclists passing close, it never ceases to amaze how people stand and talk to each across a path and one has no choice but to pass between them. I don't hold with the idea that anybody will die from a fleeting encounter outdoors but respect that there are those that do. I'd go along with that.Â* According to Public Health England, typically spending more than 15 minutes within two metres of an infected person can raise your risk of catching the virus.Â* So if you momentarily brush past someone, especially outdoors, even within the two metres how much of a risk can that realistically pose? It depends on which way the wind is blowing... But I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue. You're just a born rebel, aren't you? There's nothing rebellious in that statement. You're not only a rebel but you're also a contrarian rebel who thinks he's too cool to follow rules - especially when they're only there to protect other people from you. Whereas you're too thick to be able to give an opinion. I'll let you into a secret: that *was* an opinion, albeit one based solidly and exactly on what you have said and on what you have refused to say. You find rules designed and put in place to protect people from you (and from others like you) tiresome and dispensible. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 08/06/2020 12:22, JNugent wrote:
On 08/06/2020 11:45, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 00:27, JNugent wrote: On 07/06/2020 23:09, TMS320 wrote: On 07/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: On 06/06/2020 22:53, TMS320 wrote: On 06/06/2020 15:50, Kelly wrote: TMS320 wrote: With the number of pedestrians complaining about cyclists passing close, it never ceases to amaze how people stand and talk to each across a path and one has no choice but to pass between them. I don't hold with the idea that anybody will die from a fleeting encounter outdoors but respect that there are those that do. I'd go along with that.Â* According to Public Health England, typically spending more than 15 minutes within two metres of an infected person can raise your risk of catching the virus.Â* So if you momentarily brush past someone, especially outdoors, even within the two metres how much of a risk can that realistically pose? It depends on which way the wind is blowing... But I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue. You're just a born rebel, aren't you? There's nothing rebellious in that statement. You're not only a rebel but you're also a contrarian rebel who thinks he's too cool to follow rules - especially when they're only there to protect other people from you. Whereas you're too thick to be able to give an opinion. I'll let you into a secret: that *was* an opinion, albeit one based solidly and exactly on what you have said and on what you have refused to say. I will let you into a secret; the discussion was about whether infection can cross 2m outdoors. You added nothing. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 08/06/2020 14:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 08/06/2020 12:22, JNugent wrote: On 08/06/2020 11:45, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 00:27, JNugent wrote: On 07/06/2020 23:09, TMS320 wrote: On 07/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: On 06/06/2020 22:53, TMS320 wrote: On 06/06/2020 15:50, Kelly wrote: TMS320 wrote: With the number of pedestrians complaining about cyclists passing close, it never ceases to amaze how people stand and talk to each across a path and one has no choice but to pass between them. I don't hold with the idea that anybody will die from a fleeting encounter outdoors but respect that there are those that do. I'd go along with that.Â* According to Public Health England, typically spending more than 15 minutes within two metres of an infected person can raise your risk of catching the virus.Â* So if you momentarily brush past someone, especially outdoors, even within the two metres how much of a risk can that realistically pose? It depends on which way the wind is blowing... But I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue. You're just a born rebel, aren't you? There's nothing rebellious in that statement. You're not only a rebel but you're also a contrarian rebel who thinks he's too cool to follow rules - especially when they're only there to protect other people from you. Whereas you're too thick to be able to give an opinion. I'll let you into a secret: that *was* an opinion, albeit one based solidly and exactly on what you have said and on what you have refused to say. I will let you into a secret; the discussion was about whether infection can cross 2m outdoors. You added nothing. Is that what you were doing (or trying to do) when you said: "...I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue"? There's absolutely nothing you could say that would be decisive or even persuasive on the matter. All you or anyone else can do is either follow the rules (six feet, or as the trendier end of the media like to call it, two metres) or break them. You have confirmed time and again that you are not one to follow rules inconvenient or to have any regard to the welfare of others. The rest of us should consider ourselves lucky that you are in a minority. Not a small enough minority, but a minority just the same. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 08/06/2020 17:26, JNugent wrote:
On 08/06/2020 14:33, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 12:22, JNugent wrote: On 08/06/2020 11:45, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 00:27, JNugent wrote: On 07/06/2020 23:09, TMS320 wrote: On 07/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: On 06/06/2020 22:53, TMS320 wrote: On 06/06/2020 15:50, Kelly wrote: TMS320 wrote: With the number of pedestrians complaining about cyclists passing close, it never ceases to amaze how people stand and talk to each across a path and one has no choice but to pass between them. I don't hold with the idea that anybody will die from a fleeting encounter outdoors but respect that there are those that do. I'd go along with that.Â* According to Public Health England, typically spending more than 15 minutes within two metres of an infected person can raise your risk of catching the virus.Â* So if you momentarily brush past someone, especially outdoors, even within the two metres how much of a risk can that realistically pose? It depends on which way the wind is blowing... But I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue. You're just a born rebel, aren't you? There's nothing rebellious in that statement. You're not only a rebel but you're also a contrarian rebel who thinks he's too cool to follow rules - especially when they're only there to protect other people from you. Whereas you're too thick to be able to give an opinion. I'll let you into a secret: that *was* an opinion, albeit one based solidly and exactly on what you have said and on what you have refused to say. I will let you into a secret; the discussion was about whether infection can cross 2m outdoors. You added nothing. Is that what you were doing (or trying to do) when you said: "...I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue"? It was a standalone statement. There's absolutely nothing you could say that would be decisive or even persuasive on the matter... ...and you could easily have left it without replying. Or if you had more "science" (that the government claims to follow) you could have shared it. But you couldn't; you're just an automaton built with a knee that jerks. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 08/06/2020 20:15, TMS320 wrote:
On 08/06/2020 17:26, JNugent wrote: On 08/06/2020 14:33, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 12:22, JNugent wrote: On 08/06/2020 11:45, TMS320 wrote: On 08/06/2020 00:27, JNugent wrote: On 07/06/2020 23:09, TMS320 wrote: On 07/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: On 06/06/2020 22:53, TMS320 wrote: On 06/06/2020 15:50, Kelly wrote: TMS320 wrote: With the number of pedestrians complaining about cyclists passing close, it never ceases to amaze how people stand and talk to each across a path and one has no choice but to pass between them. I don't hold with the idea that anybody will die from a fleeting encounter outdoors but respect that there are those that do. I'd go along with that.Â* According to Public Health England, typically spending more than 15 minutes within two metres of an infected person can raise your risk of catching the virus.Â* So if you momentarily brush past someone, especially outdoors, even within the two metres how much of a risk can that realistically pose? It depends on which way the wind is blowing... But I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue. You're just a born rebel, aren't you? There's nothing rebellious in that statement. You're not only a rebel but you're also a contrarian rebel who thinks he's too cool to follow rules - especially when they're only there to protect other people from you. Whereas you're too thick to be able to give an opinion. I'll let you into a secret: that *was* an opinion, albeit one based solidly and exactly on what you have said and on what you have refused to say. I will let you into a secret; the discussion was about whether infection can cross 2m outdoors. You added nothing. Is that what you were doing (or trying to do) when you said: "...I can't believe normal distancing outdoors is an issue"? It was a standalone statement. A *non-credible* "standalone statement". You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". You *choose* to disrgeard it. As I said: There's absolutely nothing you could say that would be decisive or even persuasive on the matter... ..and you could easily have left it without replying. Or if you had more "science" (that the government claims to follow) you could have shared it. The science and the resultant advice is "Keep at least 6 feet apart". How much more clear could it be? But you are too much of a rebel to take note of mere "advice", aren't you? But you couldn't; you're just an automaton built with a knee that jerks. Well, I do tend to spot nonsense when I see it. And there's plenty of it that emanates from you, you must admit (even though you don't want to). |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 09/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote:
You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". Advice? in your previous post you said 'rules'. Actually, I know it is 6'6". For such a stickler, it's amazing how wrong you are. Actually, I'm not surprised because you have never shown any indication of having an eye for detail. You *choose* to disrgeard it. Yes, whenever I want to pass pass someone I deliberately brush elbows even when there is loads of room because the virus can't possibly transfer outdoors. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 09/06/2020 17:51, TMS320 wrote:
On 09/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". Advice? in your previous post you said 'rules'. Whatever. Actually, I know it is 6'6". For such a stickler, it's amazing how wrong you are. Actually, I'm not surprised because you have never shown any indication of having an eye for detail. You know you're wrong but I'm not going to argue about whether two metres is 6' 6" (it isn't). You *choose* to disrgeard it. Yes, whenever I want to pass pass someone I deliberately brush elbows even when there is loads of room because the virus can't possibly transfer outdoors. Merci, rebel. After all, what do the lives of other people who happen to be in or adjacent to your path matter? They're just pedestrian scum as far as you're concerned, aren't they? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 10/06/2020 00:38, JNugent wrote:
On 09/06/2020 17:51, TMS320 wrote: On 09/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". Advice? in your previous post you said 'rules'. Whatever. To you, official laws, rules and advice are the all same. You must blindly obey You must blindly obey Pretty Polly Squawk Actually, I know it is 6'6". For such a stickler, it's amazing how wrong you are. Actually, I'm not surprised because you have never shown any indication of having an eye for detail. You know you're wrong but I'm not going to argue about whether two metres is 6' 6" (it isn't). You are arguing. You can't help it. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 10/06/2020 09:48, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/06/2020 00:38, JNugent wrote: On 09/06/2020 17:51, TMS320 wrote: On 09/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". Advice? in your previous post you said 'rules'. Whatever. To you, official laws, rules and advice are the all same. You must blindly obey You must blindly obey Pretty Polly Squawk It is people like you, so clearly unable to consider the welfare of others as a natural response, for whom law, rules and advice are primarily meant. Left to your own devices and your own (lack of) conscience, your anti-social behaviour would be even more harmful than it already is. Actually, I know it is 6'6". For such a stickler, it's amazing how Â*wrong you are. Actually, I'm not surprised because you have never Â*shown any indication of having an eye for detail. You know you're wrong but I'm not going to argue about whether two metres is 6' 6" (it isn't). You are arguing. You can't help it. Have it your own way. But please start considering others, especially pedestrians when you cycle along the footway. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Social distancing
On 10/06/2020 16:00, JNugent wrote:
On 10/06/2020 09:48, TMS320 wrote: On 10/06/2020 00:38, JNugent wrote: On 09/06/2020 17:51, TMS320 wrote: On 09/06/2020 00:41, JNugent wrote: You *know* that the advice is "keep six feet apart". Advice? in your previous post you said 'rules'. Whatever. To you, official laws, rules and advice are the all same. You must blindly obey You must blindly obey Pretty Polly Squawk It is people like you, so clearly unable to consider the welfare of others as a natural response, for whom law, rules and advice are primarily meant. Consideration for others is independant of laws, rules and advice. Left to your own devices and your own (lack of) conscience, your anti-social behaviour would be even more harmful than it already is. Actually, I know it is 6'6". For such a stickler, it's amazing how wrong you are. Actually, I'm not surprised because you have never shown any indication of having an eye for detail. You know you're wrong but I'm not going to argue about whether two metres is 6' 6" (it isn't). You are arguing. You can't help it. Have it your own way. But please start considering others, especially pedestrians when you cycle along the footway. I don't have to start. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scotland sees significant uplift in people cycling since distancing introduced | Simon Mason[_6_] | UK | 0 | April 27th 20 05:57 PM |
Social Interaction | Dan | Techniques | 0 | July 14th 13 07:45 AM |
Anti-social behaviour | Brimstone | UK | 0 | June 6th 05 10:45 PM |
Anti-social behaviour | Brimstone | UK | 2 | June 6th 05 06:24 PM |
Anti-social behaviour | Brimstone | UK | 3 | June 6th 05 12:26 PM |