RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive349

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 24 March 2020. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <224½>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>, <347>, <348>, <350>, <351>, <352>, <353>, <354>, <355>, <356>, <357>, <358>, <359>, <360>, <361>, <362>, <363>, <364>, <365>, <366>, <367>, <368>, <369>, <370>, <371>, <372>, <373>, <374>, <375>, <376>, <377>, <378>, <379>, <380>, <381>, <382>, <383>, <384>, <385>, <386>, (new)(back)

My adventure to Wal-Mart today 2[edit]

Me and my mom went to both Wal-Mart and the store Meijer's (where my bank is at)- the panic buying is much worse. Many more shelves were not only gutted but some packages were ripped open with some of their contents missing. The stupidity makes me laugh. Time to make bootleg toilet paper. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 23:23, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

now you will truly rue the passing of print media. AMassiveGay (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Still plenty of news paper in my neck of the woods. Perfect to make bootleg toilet paper. Ready to go full evil. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 00:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
am I too late to add to my comment '...as you are passing your lunch'? its too late isn't it. I just thought of it. that would have been comedy gold. dammit AMassiveGay (talk) 00:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
You already nailed it with that first one, I laughed out loud. I maybe get the second bit, but magician's honor, you're not allowed to explain it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:33, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
it might have been labouring the point. if that's possible with a joke about pooping. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion[edit]

'I was not making poteen/moonshine/whatever officer - I was creating my own sanitiser.' Anna Livia (talk) 10:56, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Someone beat you to it- https://news.yahoo.com/7-eleven-owner-charged-selling-202048010.html Sick world we live in. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

'I would like to know why the byline of the 'History' category is: a) in German, and b) missing the verb. It doesn't make sense the way it's written. Just so i don't get frustrated every time I see it when I venture into the category on a search, can somebody put a 'war' or 'ist' or even 'sein sollte' at the end of the sentence? It's my first time and, though I've spent a good hour here, I'm too tired to try to figure out how to edit it myself. thanks! 71.11.254.3 (talk) 07:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Salutations[edit]

I am a new user, and I wish everyone well. I was an anonymous contributor in the recent past, and for created this account in order for in-depth edits and conversations. RATIONAL MUNDANE++ (talk) 07:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome.
Some people here are 'mostly harmless' so long as you are reasonably courteous/have reasonable points of view/have a sense of humour, some people are snarky if you are not... and there are some who set themselves up to be taken down a peg. Anna Livia (talk) 10:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Welcome to RationalWiki. I have been a user for 6 years. Hope you enjoy. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
New contributors are always good, especially when a deadly pandemic is sweeping the globe. Comrade General Pootis (talk) 13:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Create a What Is Going On in Health section[edit]

I propose we should split off all health-related news into its own section. The coronavirus news are flooding WIGO World section, and the crisis will have deeper repercursions even after it ends. First, it's only a matter of time before vaccines are developed for the virus and then there will come the anti-vaxxers and IMO the European and Asian governments are going to crack down hard on anti-vaxxers. European governments barely tolerated them before and will not tolerate at all them after the pandemic is over. In the US, the fight for M4A will intensify and the GOP will support "vaxx choice" and then there's the UK Tories who will try to undermine the NHS to pay for their economic stupidity. Tuxer (talk) 15:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

As long as it doesn't live in main WIGO forever, this isn't a bad idea. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
that's wishful thinking on European governments cracking down on anti vaxxers, particularly as any vaccine for this strain is 18 months away, well after its done its worst. AMassiveGay (talk) 16:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I think you are underestimating the European governments. While the anti-vaxxers could do some damage early on, in the end they would be forced to be vaccinated. It's completely legal too. Most European governments have a section in their constitution to waive human rights in cases of war or emergency. Tuxer (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
that's assuming a lot, like the virus is still raging by then, or that it hasn't just become a fact of seasonal life like the flu. AMassiveGay (talk) 17:10, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not questioning if this affects Medicare for all in any way, but be careful about overrating it. Medicare for all was very much pinned to Bernie 2020 and while he could, conceivably, make a comeback that is not likely and Biden is still in favor of the public option. Even if we have a Sanders administration most of the Senate dems are opposed to Medicare for all as Bernie presents it anyway. With if Biden wins because Sanders supporters never showed up to the polls congresspeople will feel no pressure to move any great distance to the left, so under a Biden administration M4A is only marginally less doomed as if it was proposed now.--Flandres (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

The push for universal healthcare is tied to the material conditions in the US, not a specific politician. Bernie did help push UHC into a national spotlight and give it a PR friendly nomenclature, but it would not have worked if not A- the failure of Obamacare and B- the fact that thousands of Americans are drowning in medical debt, being defrauded by insurance and pharmaceutical companies and that they're paying more for lower quality care than other nations. Unless the US manages some to get functional healthcare reform, such as public option, UHC will remain a major policy goal for the long term. Plus UHC/M4A is above water in polls in all states in spite of the fact that Bernie is struggling in the popular vote. So M4A is not a Bernie that's just going to go away.Tuxer (talk) 20:29, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Remember those famously high poll numbers tend to go down if you claim it leads to things like longer wait times or tax hikes so the discourse on this is still malleable. Also, this is getting off topic for the thread so we probably should not dawdle but there really is no path to passing Medicare for all without Bernie in the white house(and even then its still unlikely) so we probably will not see it any time soon coronavirus or not.-Flandres (talk) 20:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
There are tens of millions of people without health insurance, and tens of millions more uninsured. 40% of Americans can't handle a $400 emergency, plenty more would struggle while doing so. As long as things continue to be like this, don't expect things to "return to normal" anytime soon. Oxyaena Harass 22:33, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Where did I say things were returning to normal? This was just saying Biden and Trump will not pass medicare for all and if Bernie does not win he has no way of forcing that through, neither will he force it through if he is elected which is quite unlikely. That does not mean things are going back to normal.-Flandres (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm seeing talk about European governments being hard on antivaxxers but that philosophical disease is rampant in Italy, and France has a soft spot for homeopathy. I think you're overestimating Europe's attitude to the movement. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 19:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes, and furthermore remember the largest party in Italy right now networks with anti-vaxxers and pretty much already supports "vaxx choice."--Flandres (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
So returning to my original point, should we split a health section off from WIGO World?Tuxer (talk) 21:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, but the germ I can't remember the name is everywhere on the news. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 21:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Idea: To prevent it from being a permanent feature, as ikanreed has expressed (and I do agree with that), maybe call it something like "What Is Going On in Pandemic" or "What Is Going On in Coronavirus", makes it clear what the topic should be (and what should not be placed there, as health is pretty broad) and forces a logical sunset...--NavigatorBR(Talk) - 21:18, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

So I can create the page or is it someone else? Should we do a poll?Tuxer (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I've already suggested the exact same thing on the WIGO World talk page. And I did that just because I don't want to see the rest of March and all of April and May in WIGO World stuffed full of the coronavirus and nothing else. It certainly shouldn't be a permanent WIGO. And I think that once the virus ceases to be a major public health concern, any other lasting societal changes related to it, like a possible crackdown on anti-vaxxers, can just go into the regular WIGO World. We needn't keep digging up the WIGO coronavirus page every time something slightly connected to it comes up once it's faded into memory. Spud (talk) 05:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tuxer Go ahead and create it. Nobody's said no. If anybody doesn't like it, they can take it up with me. Spud (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

OK. I am also going to purge most coronavirus news to the new page, though I am leaving the economics stuff in WIGO World.Tuxer (talk) 16:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I made up a symbol File:Covid-19 Icon.svg for the page and links. (If someone thinks of a better icon, they can replace it.)--NavigatorBR(Talk) - 22:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The Flat Earth Strawman[edit]

(Thought I'd start a little conversation that, for once, isn't related to the Corona Virus, everyone needs a break from it at some point: just thought I'd throw that out there so it doesn't look like I'm mindlessly deviating from more important stuff). Anyone ever seen someone use the Flat Earth as a bragging point? As in, like, when someone rambles on about some kind of insane conspiracy theory, they justify themselves by comparing themselves, positively, to a Flat Earther? My brother did just recently. Last time I visited him in France, he made some utterly inane argument that the Wal-Mart garden department is a structural prototype of FEMA death camps. Having listened to him espouse several, equally as maniacal conspiracy theories in the past (including but not limited to white genocide and false flag bullshit), I finally asked him if there was ANY conspiracy theory he DIDN'T believe in. Somewhat unsurprisingly, he retorted to his routine "At least I'm not a flat Earther" escape hatch. Like WTF? Okay, so you don't believe in the flat Earth, congratuf*ckinglations you want a trophy for that or something? You entitled to a Bachlor's Degree or Master's Degree or whatever TF else? You want a NOBEL F*CKING PEACE PRIZE FOR IT?! Let's be real, rejecting the flat Earth really isn't an accomplishment, unless MAYBE it was still 3,000 B.C. Aaronmichael5 19:34 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry for not reading the rest of your post after the part about Wal-Mart gardens being like FEMA death camps. No offense but I'd break down laughing at your brother for that suggestion. Huh well, I rather have a flat earther with me than a white genocide conspiracy theorist. As I said before, that conspiracy theory is a personal attack on me, and it's exactly like saying my mom killed me by marrying my dad. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 19:46, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Not to mention the false flag conspiracy, which have gotten so out of hand that some have harassed actual relatives of victims for being "crisis actors". Obviously any Flat Earth arguments get a good laugh out of us, but at least nothing is hindered in the process. Ironically, many of these so called "truth seekers" sometimes make flat Earthers look BETTER: not that it says much, but still.Aaronmichael5 22:17 13 March 2020 (UTC)
True. You have to tell him he's actually worse than a Flat-Earther in the grand scheme of things, when it comes to harming other people. You can knock down that reassuring pillow he was standing on. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 22:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
That's not an escape hatch. That's them answering your question honestly. What you do with that information could help you bring them out of it. Probably not. But could. "What makes flat earthers wrong? How do you know? How do those same methods of understanding apply to [conspiracy you believe Y]? Is it enough to doubt the official story, or should you have a plausible theory of your own that holds up to intense scrutiny?" Dealt with enough of these people in my life to know that kind of Socratic dialog won't help. But there wasn't anything wrong with their answer. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 02:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
What a sheeple. Everyone knows the FEMA camps are located on the other side of the flat earth, right next to the alien landing pads, which is where Muslims, who are actually exterrestrials, are brought to earth. (You get to them by going through the Egyptian pyramids. Why did you think Egypt is full of Muslims? Checkmate, atheists!) --47.146.63.87 (talk) 12:22, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
The concentration camps are usually in white goods, accessed through a Narnia gateway fridge. 80.189.215.167 (talk) 07:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Mike Pence's record on public health.[edit]

I have just read that a small town in Indiana had a HIV outbreak in 2015 where 20 cases were reported due to the use of dirty needles. He was advised to allow a clean needle exchange which he refused to do despite overwhelming advice for political, religious and personal reasons. By the time he did agree the number of cases had risen to 200, 180 cases give or take more than should have been if Pence had not been such a tosser. This is the man handling the Corona19 outbreak in the USA. — Unsigned, by: Mercian / talk / contribs

This isn't supposed to be shocking, at least in my point of view. It's just an example of the Trump administration vacating a lot of important positions while filling others with those that are not just unqualified but are ones that work against the department they're supposed to represent. We just had a coal lump covered in smoldering oil running the head after the EPA, we just had an oil execute lead our Secretary of State before he was booted. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 21:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
The Trump administration is loaded with ideological toadies and loyalists who don't give a shit about the mission of the agencies that they lead. For example, see Betsy DeVos at Education. The right wing whines about so-called deep state subversion pushing against all of the fools Trump has put in charge of the various arms of government, but in reality, these are real people who are committed to real missions and real goals reacting to the losers that the loser-in-chief has anointed to the top job. Cosmikdebris (talk) 03:08, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
"AIDS is a racial disease of Jews and Niggers, and fortunately it is wiping out the queers. I guess God hates queers for several reasons. There is one big reason to be against queers and that is because every time some white boy is seduced by a queer into becoming a queer, means his white bloodline has run out." — J. B. Stoner
"Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. You cannot serve two masters: you must pick — God or Satan." — Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore
(P.S.: Pence is a Dominionist.) --47.146.63.87 (talk) 13:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Not to be the "this ain't news" guy, but Pence also once said Disney was anti-hunting because of Bambi. But to Pence's credit, as a Dominionist batshit anti-science scared of everything so somehow society is not his problem kind of politician, after much pushback and personal prayer, he did eventually give the greenlight to needle exchanges. J.B. Stoner is nutpicking. Mike Pence's comments on Bambi being Disney's attempt to sour hunting season, and Mulan being Disney's attempt to put women in the military are nutty enough. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The social media bar on the left hand site[edit]

I just noticed that this site actually links to social media. Like, literally, second before I added this topic. I mean, ok, that's cool, but you have to rad and you have to listen, have you ever tried to do that with somebody who doesn't read or listen?

Part of the reason I like music and comedy is because there's a platform, a moment when everybody has to listen. I'm not good at performing either, where is Machina, I want to talk to Machina. but having fun with something I've created that is personal to me is,,, fun, easy. There's not a better phrase for it, it's easy and fun. And I'm pretty confident in myself, I mean, what am I trying to tell you guys to do, stop being mean to each other? Bad look. You all really wanna look like you can't stop fighting with each other? It's kind of our fault for not knowing how to razz each other

We're not all going to hit, and the site is supposed to be a resource, not a pop icon.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:14, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

So, ignore it then? --47.146.63.87 (talk) 01:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Yeah I read that comment several times and I still don't understand what I'm reading. No offense, Gol Sarnitt, but you're being really incoherent. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 03:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Guilty. I'm a little frustrated with social media, which I don't take part in. By "the left hand side," I mean literally the left hand side of the window we're all looking at, where there are links to Twitter, Facebook, Discord, and Reddit. I do tend to think about a lot of things at once. I have just seen a lot of "don't take the drama here" kind of statements. If I wanted to just argue quickly to no benefit, I would go to social media. Again, guilty, I'm occasionally entirely incoherent, I think about a lot of things at a time.
So, to read my own writing, I keep seeing posts that are "Get rid of this or that or the other thing" because "support of this or that or the other thing." And what seems to be missing is a platform that is used as a place for a finished product, not just a shouting match where the best meme wins. And I know I'm guilty of a million self-edits, so I use this platform more casually than I'm supposed to. But the active dragging and cornering combined with the necessity of immediacy of modern social media, it's a hard place to have honest questions. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Withdrawing from SSRIs[edit]

Its a struggle, im forced to do it without a doctor due to moving for my safety and right now im just here with a bit of anxiety, waiting for the night to go by.Spoony (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

That's shitty. You could try taking your prescription bottle/records/etc. to a pharmacy and explaining your situation. The pharmacist might write you an emergency prescription. Could also try an urgent care facility if one is available. (Assuming you're 'Murican?) Or a regular doctor appointment if you can get in somewhere and they take your insurance or you can handle the cash price (ask straight up about paying cash; some places will give you a good price because it means they don't have to go through filing insurance claims). Other options are going to a psychiatric hospital if you can get to one, though I don't know if they'll insist on admitting you. Or a regular emergency room, if you don't mind waiting forever and having the possible issue of a big bill. If you're on Medicaid or Medicare the bill usually isn't an issue. Which, speaking of, protip, sign up for Medicaid right away if you're eligible. If not, try to sign up for individual health insurance ("Obamacare") if you don't have it and you can manage it. Moving triggers a "special enrollment period" which means you can sign up right now. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
It got bad enough I ended up having 3 different panic attacks, but I was able to get an appointment set tomorrow. Im taking 2/3 of my original dosage until I get directions on what to do but Im hoping to taper off.Spoony (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

M4A and ethics[edit]

People literally cannot afford to see doctors, M4A is a matter of life and death for many people. Those who oppose it are immoral, I myself am at risk of losing my insurance due to Trump's assaults on social safety nets. I need my meds, my life would be hell without them. I am mentally ill, I've gotten nothing back from Social Security even tho it's been almost a year since I first applied for disability and I`m gonna lose my insurance when I turn 19, without my risperdal for instance I become suicidal.

It's not even a matter of "affording" M4A, I don't want to hear that talk when we literally just wasted 1.5 trillion dollars on already obsolete aircraft. Oxyaena Harass 13:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, stupid question. Why are you not using risperidone instead? My google-fu shows that it costs $4 for a 30 day supply at Walmart, and $1.50 a month for mail order. CoryUsar (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Risperdal is risperidone, and I don't have money, any money. Oxyaena Harass 16:12, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
So why is your insurance paying for risperdal and not the generic risperidone? Might seem off topic, but it's related to my area of expertise. CoryUsar (talk) 16:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Most people use brand and generic names of drugs interchangeably. They probably are taking generic. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
The old rock and a hard place predicament... Hope your fortune turns somehow. 82.36.198.177 (talk) 17:26, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Are you sure you're losing insurance at 19? Most people can stay on their parents' insurance until 26 now. Apply for Medicaid if you can. Also get a Social Security disability lawyer if you haven't. (You can do this even if you've already started SSDI/SSI applications.) It's often difficult to get claims approved without one. They know the tricks of the trade. They don't take payment up-front (because obviously most people applying can't afford it); if you get approved, they get paid from a cut of your benefit. See if there are social workers, charity programs, or anything like that available in your area as well. They can really help you navigate the system. It might be worth checking whether you're eligible for any other benefits from things like parents' other work benefits: stuff like private disability insurance. Worst-case, go to a psychiatric hospital if you need to. It's better than dying. I feel for you buddy. Society is fucked up in a lot of ways. I have severe major depressive disorder myself, though I'm very very lucky that it's now well-controlled on meds and I have a wonderful loving fantastic family. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

See, that is a sad thing about politics right there-M4A is popular and furthermore it is logistically sound(we can fund it, we can boost our healthcare infrastructure to handle the increase in patients) but strategically doomed(there is no way to get it through congress when even most democrats just want the public option and some even agree with the privatization polices of the Republicans, and neither Biden nor Trump would really pressure them on that.) A sad fact of life I suppose, though given that the USA is a dying nation its diktats will only matter for so long.-Flandres (talk) 18:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I would say calling the USA a "dying nation" is a bit of overreaction... but on the other hand the socio-political situation America is abnormal in liberal democracies. No other liberal democracy, even very conservative democracies, have such a mass reactionary movement oppose to even the most milequetoast of social reforms. So yeah, the US is at a crossroad: it either can implement much needed social reform or it will continue its downward spiral towards a civil war.Tuxer (talk) 23:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
And how likely is it that these "much needed social reforms" will actually happen on the federal level? I don't think it is an exaggeration to call a nation organized by a hideously unsustainable political and economic system about to enter a climate crisis a dying one.-Flandres (talk) 23:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, I find myself agreeing with you for once. Oxyaena Harass 23:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
"for once?" Forgive me for being daft, but I did not think we have even met, let alone quarreled, that much around here...is there some way I have offended you that I have forgotten?-Flandres (talk) 00:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Nah, I`m just being caustic. Forgive me lol. Oxyaena Harass 00:48, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
I’m assuming you’re referring to the F-35 when talking about “$1.5 trillion on an obsolete aircraft”. That is actually untrue, it’s the total cost of acquisition and aircraft fleet operation to 2077 that will cost 1.5 trillion. Obsolete? Coming from someone in the operational and intel side I can assure you it’s definitely not. Has the F-35 been marred by delays and cost overruns? Definitely. But we have not spent close to 1.5 trillion on it. 76.198.195.103 (talk) 12:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Our enemies are already adopting drones, drone warfare is the future of combat aviation. Oxyaena Harass 13:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Shifting the mood here- Funny Esperanto Sentences![edit]

Because everyone is tense around here lately, why not have some fun?

Cu vi mangi autojn kun karatoj kaj chokolado?

La hundo satas ludas kun bebo.

Hundojn satas cezimo. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Mia ŝvebŝipo estas plena de angiloj. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 00:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Mi ne sxatas doni beboj al hundoj, kun au sen karatoj. 96.241.209.54 (talk) 02:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Voku al la pordisto. Laǔŝajne estas rano en mia bideo. Spud (talk) 11:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

On “acting gay”[edit]

My image of what a gay man is like is severely colored by modern media, or media in general. I just have a hard time picturing someone who is gay that isn’t “effeminate” or flamboyant. Even in the area I live the meetings I go to seem to have nothing but that personality. I haven’t really met anyone that isn’t like that and it’s kind of left me feeling left out, like that is the only option available for a gay man in order to be “seen”. It has me feeling like I have to be into such things and lie the same things as well just to belong or to meet someone else but I don’t truly do so.Machina (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

where the fuck do you go out where that is all you see? im guessing not xxl. its not 'the only option for a gay man in order to be seen' - its all you are selectively seeing, and possibly your views on masculinity are shit. its not at all borne out in my experience, and I have been, lets say prolific, in that area (that's not a boast, I have a some what compulsive personality), and im rough trade. does it not occur to you flamboyant types tend to stand out more, because, you know, they are flamboyant? and its not born out by what people are looking for in others. some folk are, some aren't. there is no shortage of people looking for a narrow definition of masculinity, and sadly no shortage of people who are not only looking for that narrow definition, 'real men' as they'd have you believe, who are not shy about letting you know of their dislike for 'camp queens' and if they wanted to fuck a woman they would. spare us from straight acting bores. its not a good look for you. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
There are both feminine gay guys and masculine gay guys; same goes for gay women. Seen plenty of media showing both types. Shows are not restricted to one type. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 20:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

So Massive clearly missed the point. What I am saying is that much of what I see around me is pretty much the stereotype. I mean it’s South Florida so that’s somewhat expected. I just haven’t met any guy who don’t fit that stereotype mould when I go to the gay areas. If you’re talking about Grindr that’s got the same problem only here it’s full of anonymous “straight” guys experimenting anonymously. I haven’t seen media portray a gay man as something other than their sexuality and in the most feminine way. Gets me thinking that’s all there is.Machina (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

talking of missing the point, re read what I said about you selectively seeing what you see. also consider how you continually recount observations that are shallow and dismissive of the people that your observations involve, consider these observations are contrary to the experiences of everyone whoever responds to you, consider how your rigid and inflexible interpretations of even the most benign things as somehow negative are shared by noone but yourself and everyone else is wrong because you said so, consider how dismissive you are of the people responding with their own, often extensive experiences that contradict your shallow observations, dismissing them as deluded or ignorant, as if you are the only gay in village who has ever experienced gay life, considering how you continually make post that show you do not/cannot/will not make efforts to engage more in life or with people for your observations to be anything other than shallow and dismissive, consider how its always other people that are the problem or when no one else is involved any advice given or misconception corrected that might help you are instantly dismissed with no attempt to even consider how it might be helpful in someway, consider how you have built a narrative for yourself that you continually reinforce to simply avoid having to deal with any of your of issues, and consider that empathy that many of us may have with your mental issues and insecurities, we all have our own here it seems, will only get you so much leeway for continuing to being such prick about earnest and honest responses to your posts. fuck off. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:13, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
and just to address some specific points, ive never been to florida, but I hear people al the time say the same thing about gaylife in London, its still complete dogshit. I myself have bitched to friends about supposedly straight guys on grindr, but the difference is I know im just sounding off because I like to sound off once in a while, and I can easily see it isn't reflected by reality. and finally anyone looking at Hollywood or main stream media and thinking its has an accurate depiction of any kind of minority life, is a fucking idiot. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:28, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
ok last time, but concerning grindr, there is a feature where you can pick any location in the world, so I just typed Miami, specifically Miami gardens which I picked at random, and see what popped up. can you guess if it confirms or contradicts anything said by machina? I'll give you a hint - not one profile corresponded to anything machina said, and not just about grindr, about anything. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
ok really one last time I tried Miami beach this time. that's gotta super gay. no sr8 guys, lots of abs, some twinky type, some beary types, 1 crossdresser, 1 transwoman. several tourists. no one saying they were str8, but nothing super gay. starting to think London might be though, the building I live in looks a lot camper than Miami. I do love London. anything outside zone 2 is wasteland though AMassiveGay (talk) 00:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Again Massive it shows how little you know. I said that in my area I haven't met any of the people around me who contradict the stereotype. I have done what is asked of me and gone into the world but I end up disappointed because instead of examples that contradict my views I just see more of the same that I am trying to disprove. Even the muscled guys around here are still part of the "effeminate" stereotype. So it's clear that you are the one who doesn't understand, who hasn't tried and failed again and again to see proof of what other people talk about. Consider, perchance, that you know nothing of this area I am in because you don't live here.Machina (talk) 05:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

its always other people with you isn't. and honestly, at this point I wouldn't trust you t be able to accurately describe your breakfast. on top that you make a clichéd homophobic complaint like a clichéd straight acting bore. you have become a cliché. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
It's more like you have become the bore with how little you know. It's clear you don't have an interest in being helpful.Machina (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
@Machina I will give you a benefit of a doubt. Perhaps you did not know but there are plenty of examples in media showing all types of gay and trans people. I will not lie, there is cliches in media as well though. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 15:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
I just tend to see the same stereotypes being repeated again. The only time I see diversity is with lesbian relationships in the median but when it comes to gay ones or even gay characters there doesn't seem to be much in the way of progress. I also meant it when I said that the groups and meeting I go to tend to be more of the "stereotype" and makes it hard to see gays as the diverse group people claim them to be.Machina (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
"Acting gay" and the related stereotypes are a form of social signaling. Like other social signals, they serve a purpose for the people who perform them. In this case, it identifies their sexual orientation, which sets the context for interactions in a way that's useful. Gay people are a small minority of the general population, so finding prospective partners is a lot easier with an obvious signal, and it helps to maintain solidarity in a minority group, especially one that's faced various hardships. The strength of this signaling as a normative influence naturally varies from place to place. Looks like you happen to be in an area where it's particularly strong. I would expect there to be others who don't particularly like conforming to the stereotype, but with its local cultural strength, they probably don't participate much in "gay culture" since the local culture doesn't resonate with them. If you want to find them, you'll have to do so without a handy signal. You mentioned that there doesn't seem to be "progress" in media portrayals. Progress to what? Your experience shows that the portrayal is largely accurate. Do you want inaccuracy for the sake of ticking diversity boxes? The problem with that in this case is that a gay character who doesn't perform the signals can fail to tick the "gay" box in the first place because their sexual orientation isn't made a focal point of their character. Media portrayals tend to select for visible traits if the traits are considered important, so tokenism tends to build with stereotypes. Often accurate, but often failing to give a complete picture of the demographic in question. Which not only isn't the goal of such things, it shouldn't be the goal. People are individuals, not instances of a transcendent Platonic Idea of their demographic, and in any incomplete sample, you won't get a complete representation of the demographic. 192․168․1․42 (talk) 03:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
if they think its 'accurate' then hes in the only place in the world its is. hes merely regurgitating a homophobic trope. also, queer as folk, six feet under, the book club, the soporanos, probably half the characters in oz, even will and grace have non camp gay characters. that he hasn't seen any is on him. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
oh, and omar from the wire. AMassiveGay (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Will and Grace is a terrible example and it part of the problem, same with Queer as Folk as well as Oz. But the mystery guy has a point though, they make it obvious because otherwise it wouldn't sell well.Machina (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I note that you ignore the shows I mentioned, buts lets stick to queer as folk, will and grace. I gave examples of shows with non camp characters. there are camp effeminate and flamboyant characters in them sure, but there is a diversity there. on top of that without those shows, queer as folk especially, there wouldn't be any gay characters on tv. they were benchmarks in representation.
as for sexuality being front and centre, guess what - if you are gay society defines you by your sexuality. whether you like it or not. its likely not all there is to you and isn't for me. but that definition defines who my friends are, where I go out, who my lovers are. its not all I am but it is a big part me.
and its not the issue I have with what you've been saying hereAMassiveGay (talk) 21:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
It's OK that this is the question. I just checked a listicle (no autocorrect for that word, my God) from Buzzfeed that said "16 Gay Tweets to Make You Laugh During Coronavirus" and it's very cool that some people can lean in to the stereotype. Also posted tweets that featured black women in the videos, and me, I'm like "Didn't I also read that meme blackface is a thing?" I think AMassiveGay is on point with that statement. As a cis male, I am comfortable making jokes. A guy at work played Hinds, and after almost a whole year of hearing nothing but awful EDM from the kids, I was like "Is this Hinds? If this is Hinds I'm going to lose my shit." And it was a new single from Hinds, and it was a new single from an all girl Spanish band that I absolutely love and I lost my shit. Which, for me, was just bopping along. A young lady asked me "Do you like this song?" I said "It's not just that I like this song, it's that I love this band. " and everybody looked at me. "These are my gay-boy tunes." And everybody laughed and got it, nobody questioned it. I don't think they think I'm gay, I just think based on what I normally listen to, me being into a very poppy girl-centric band was a surprise, and calling it gay of me to like it was a quick explanation that actually worked, and I feel bad about spouting it off. I don't have time to say "well, they are influenced by a lot of the same bands I like that you've never heard of, and I read their aesthetic more as a take on alternative indie rock with a punk vigor and a pop sensibility, and their songs always culminate in the undeniable sound of a group of girls having fun, which is also how they portray themselves, so that's nice." I can't explain that to anyone who listens to EDM casually, like, look, this is what I like to hear, the kids are just "vibing," and if a song with as clever a structure and as interesting melodic counterpoint as Hinds regularly put down is too much, if it's confusing to you, whatever, it's me being gay for Hinds. And unfortunately, that actually reads, because homosexuality is also confusing. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

It seems to be the issue because as I have said I don’t see people in real life where I live that are contrary to the stereotype.They all exhibit some aspect of it if not all of it and I can’t really relate to them.Machina (talk) 07:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

define the stereotype. define effeminate. define flamboyant. define masculine. how closely do you think people meet people your definition? you say 'They all exhibit some aspect of it' that there needs explaining because that sounds like you latching on to some superficial aspect, maybe a particular mannerism, something in how they talk, or how they dress, some little thing that you are using to make too broad a judgement. that kind of thing is fine if you need to narrow the field, so to speak, but it tells you nothing about the those you have dismissed. no one this planet is 100% one thing or another. no one is perfect. why rush to judgement based on arbitrary and superficial criteria. why get hung up on some aspect that's probably only evident to you because you are hung up. is 'some aspect' a fundamental difference that you cant relate to, or a superficial thing you ae using to put up walls? AMassiveGay (talk) 16:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

None of it is superficial, it's just the they all seem invested to varying degrees in the culture and I am not. I don't care about Pride, drag, whatever reality show they reference, social media, drinking, my outfit, or really any aspect of the culture. But wherever I go there it is and I just feel like an outsider looking in. I don't relate to these people because they aren't me. They tend to be rather superficial even if they are nice folks. I find myself having to explain a lot of what I am talking about when I am around them and trying to share my interests makes me look like an alien. You say such criteria is arbitrary but it's not, it's a prevailing trend with from what I see no real exceptions. It's not just one thing it's many things, of which I am not.Machina (talk) 19:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

what do you mean by culture here? with the exception of pride do you not think these are typical subjects for any one straight or gay? what is the venue for such conversation? how well do you the people? people don't go all in with their passions right away, they need to get used to one another. its not meant to be deep and challenging especially if the goal is to relax and enjoy ones self, that comes later. a life story from a not that close acquaintance can be a bit much, a bit too intense, off putting. its small talk. theres an art to it. im not great at it. but it doesn't make them superficial because conversation doesnt move beyond it. its means you are not gelling enough to move beyond. reality shows and social media feature heavily in polite conversation these day. its common ground. but the topic is not really the point. its how you respond. what does it say about you? does it give them anything to work with? how you react to a topic you are unfamiliar are not interested in. what do they give you? tone, cues, nerves, confidence. whether you are interested in what they have to say. its being interested in other people.
none of this is about 'acting gay'. it has nothing to do with stereotypes. it has nothing to do with effeminacy nor masculinity. people think coming out fixes all problems. sadly no. all the self loathing and loneliness, all the coping mechanisms that may or may not do more harm than good - they don't disappear overnight. whatever passes for a gay community wherever one may be might be welcoming in some ways, but in others? you've still got to navigate a whole new set of social mine fields with all the anxiety and angst you've had before. it can be despairing if you don't fit in with who you thought was 'your people'. this is about social skills. its about confidence. about self image. self acceptance. knowing what it is you want. issues with these things don't have easy fixes. the more barriers you put up the harder it is. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

It's not and I'm not talking about a life's story. When I explain my interests and what I like I end up having to use more words and explanations because the way I like things isn't the same as most people. As for the culture, it's just obvious to everyone here what is meant by that. The fact that I have to explain it means that you don't really "get it". I'm not putting up barriers, merely recognizing the ones that are there. There is a clear divide between me and the people in the gay community Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)and it's clear that we just won't get each other. I don't get their interest in the gay culture and they don't get my stuff either. Acting "gay" is really the only way for people to stick around with me. It has nothing to do with any of the things you mentioned, which is why I'll repeat myself when I say "you don't get it". The community is only for those who fit the culture and I don't.Machina (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

you start this thread with the nebulous term 'acting gay', which you have portrayed with the most broad and homophobic descriptors, in a way that I find personally offensive and is patently false wherever in the world you may be. you've not elaborated in any useful way, shifting focus to other complaints, complaints that are incredibly superficial. nothing that puts anything in context. nothing to give weight or flesh out anything you have said. I ask about culture because you have given nothing that indicates how this all might fit together, the sort of interactions you have, the spaces they take place in, what it is you were expecting, what it was you were looking for. nothing but your insistence that you are correct. im not going to take homophobic tropes at your word merely because you insist.
what were you hoping to gain here? what was the goal? a grown up would have just said 'not my scene' and go about doing something that is. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I feel like I shouldn't have to explain what is meant by gay culture since everyone around South Florida knows what is meant by it. They know what is meant by those who fit into it and those who don't. As I have tried to say, if you don't know what I mean by gay culture then you don't get it. The descriptors are not homophobic, but accurate and even people in the community know what is meant by it. You need to get in the loop before you criticize what you don't know. My complaints aren't superficial either, as I have said there is a "divide"around here between "straight acting" gay men and the ones who don't. There is even a difference in tastes and interests between people who fall into the two groups, we all know it. That fact that you refuse to acknowledge such things just reveals your ignorance.Machina (talk) 00:53, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

more empty assertions and absolutely nothing else. you are full of shit. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Can you articulate a definition of homophobia such that something in this discussion so far qualifies? 192․168․1․42 (talk) 09:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
So this is falling into the "I didn't mean that, so I didn't do that" realm, which is a perpetuity trap. So I got all drunk and tried to say homosexuality as a visible culture is easier to understand than homosexuality as an identity. Alcoholism, what a way to get a dog into a fight and then forget about it. That doesn't mean the culture that is perceived is more accurate. But, homophobia, I think is a little out of context. I've been grabbed onto at a bar by a drunk gay guy. Just get outta there, state your heterosexuality if it matters and outmaneuver them. Anybody can be gross and desperate. At that same bar I did tell a guy not to kiss on a girl who was just making sick faces whenever he did it. I also saw a pregnant girl with a shot and a cigarette, and I was like "The convenience of this location is not worth the circumstance anymore." If we can agree that the initial question is a little loaded, and we can agree that nobody is "acting" gay or assumed gay here, can we ask a better question? I'll take my answer off thread, because I'd like this thread to die. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hmmm....[edit]

This may not be a cure, but I for one don't like to get sick, so this seems good. What's not good, however, is drinking bleach. Now, if you excuse me, I gotta find something that will make my keyboard sticky.Jeh2ow Damn son! 19:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh sure, the Deep State poison center will tell you drinking bleach is a bad idea and will cause organ failure and blah blah, but non-sheeple know not to believe any of that BS. Drink it five times a day and you're guaranteed to live to 100 in perfect health! And the real cure They don't want you to know about is mixing it with drain cleaner. Cleans out all the toxins beamed into your body by Wi-Fi. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
For best results, do both. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 00:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Fap for health! NoFap is a death cult. Bongolian (talk) 04:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The person who should actually win the Democratic nomination[edit]

Democrats are hung up on Biden versus Sanders, as is abundantly evident in this here saloon bar (even leading to at least one incident of LANCB!). But I can present you with a better option, an option for the future. Democrats disagree on a candidate to pick because of, primarily, differences in policy. The clear solution is not to invest in a candidate who sits between Biden and Sanders, but a candidate who has no policy at all to be upset about because he hasn't even made a single policy proposal. That's right: I'm talking about Martin "The Rock" O'Malley! Now, I can hear what some of you are thinking. "But Spriggina! Martin O'Malley already ran for president in 2016 and lost by a lot!" Well, I can assure you that this fearless, unflinching giant among men has only been made stronger thanks to his previous experience, and don't forget that Bernie also ran and lost in 2016. The fact of the matter is that America needs a uniting force, and O'Malley is that farce.

I will now take questions. սպրիգգինա (խոսել) (ներդրումներ) @ 21:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

What should we do with a drunken sailor early in the mornin'? Oxyaena Harass 00:47, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Tie him to the mast and then you flog him; keel haul him till he's sober. սպրիգգինա (խոսել) (ներդրումներ) @ 01:48, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
That's what we do with a drunken sailor early in the mornin'!Jeh2ow Damn son! 03:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
No. Put him in a Scupper or a long boat. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Put him into bed with the captain's daughter, then throw him in the bilge and make him drink it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

John Henry's Hammer[edit]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TzQiJQiXMA

Oxyaena Harass </span> 02:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

New article: civility[edit]

I've created a new mainspace page on civility. This page is intended to be descriptive of the idea of civility, and is not intended to change any RW rules in and of itself. I encourage everyone to read and edit it, but I also encourage everyone to think about whether there should be any changes to RW rules towards creating greater civility. Bongolian (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Is Boris Johnson right?[edit]

I have to admit that this a question I thought I would never ask, as the default response is "No".

But he has taken the UK on a different path to the rest of Europe in respect of Covid 19. Instead of trying to stop the virus dead by putting the entire country on lock-down like Italy and Spain he has decided (as far as I can tell) to allow the virus to spread though the less-vulnerable members of the population in the hope of creating herd immunity which will protect everyone who is more vulnerable.

Of course, this is based on the assumption that people who have recovered from the virus will, in fact, be immune for some time. This has not yet been established. So it's a risky strategy.

But it does have a hypothetical endpoint. When, say, 80% of the not-at-risk population has survived the infection life should start to return to normal. In contrast I'm not sure that the "everyone stay at home" strategy has an endpoint. Because - how long do you stay in lock-down?

I know that this seems to have worked our in China but aren't they still vulnerable to a second wave of infections once they open everything up again?

Anyway, I would be interested in opinions.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I’m by no means an expert on this, but one thing that had me puzzled was that the UK did not limit visitors to nursing homes, i.e. decrease contacts between the low and high risk groups. This is indicative of what I see as the core problem with Johnson’s strategy (if it is indeed a coherent strategy and not just rationalising doing nothing):
That by letting the disease run rampant among the population at large, even if most are not in any serious danger, you are much more likely to see vulnerable groups infected in large numbers as well, possibly overwhelming the capacity of the healthcare sector to treat them.
The converse strategy is to slow the infection rates enough that the healthcare sector can cope with the numbers of seriously ill patients and the Italians have some trouble managing this at the moment, which is why several other countries lock down at an earlier point on the “infection curve” than that reached by the Italians. However, one should also not underestimate that there is a degree of “healthcare theatre” (cf. the “security theatre” in airports) in some of the measures, such as several countries closing their borders, despite COVID-19 already being well established within the countries in question. ScepticWombat (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Yes, closing borders after there is well-established internal community transmission may not make a lot of sense. But we now have the case of China which apparently has largely managed to close down internal transmission and is now imposing restrictions on internal visitors. Though that beings me back to the question: if you go for the "close borders and lock-down" route, then what is the endgame?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 12:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Presumably the virus will just die off eventually if it cannot spread to any fresh bodies. Either that, or years later we have a vaccine, but that's a bit of a long stretch to wait for an end game. 82.36.198.177 (talk) 12:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
It's kind of unlikely that it will just die off, other viruses just mutate around immunity and there would be see to be no reason this one won't do the same. And, sure, we can wait for a vaccine, but that's going to be long time with whole countries under quarantine. For that matter whole economies.
I live in Spain and it's clear that this is going to get very painful very quickly.
In Madrid alone something like 400,000 hospitality workers have been laid off according to one story.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
'Viruses etc' do not carry passports/respect borders.
The main problems seem to be the combination of people being infective before the disease becomes apparent - and seemingly for many people (including 'young persons' and 'infants who have not yet received all their inoculations') the disease has minimal 'show' ('minor cold or sore throat etc'). Anna Livia (talk) 12:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
You are correct that Johnson is Dead Wrong. In short, taking measures to slow down the transmission rate reduces the total number of infections. Here's a Washington Post article, with graphics, which explains it (no fee to view).[1] Bongolian (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
I've read the article and its very interesting. (But when I went back to confirm my understanding the paywall locked me out). But as I remember it, the article was arguing for neither a total lock-down nor for a laissez-fair attitude in order to reduce transmissions. It was arguing for social distancing as the best option to reduce transmission.
But prioritizing transmission reduction is not the stated objective of the UK. The argument is that they want the "fit" population immunized by exposure to the virus.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
What do people who know what they're talking about, meaning infectious disease experts, say? This isn't an "opinion" thing. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 01:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
The UK has plausible-sounding experts who have appeared on TV alongside the British Prime Minister who have confirmed that he is doing the right thing by going for herd immunity and broadly leaving the country to keep running.
Spain has plausible-sounding experts who have appeared on TV alongside the Spanish Prime Minister who have confirmed he is doing the right thing by shutting down the country.
In both countries there are those who question the strategy.
The problem is that the situation is unprecedented and thus there are different possible options and the optimum one is not clear.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
at this point there is no good options that arnt going to suck for some people. AMassiveGay (talk) 10:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
the criticism I hear about the uk approach is not that it is wrong per say, but that it is a gamble over something that we don't yet know too much about AMassiveGay (talk) 10:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
The UK government is now insisting herd immunity is not part of the strategy, although it was chief scientific advisor Sir Patrick Vallance who mentioned it (i.e. it wasn't just Boris Johnson talking shit).[2] --Annanoon (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess it's becoming a moot point as the UK is gradually moving towards the stance held by other European governments.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

'Infamy, infamy'[edit]

Relevant to mention today. Anna Livia (talk) 12:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Beware the ides of March. Cardinal Chang (talk) 18:54, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I keep experimenting with story concepts involving zombies and keep writing draft after draft for each concept[edit]

My computer, my flash drives and Google drive are loaded with novel drafts. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Good, that's a healthy part of writing. Any experienced author will tell you there are dozens of drafts for every successful work they finally get out the door. I will say my dumb personal opinion that you are free to ignore is I think zombies have been overdone a bit in the past 15-odd years, but you need to write what interests you. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Take what I say with a grain of salt since I don't have any books published, but write what you want if for no other purpose than to practice the whole story creation process. How do you develop characters, how do they interact with each other, how have you had to rewrite either the characters or the plot to make one fit the other (and which did you choose), and so forth. You absolutely will not get that one right the very first time you write something, whether that was a homework assignment in a college class, a fanfic, or an actual novel.
As for story ideas for myself, I've been toying with an idea for an inverted dystopia, that is, something that should be dystopian but isn't. Basically, a world where everyone has ID chips implanted in them that everyone else can scan, and all of your personal details and criminal background are instantly available to everyone else, only it turns out that there were/are very good reasons to implement such a "terrible" idea. E.g., you can instantly see which homeless people are addicts/excons and which are just down on their luck, which "businessmen" are known con artists, which guys hitting on you are already in a relationship or have delinquent child support payments or oh so much worse, and so on. Also, just crossing my fingers no one else has already done something like that already. CoryUsar (talk) 02:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
CU - what about politicians? And 'the grey hats' can be variously useful on occasion (or merely interesting).
Try AO3 and other websites of a similar nature - and there are probably zombie-themed groups on 'the usual social media websites.' Anna Livia (talk) 10:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Not really focused on politics, but rather day to day life for everyone. CoryUsar (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Anyone want to write a story on politicians being zombies (or even zombie reptilians)?
AO3 - Archives of our Own: other fanfic and story websites available. Anna Livia (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Right, so what do you think is wrong with that? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 18:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Got some themes in mind: individualism, freedom from oppressive religious dogma (in both a figurative and literal sense), combating racism and cultural divides. Got some things planned out. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Vandal Brake[edit]

How much do you love Vandal Brake? I worked on this thing for an embarrassingly long period of time (maybe 4 hours) before I realised that I'm basically looking at a copy of MediaWiki's blocking code from circa 2011, with most instances of "block" replaced with "vandal", the point apparently just being to allow a rate limit as a kind of block action. Maybe there's another 2 hours of work left until I can be sure that it will work after a MediaWiki upgrade. Do you love it as much as you would love the other things I could do with 6 hours of my time? OK, so 4 hours of that is sunk costs, but we can expect that this order of magnitude of maintenance cost will be repeated for future upgrades. Is it the one thing that makes RationalWiki special? Or could you make do with plain old MediaWiki blocks alone? -- Tim Starling (talk) 04:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I don't use vandal brake much, so I don't care. Others may think differently. Bongolian (talk) 05:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Go ahead and do away with it, not much use anyways. Oxyaena Harass 08:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
. no. it has its uses AMassiveGay (talk) 10:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
The vandalbrake exists because once upon a time this site took pride in literally never blocking anybody. Even the most obnoxious assholes and blatant trolls were given a voice here. It was a freedom of speech utopia. Then authoritarians like Bongolian and Oxy, who I'm naming as examples because they are so content with 86ing it, gain influence here, and now people get outright blocked on a hunch and massive HCM shitstorms form because someone else with influence eventually comes along and challenges the authoritarians for being too quick to block. Frankly, there would be a lot less drama if the two who proudly declare they don't use vandalbrake started using it exclusively. GreenNewDeal (talk) 12:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Reminder that Morris is permabanned for "serious harassment." Oxyaena Harass 13:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
(removing trollcollapse) @GreenNewDeal The vandal brake is not used for random IPs, which limits it's usefulness. Since the big debate a couple of months ago about "authoritarian" block practices, I've seen less of this type of behavior. @Oxyaena Please assume good faith. Not every contentious post is a Morris troll. The vandal brake and the abuse from shitheads like Morris are two completely separate issues. Why did you conflate the two here and automatically assume that this post is a deliberate troll attack? Cosmikdebris (talk) 13:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Simply knowing behavioral patterns, it should also be noted that back then, even spambots only got blocked for a few days. Is that something we want to go back to, a decidedly toxic hellhole of a community? Oxyaena Harass 15:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Of course I do not want to encourage a toxic community. We are in complete agreement on that point. The community here is not stupid and can readily recognize truly toxic behavior and deal with it. We must be careful not to assume that everyone who posts a single contradictory opinion is a troll. I respectfully disagree with your contention that GreenNewDeal's original post above makes them a toxic troll by, using your logic, "simply knowing behavioral patterns." Cosmikdebris (talk) 15:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
On the point of the vandal brake, it is a useful feature, but it there's a tradeoff between doing a quality upgrade and leaving this feature out, I'm on the side of concentrating on the upgrade. Cosmikdebris (talk) 15:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Just to note that I have never opposed the use of the vandal brake, and just because I don't use it much doesn't mean that I'm blocking excessively. I agree with Cosmikdebris. Bongolian (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Let's keep it for now. I don't really want to remove it and then have my action be cited for years to come as aiding the decline of the site into authoritarianism. I may simplify it a bit. I have some concerns about the autoblock feature: when I introduced autoblocks to MediaWiki in 2003 (wow, so long ago), I gave them a 24 hour expiry time, since IP addresses change and you need to avoid collateral damage. But VandalBrake doesn't have expiry, so autoblocks are retained forever. It looks like they were cleaned out in January 2018, but not since then. The special page text is overridden to discourage IP blocking anyway. If we're not blocking IP addresses, then the "anon only" and "prevent account creation" flags don't make any sense. So I am leaning towards removing the IP-related code and all of the options, which would simplify it substantially. -- Tim Starling (talk) 06:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

starting to get a bit concerned[edit]

run out of flour. went to shop, and the shelves were bare. got some eggs and some kidney beans and loaf of bread. I wont starve but fuck that's going to be bland meals for while. eventually found some flour in the offy so at least can make gnocchi AMassiveGay (talk) 20:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Crazy that the 2012 crazies were only 8 years off, huh? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
was there much hoarding in 2012? the offy was fully stocked, so hopefully people are hoarding from Sainsbury. theres no paracetamol anywhere either AMassiveGay (talk) 20:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Well, a stopped clock is right twice a day. Since all societies go through periods of great turmoil, not to mention they eventually must collapse, if you constantly predict some massive social disruption is imminent you are bound to get it right at SOME point. They may get the cause of death wrong(so no communist invasion or NWO crackdown), but it will happen.-Flandres (talk) 20:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't know if this is happening in all neighborhoods where you are. I have found that this binge buying happens in areas where a lot of people have extra cash. Poor people just buy what they need because they must. Ariel31459 (talk) 22:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Building on Ariel's point, buying what you must is fine until people drive across the city in an effort to buy up all the shit they might need. Then you have to consider what you have versus what you might not. I moved into my current apartment late October. I've not used up the 12 rolls of toilet paper I bought, a month and some weeks ago I bought extra TP, toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoo and conditioner, because I heard this stupid shit was gonna happen and I believed it. Then it didn't and I was like "well, this shit doesn't go stale, so whatever." I do my pooping at work and know how to wipe (granted I, both at work and home, have a bathroom with a single toilet and sink (It's not executive, everyone can use it), use the bathroom sink and cheapo toilet paper for some DIY wet wiping), so even with my hairy ass, weekend poops aren't going to get me. What's going to get me is I didn't stock my freezer, I tend to buy what I'm going to eat, and I can't buy extra food now because the food is gone. Grocery stores aren't going to close because "their size and spacing, and aisles create a natural barrier" or some shit, OK, Governor, grocery stores won't close and I am going to continue to go to grocery stores to get food. I'm not worried about myself, but I have already had to talk to my brother to help me explain to my mom that I am not going to visit her until this is at least somewhat understood. I can go to the grocery store without fear of getting sick because I am not scared of getting sick, but if I feel sick I'm not supposed to go, but now I will have to because I couldn't get a carton of eggs. Well played, doomsday preppers. I knew I should have bought some of those Jim Bakker apocalypse buckets. I bet he is rolling in enchilada cheese right now. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
My Brexit stockpile is certainly turning out to be useful. Avida Dollarsher again 09:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I live in central London, waterloo area. as with most of central London, you have the wealthy living in one building, but next door is social housing. lots of people come in to London to work. I am thinking commuters if its only the supermarkets that are empty but cornershop/offy is fully stocked. theres not to many left of those sadly. they have all been forced out. we got 5 Sainsbury and 5 tescos, all selling the same things, all within 5 mins walk. used to be cornershops. a variety of lentils, beans, flours, world foods, now the choice is kidney beans or chick peas, and only in a tin. and you cant top up the leccy in Sainsbury. only one place to do that, an if that goes, means a 30 minute walk just for that. gentrification really makes things bland AMassiveGay (talk) 16:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Is friendship selfish?[edit]

https://medium.com/@krisgage/friendship-is-a-waste-of-my-time-2a48a1b01831

From this post it makes it seem like friendships are awful drains on us.Machina (talk) 20:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

No, selfish is the notion that if something does not "give a survival advantage to me", it is useless. Humans evolved to be social, acting to benefit the whole species, not individuals. It is a different strategy than e.g. felines, who are way more individual, but from my very biased point of view, apes are more successful than cats. 2804:431:C7F2:C08F:C216:2D14:9439:B93F (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Friendship is magic. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 07:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Oh yes, it is. Bongolian (talk) 07:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess from the way the article makes it sound much of the aspects of friendship appear to be more parasitic than we first assume them to be.Machina (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I mean, "waste of my time" is absolutely a feeling. Especially when you've got a friend that monsters on a whim, and then doesn't engage back. So, I revisited solipsism, and I think I have a better use/explanation. It's absolutely true that I can not experience the world the same way you do. Solipsism is not useful to ask questions like "did I make the universe up?" It is more useful to ask questions like "if I see the color red, and everyone else sees the color red, would it look the same through my eyes and theirs?" Your perception is the only perception you can perceive, and it's very important to be solid in that, but it doesn't mean it's the only perception that can exist. And if friends are a waste of your time, I'm really sorry for getting mad at you. I heard a joke about seeing a bad movie and somebody in the theater said "Well that's 2 hours I'm not getting back." "Bad news, that's not how time works. Who is going to give you an hour back?" Not my joke, I don't remember who said it. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Issue with one of the state flag icons[edit]

So, apparently there's an issue with the {{sf|ga}} because it's displaying: " Georgia (U.S. State). " instead of an an image of the Georgia state flag. Notably, other state flags display correctly.--NavigatorBR(Talk) - 21:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

For some reason, the wiki doesn't like reading the mediawiki commons file (which I'm not sure why it's specific to Georgia, maybe it has to do with the periods?), so I just uploaded a duplicate, and it reads fine now. I also created a redirect for template reasons (a page named Georgia (U.S. State) as specified in the template didn't exist). --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario Thanks for your help!--NavigatorBR(Talk) - 03:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
That looks like the Georgia State Flag to me on my end. I live in Georgia, so I'm reasonably familiar with it... Kencolt (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
It does now because the problem's been fixed. It wasn't displaying any kind of flag before. Spud (talk) 10:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Ah, I see. (Where, apparently, I wouldn't have previously...) Kencolt (talk) 13:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Anybody have any new info on the ACICS and or the schools it accredited?[edit]

Updating the ACICS article has been kinda a pain in the ass. The most recent addition I added was Daymar College (which is in the process of being sued). --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 22:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus question[edit]

Why is there so much hype and lockdown?

The deaths are 'a fairly small number', and the number of 'serious cases, recovering' under 1%, with an unknown percentage of people who have 'no worse than a bad cold' and are not recorded, and yet there are major lockdowns, closures and other interferences with ordinary living. Why not go for a more muted 'there is a flu-like going round, this is how to minimise its impact, and this is what to do if you are particularly vulnerable' strategy - thus avoiding panic buying and shortages etc?

Is there something we are not being informed of - or are 'the authorities' doing a 'real world practice' for a disease which does have a significant mortality rate? (Such 'practice exercise' do occur - Krieg spiel being one example.) Anna Livia (talk) 11:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it mainly due to the health care system will become overwhelmed if too many cases of COVD-19 happen in one area. We saw that in Wuhan where they had to build two hospitals quickly to house sick patients.Cms13ca (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
As for Shiawassee County, Michigan (where I live) there is a population of over 60,000 people. This is adding up all towns and villages. There is also only one hospital in the entire county along with urgent care clinics. The only other hospitals around are in neighboring counties. So if I wanted to go go a hospital other than the only one in my area- I would have to travel 40 miles. Btw, the neighboring counties have significantly higher populations. So if the virus spread across Michigan in high numbers the hospitals would be packed. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
If you still don't get it by now, then maybe mankind deserves to go extinct. Ok, I'll type this slowly, so you'll understand.
Firstly, this is not "just another flu." This is a flu like the 1918 Spanish flu. Have an adult read to you about that, sometime. Just not your grandparents, because you'll likely infect and kill them.
Secondly, there's about a 40% transmission rate. This means that you can expect 40% of a population to get it. Many cases will require hospitalisation, some in ICU, some for long periods of time. Fun fact - no country has enough beds, and certainly not enough high care beds for up to 40% of the population. This ignores people suffering from other ailments. If you've just had a heart attack and the ICU is full of corona victims, sorry for you.
Thirdly, that is why self-isolation is important, to try and slow the spread of the disease and avoid the spike in demand on medical services, which means they might last a bit longer before collapsing. Chances are, it's not if, but when, you're going to catch this. The aim is t make then when as far in the future as possible.
Fourthly, 7.52 billion people in the world, 40% transmission rate, 3% mortality rate = potentially 90 million dead.
Still think it's "just a flu?" Go fuck yourself. RoundeTheeHorne (talk)
RTH - swearwords detract from your argument.
Oh, boo-fucking-hoo. "Oh, you used a naughty word and know I don't know if I should take the rest of it seriously. Take me to my fainting couch." Grow the fuck up. RoundeTheeHorne (talk) 15:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I am grown up - 'dead dove, weird corners of fanfic and all that.' Consider the statement 'A gentleman is someone who knows how to (play a certain musical instrument/eat certain strongly smelling foodstuffs) but does not.' Anna Livia (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Consider the UK - 60 million population, several dozen deaths, 'thousands' with the serious form of the illness and 'perhaps 55k infected' (just quoted 'somewhere on the web') - which is a fraction of 1%.
The question is not "should action be taken" but whether, given that 'many' people (and almost all young people - the infant in the news seems to be a particular case) have very limited symptoms whether the current official courses of action are an over-reaction - or will come to be seen as such by the general population (potentially causing more problems as a result). Anna Livia (talk) 14:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

A lot of idiots are going to say, "it's just flu. What's all the fuss about?" Notice I used the word "idiots". This is not something I would necessarily always say, but under the circumstances, trust in the "powers that be" and follow the official advice to the letter. There's nothing they're not telling us. Information on the very real problems this virus poses is readily available. I'm glad I'm not in my native Britain right now, because I wouldn't like to be a prisoner in my own home for the next two or three months. But do as you're told and stay indoors. Spud (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

In the UK, the reasonable worst case prediction is 80% infected and 7.9 million hospitalized. Estimates of death in this scenario are 0.6%-1%, or 318,660-531,100.[3] The UK has nowhere near enough hospital beds, even if you ignore the fact that people will continue to be ill with other things. --Annanoon (talk) 16:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Taking extra precaution and not panicking is key. Panic helps nobody. Acting like the pandemic is the apocalypse is insane. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
True. But acting like it's nothing. Saying, "They're not going to stop me from going down the pub." Saying, "It's only flu. What's all the fuss about?". That's not going to do any good either. Spud (talk) 16:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I give you that. My main concern is conspiracy theorists and con artists taking advantage of the situation for financial gain. Truly sickening. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 17:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
One problem is - the immediate jump to 'worst case scenario' (rather than plan for 'next stage above current predictions'). What happens if '80% get the disease' - but almost all get the very minor forms - so people become blase and the next pandemic #is# the killer one? The people who say - 'they said the Millennium Bug would cause the end of civilisation as we know it, and various other serious outbreaks would kill large numbers but didn't, and all the various cases where "the powers that be" said trust us we know better and were wrong: don't call me cynical but...'
If "the authorities" said - take these sensible precautions for now and we will monitor developments and upgrade as necessary' the situation would be less problematic.
The real problems will happen when the coronavirus crisis is declared over (and the economic consequences come into full play). Anna Livia (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

This outbreak is more scary in implication than in and of itself. The populace is in the grip of a panic, several organizations have fumbled the response to varying degrees, and the economy is in peril. What happens is this keeps happening with more deadly diseases? Remember, the northern latitudes will only get warmer, and that will open the door for some truly nasty viruses to make their way north.-Flandres (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

One thing nobody's mentioned, but is worth considering: The more the virus spreads, the more chances it has at mutating. WHO response and more info here. There are already 2 variants, and any variants that may participate in the pandemic of course have to factor into vaccine design. There hasn't been evidence that the virus is changing, but it can easily change and the probability goes up with every transmission. So let's consider our options here categorized under 3 types of strategies: 1.) locking down, 2.) laissez-faire, 3.) practicing selective social distancing to slow down the spread just enough to not get out of control, but let it spread in a controlled way, hopefully through the less vulnerable part of the population. I'm not saying 1.) locking down is the perfect answer here, but it does mitigate this problem and makes things easier for vaccine design and healthcare in general, so you can see the benefits. The UK approach discussed earlier in the saloon bar of letting it spread just fast enough for herd immunity to kick in is akin to 3.) and could be somewhat foiled by virus mutations as well, so it's also not the perfect answer. 2.) Laissez-faire is I would say the worst of the 3 strategies, considering how the supposedly excellent healthcare infrastructure of Northern Italy has been completely overwhelmed and the death toll which could have probably been mitigated. Nullahnung (talk) 18:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

If you want to see how it is mutating then this is a good site.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
The situation reports seem useful enough. I won't pretend I know what patterns to look for when I see all these mutations accumulate, though. Nullahnung (talk) 17:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
it is like the flu in the sense its likely no big deal for most people. not like the flu in the sense if you are at risk, there is no vaccine or treatment beyond treating the symptoms. I feel like the difficulty for a lot of people is the we just don't know how bad this thing will be until its done. until then, businesses close down, jobs are lost, that for a lot of people not yet directly effected, is going to be tough to take. I got no sense about how long this will last, if we will have to do it all again in the winter. I got no sense if my government is doing the right things, or European ones have the right idea, no sense of the actual death rate, no sense of how reliable various worst case best case predictions. I got no clue, feels like no else has any firm idea, and while health authorities scrabble about to get what they need for whatever scenario they are working with, im left with nothing I can do in any way except wash my hands and avoid people.
if there was any certainty - a time frame, that any one thing is the right thing to do, even a definite 'x amount of will die' would help. you can plan, you can steel yourself for the worst, resign yourself to what life is going to be like for a definite while. as it is, we got a bunch of best guesses. how long before people rebel in some way? AMassiveGay (talk) 18:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
The original question can be answered in one word: Italy. Unless you’d really like to be in a situation like Italy’s with vulnerable patients overwhelming the healthcare system and see this as simply “the cost of doing business”, or unless you are actively in favour of a sort of social Darwinistic culling of the elderly and other vulnerable groups, you’d better do all you can to limit the infection rate. Not to mention that an overburdened healthcare system is likely to result in greater mortality as the need for respirators etc. outstrips supply. A healthcare system that can easily cope with, say, 10,000 cases per month for 10 months may not be able to handle 100,000 cases in a single month. ScepticWombat (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
The problem does appear to be the disconnect between 'the population of the world/a given state and the number of visible cases and deaths' and the official response of total lockdown for an indefinite period (with consequent economic and social disruption of various kinds, actual and potential, and not just present panic buying and isolation of the elderly/vulnerable).
If 'the authorities' said - we are imposing lockdown of some sort until (say) Easter (to allow for the two week carrier phase) then reconsider people would be more tolerant.
I am paraphrasing various discussions etc with others/heard - along with 'more people die on the roads (across a much wider age spectrum).' Anna Livia (talk) 11:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
More people die on the roads. Oh, for fuck's sake! Probably more people die from banging their heads against fucking brick walls as well. Which is what I feel like I'm doing here. Spud (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
I usually will be the first person to use the more people die to cars argument to dismiss a threat as not worth panicking about, but in this case we're talking about carefully considered advice from the powers that be, that cannot be so easily dismissed. Nullahnung (talk) 17:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
I do wonder, though, especially in the US with limited testing, how many people are going to quarantine themselves for 2 weeks, not actually have had COVID-19, and then emerge from their bunkers into a world that still actively spreads COVID-19. I do understand flattening the curve, but as long as that might take, now is not the time to hole up and expect it's over in 2 weeks if you're not high risk. I know Hudgens is the high profile drag right now, but she's only wrong in that she didn't encourage people to follow protocol, encourage social distancing. "Fine, whatever, go party, fill bars, wash your hands, get COVID-19, but don't visit your grandma" is really pretty bad because we're all gonna have to go to the grocery store, some tomorrow, some in a couple weeks. Don't spread COVID-19, survive it. Your immunity to it does not mean you can't carry it around. I have so many people I know who are like "This is fucking stupid, what am I supposed to do, wash my hands to the bone?" No, just do the correct thing, which is to take the steps to not spread the virus INCLUDING washing your hands, don't fucking do large gatherings (I can trust you, but when's the last time you saw an accident on the interstate, oh, twice yesterday? Cool) , don't go sniffing peoples' hair, Joe Biden, or putting your hands all over a microphone, Donald Trump, and if you're low risk especially isolate from high risk because the highest risks are people who don't know how to manage their behavior. If we're all gonna catch it, fine, but take it seriously. And don't do stupid shit like buying up all the groceries so you can survive the next two weeks when it will magically go away. Like, that's not real, that's not how it works. Being said, I did hear that Italy has a problem with people dying alone, separated from their families due to quarantine. I don't really like that either. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:14, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
The only positive thing that will exit of this pandemic is that -hopefully- we'll be prepared when a really nasty one comes, which I suspect is just matter of time. And that politicians will understand that it's a very bad idea to cut the budget destined to healthcare. Panzerfaust (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

They murdered King[edit]

when he spoke out against Vietnam. Oxyaena Harass 14:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, but they kinda sound like idiots. Here's what we used to like,
Ariel31459 (talk) 16:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Disagree. Protest songs on Vietnam are one thing, and I can fill your playlist, but the quick point is Wake Up was 1992, and done as part of a whole album played in a pretty fresh style. I didn't get into RATM until 1999, and I absolutely respect Tom Morello to this day as a guitarist, even if I liked the songs more when I was 12 than I do now. Also, Morello went to Harvard, so "sound like idiots" is a bad look for "I'm not into it." Am I allowed to post a third video? I'll play it safe and just link to it. This is shit from 1999 and holds up. I got my first RATM cd when I was 12, my mom made me play it for her before I got to have it. It's just good funk/punk fusion, early 90s were a good time for strong musicians to attempt fusion. It got bad later, but Rage started out as an intelligent fusion band. I prefer the song "Tire Me" Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't know. Many of us are kind of against conspiracy theories. They do tend to suggest a lack of intellectual integrity. I see that here.Ariel31459 (talk) 16:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Except that it's not far fetched to believe MLK was assassinated by the feds, hell, even his assassin said he was put up to do it by "someone," and knowing the shit that went back on in the day, it's not really a far-out conspiracy theory. Oxyaena Harass 22:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Ok, I missed the issue by a mile. So, I guess the issue is whether the lyrics are decidedly something specific, or if the good info is also brief, and doesn't include J Edgar Hoover's attpempts to "flatten the curve" of civil rights activism. It doesn't mean there is a 1-1 proof of any of it, but I have to say capturing the L.A. frustration in 1992 like this, and doing it in a smart way is cool. I'm not busy playing the game of "Maybe de La Rocha was being coy," or "Tom Morello is smart so he's an expert on history." It isn't far fetched to believe that MLK was assassinated by the FBI, but it also isn't far fetched that these smart kids were keyed into a cultural frustration that, in 1992 WAY before it was mainstream, wasn't being talked about like it should have been. Black Lives Matter, I'm a supporter, "all lives matter" is a disingenuous rebuttal. A song doesn't validate a theory, sure, it validates itself as an art-piece, that's art. And Rage was definitely crafting art at the time. Same year as the riots, songs don't get written in a day (unless they fucking rule, but they don't hit the release). I don't think this is a Vietnam song, exactly, but it is a protest song. I also think Cockburn is slaying. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
not far fetched to suggest the feds had king killed, but its still a conspiracy theory with no real evidence to suggest they did nor any real evidence that casts doubt on the official version of events. james earl ray is not exactly an unbiased source and even if it were true that he had 'help', its not like there was any shortage of people or organisations with motive to have king killed. he'd had plenty of attempts on this his life already - events entirely unrelated to Vietnam or the fbi. that it isn't far fetched is irrelevant AMassiveGay (talk) 17:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Either way this song is a simple protest song, I don't see any reason to nitpick it for the sake of pedantics. In fact, MLK's own family believes James Earl Ray was framed. Oxyaena Harass 23:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
The song has a disputable veracity to the lyrics. But that "they turned the power to the have nots/ and then came the shot" like, yeah, that's good punctuation. And Rage carved out an entire lane for bands like Limp Bizkit and Linkin Park to cash in, who used the same fusion in a really dull way to express anger at nothing specific. This song (wake up) expresses anger at something, which is punctuated by "he gave the power to the have nots/ and then came the shot." It's conspiratorial, but a lot of Rage's work is political. I didn't have my first epiphany for music until I found an alternative radio station on this blue and yellow joke of a radio/cassette player in 1997 that you had to slide the dial around, it wasn't a knob. But fist day into a new house, I found that classic rock radio station. A couple days later, I got bored and found a station that played "Paranoid Android" and "Pepper" and "Everlong" and "Semi-Charmed Life" and they just put em on, one after the other, no Billy Joel, no Eddie Money, no ZZ Topp, and I was just like "My parents have been listening to the wrong music, Traveling Wilburys and Fleetwood Mac should be doing this! QUEEN SUCKS WHY THE FUCK IS QUEEN ON THE RADIO!?!" The second time I heard Chumbawumba, I had a plan, I jumped and fell on my back in my bed in my own room every time they said "I get knocked down." I was ten. I'm still never going to not look for a fire escape when I hear George Thorogood, but what I'm trying to say is art is subjective, and can be very personal. I think "Wake Up" while, conspiratorial, was also created in the middle of/out of a movement. It's not just the "give me something to break" Limp Bizkit being angry is fun and cool. But '97 was the year of my third eye opened, looking back on it now, half the shit is like "ugh, I know I was 10 if I was rocking out to that one." Musically, Rage holds water. The spirit of the song has held some water too. "He turned the power to the have nots/ and then came the shot." Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)