Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.

[HappyDaze]

You seem to be arguing in good faith.  The HD, not so much.  That's the difference between a liberal and a SJW.  Worse, he's a SJW pretending (badly) to be a conservative.  I'll take honest disagreement over lying any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Besides, I'm not so sure that HD isn't the banned Trippy Hippy as a sock puppet.  There are a lot of similarities in their "arguments".

Oh, fuck you dude. I'm entirely my own self. If you care enough, go look through 4 years of my posting, you dumbass motherfucker. When someone wants to engage without the tired-ass SJW bullshit whenever someone disagrees, then you'll see my reasoned arguments. But for the moronic NPCs of this site (and yes, son, you qualify), well they can eat shit.

[Shasarak]

That's pretty much the kind of thing I saw and why I throw profanity, scorn, and ridicule at several other posters that think their shit doesn't stink. In reality, I'm easygoing and sensible, but around here, that's actually a poor fit for the tone of the site, so I decided to rebuild my character for this game.

Heh, easy going like a brick to the head.

[HappyDaze]

Heh, easy going like a brick to the head.

Only on Tuesdays.

[Pat]

Just making an observation. To wit: you step out of line and suddenly you're an "SJW."

I can't tell you how many conversations I've had where I post X, someone decides that means I support Y, and then goes off on me for supporting Y. I reply by saying no, I don't support Y, I just said X. Which you'd think would end it, because not only didn't I express any kind of support for Y, I never even mentioned it. And then I explicitly denied it. And even if all that wasn't sufficient, who's the subject matter expert on what I believe? Me, or someone with whom I've only exchanged a handful of posts? The only correct response would be to backtrack, and respond to what I actually said. But that never happens. Instead, they invariably double down, and keep attacking me for supporting Y.

This the result of manichean groupthink, where people have mentally divided the world into sides. Usually there are just 2, but occasionally there's some grudging acceptance of a small subset of heterodox positions. And then they look for signals that they use to immediately and irrevocably categorize people into one of those mental boxes. The signals they use to classify people are invariably trivial, not substantive. At most they're a single issue litmus test; at least, they're often just based on the use of a phrase or a term.

The reason the signals have to be superficial is because until you're slotted into one of their boxes, they can't respond. They only have a limited set of arguments, tailored to those prefabricated, imaginary mental models, so they can't deal with anything beyond that. Even their arguments aren't arguments in any real sense, because arguing involves listening to what the other person says, and responding to that. They're incapable of dealing with real people, with complex and contradictory beliefs. The boxes don't represent the human diversity of thought, they're just caricatures, imaginary goblins, or boogeymen.

If fear is the mind-killer, this is the conversation-killer. I typically make the mistake of trying to explain what I really believe, but it never works. And there's no way to advance the conversation, because it inevitably circles back to "I didn't say that".

[Abraxus]

It's more than just stepping out of line and being jusdged an SJW. It's as PAt posted unless one push and encourages the carefully constructed personal narratives either one is both an enemy and not worth listening to.

To use an example of an ex-friend who once Trump came into power in 2016 went full SJW and kept complaining more and more about what I was posting in my feed. He knew full well the way I feel and think about certain subjects yet I was still a "bad" person for thinking differently. n my end I was willing to let bygones be bygones though I muted his Facebook feed and ignored his SJW outbursts in person. An example of his narrative was how myself and more Liberal friend of ours were having a discussion about the how the new casting of a black Batwoman was done as a diversity hire and SJW response was to call us racist and misogynistic. When it clearly is a diversity hire. The original character has always been white and pointing out a race swap in a TV show to appease SJW is racist. Yeah don't piss on my leg and tell me it is not raining.

I expect many to suffer full mental breakdowns if Trump wins as many are so certain of their positions, opinions and narratives on subjects that reality has a way of going against the narrative. In essence it is not about having a difference of opinion and being called and SJW. It is wanting to live ones life with an echo chamber and when people don't give one said echo chamber they become the enemy. Non-SJWs act like that too except more and more except that the SJWs outnumber those that are not.

[Abraxus]

Many SJWs are also social chameloeons claiming not to be an SJW yet seeing their actions in and out of the net they are pretty much SJWs. While claiming otherwise which is a smokescreen for the behavior and bullshit.

HZ claims to be a "conservative" yet in the thread about What does Conservatism mean to you is nowhere to be seen. If he really is a Conservative which is highly doubt why is he not posting in a thread about any and all things Conservative. It's more of their bullshit to let others think they are one of the gang yet very much apart of it.

[HappyDaze]

Many SJWs are also social chameloeons claiming not to be an SJW yet seeing their actions in and out of the net they are pretty much SJWs. While claiming otherwise which is a smokescreen for the behavior and bullshit.

HZ claims to be a "conservative" yet in the thread about What does Conservatism mean to you is nowhere to be seen. If he really is a Conservative which I highly doubt why is he not posting in a thread about any and all things Conservative. It's more of their bullshit to let others think they are one of the gang yet very much apart of it.

Maybe because I'm working M-F you dumbass and I'll save making long posts for the weekend.

[Steven Mitchell]

This the result of manichean groupthink, where people have mentally divided the world into sides. Usually there are just 2, but occasionally there's some grudging acceptance of a small subset of heterodox positions. And then they look for signals that they use to immediately and irrevocably categorize people into one of those mental boxes. The signals they use to classify people are invariably trivial, not substantive. At most they're a single issue litmus test; at least, they're often just based on the use of a phrase or a term.

The reason the signals have to be superficial is because until you're slotted into one of their boxes, they can't respond. They only have a limited set of arguments, tailored to those prefabricated, imaginary mental models, so they can't deal with anything beyond that. Even their arguments aren't arguments in any real sense, because arguing involves listening to what the other person says, and responding to that. They're incapable of dealing with real people, with complex and contradictory beliefs. The boxes don't represent the human diversity of thought, they're just caricatures, imaginary goblins, or boogeymen.

That can happen.  What can also happen is that a troll will depend on everyone else playing by those criteria and giving the most charitable interpretation possible to everything said--and then will play stupid troll tricks with that.  Some of the smarter ones obviously even really enjoy it, but not everywhere has that class of trolls.  Moreover, I distinguish the pure "troll" here from those who push right up that line with extreme debate techniques.  That is, they don't really care what anyone really thinks--they are in it to "win" the argument.  

Normal people will only put up with troll behavior for so long.  Normal people will only put up with the "debate" when it is clearly called out--frequently with an agreed upon premise from which the debate can begin.  We've all been in that room where several people are having a conversation about what they believe.  It's usually mild.  Maybe a few questions for clarifications.  Then "that guy" has to turn it into a debate while pretending it is still just a conversation.  Pretty soon, it isn't mild anymore.  I'll sometimes tell them if you want to have a debate, let's have a debate.  We'll pick a starting point and go from there.  No, no, don't want to do that, we are just talking.  Bullshit.  

Now, sometimes the person that pulls that trick doesn't understand social cues, especially young, supposedly "college educated" males.  I can sympathize--been there, done that, got the T-shirt a long time ago.  After enough times of not getting the hint, you stop talking to them.  Especially if they are still doing that nonsense in their mid-30s.  Otherwise, wait until they grow up a little, then we'll talk.  In the meantime, let the adults have our conversation.

But mainly, it is the debating technique of the "not off the rails but leaning that way" left to insist that anyone who disagrees with them about the nature of reality is racist, in lock-step, ignorant, and too many other motives ascribed to list here.  The rest of us are tired of the giant fucking blind spot--to put the most charitable explanation on the behavior.  If that makes me Manichean in that respect, I can live with it.

[DocJones]

Risk of Death Is 30% Lower for COVID-19 Patients Treated With Hydroxychloroquine
And that's after they've been hospitalized!  
Recommendations of other studies are for better results in outpatient treatment.

[DocJones]

I almost forgot the required trolling comment.

Real Men Don't Wear Masks!

[Brad]

Risk of Death Is 30% Lower for COVID-19 Patients Treated With Hydroxychloroquine
And that's after they've been hospitalized!  
Recommendations of other studies are for better results in outpatient treatment.

INB4 jhkim "That's not a legitimate study!"

[jhkim]

Risk of Death Is 30% Lower for COVID-19 Patients Treated With Hydroxychloroquine
And that's after they've been hospitalized!  
Recommendations of other studies are for better results in outpatient treatment.

INB4 jhkim "That's not a legitimate study!"

No, as far as I can see, it's a legitimate study. Here's the actual article:

https://www.ejinme.com/article/S0953-6205(20)30335-6/fulltext

I'd put that in the positive column together with the other studies. Interestingly, it contradicts the claims at c19study, which pitched that hydroxychloroquine is only effective when taken early, not when administered upon admission to the hospital. There was another recent paper studying side effects, which found hydroxychloroquine seemed safe on its own -- but there was evidence of dangerous side effects when taken together with azithromycin.

http://outbreaknewstoday.com/hydroxychloroquine-and-covid-19-two-different-studies-78345/

[Spinachcat]

That's pretty much my take on this. The elderly couple may not only feel safer, they may actually be safer. I've no idea how much, but even if the benefits to that couple are incremental, me wearing a mask in indoor public spaces is a tiny, tiny sacrifice to make for them. Not to mention, that elderly couple are my neighbours.

If the elderly couple are scared of the sniffles, they can stay home.

Amazing how the road to tyranny is just submission to one "a tiny, tiny sacrifice" at a time.

How many thousands of business must be destroyed to keep your neighbors pacified?

How many millions of children must lose years of education so your neighbors "feel safer"?

How long do the rest of us have to put our lives on hold to please your neighbors?

Maybe because I'm working M-F you dumbass and I'll save making long posts for the weekend.

You gotta put the effort into those TikTok videos! There's so much competition between the nursing department / dance teams now so every hospital has gotta step up their choreography.

[HappyDaze]

You gotta put the effort into those TikTok videos! There's so much competition between the nursing department / dance teams now so every hospital has gotta step up their choreography.

I wish; what I've got to do is revamp a phone triage system to adjust for some scope of practice changes (or "clarifications" depending on how you want to look at them) while trying to incorporate the input from a huge herd of cats (MDs, PAs, and ARNPs) and filter out the wasted noise.

[Spinachcat]

LOL.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website disclosed the shockingly small number of people who died from only the Wuhan coronavirus, with no other cause of death mentioned. Hold on to your hat because here it is: out of the 161,392 deaths in the CDC data, just six percent, about 9,700 deaths, were attributed to the coronavirus alone. According to the CDC, the other 94 percent had an average of 2.6 additional conditions or causes of deaths, such as heart disease, diabetes, and sepsis.

We crippled our nation for 9,700 deaths.

LOL.