By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I know many people who will not accept this as incompetence because, it seems, political purity is more important than competence. Not only on this forum but elsewhere those of us who are angry are “just lefty losers”.
1
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 16:14 - May 8 with 2396 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 15:48 - May 8 by BlueNomad
I know many people who will not accept this as incompetence because, it seems, political purity is more important than competence. Not only on this forum but elsewhere those of us who are angry are “just lefty losers”.
GIven its older people who tend to get it worst and they also tend to vote Tory, they're the ones who should be up in arms about it. Wierd.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 15:48 - May 8 by BlueNomad
I know many people who will not accept this as incompetence because, it seems, political purity is more important than competence. Not only on this forum but elsewhere those of us who are angry are “just lefty losers”.
This 'lefty loser' was pointing out that Italy and Spain shut down 2 weeks before us but I was accused of "hindsight-us" and 'how could we have possibly known how bad it was going to be'
Stunning levels of delusion from apologists.
What was noticable was that at the school where I work, parents were keeping kids home long before our shutdown. Teachers were furious about having to go in.
[Post edited 8 May 2020 20:24]
4
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 21:00 - May 8 with 2231 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 20:20 - May 8 by manchego
This 'lefty loser' was pointing out that Italy and Spain shut down 2 weeks before us but I was accused of "hindsight-us" and 'how could we have possibly known how bad it was going to be'
Stunning levels of delusion from apologists.
What was noticable was that at the school where I work, parents were keeping kids home long before our shutdown. Teachers were furious about having to go in.
[Post edited 8 May 2020 20:24]
As were others. Which leads to conclusions such as Callis > Tory Cabinet.
1
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 21:31 - May 8 with 2199 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 21:00 - May 8 by eireblue
As were others. Which leads to conclusions such as Callis > Tory Cabinet.
in all fairness, I'd trust everybody on here bar r2, Baron and NotSureItsNotBlueas more than I would the current cabinet with this. Yes, even Fishers is probably more competent than they are.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 20:20 - May 8 by manchego
This 'lefty loser' was pointing out that Italy and Spain shut down 2 weeks before us but I was accused of "hindsight-us" and 'how could we have possibly known how bad it was going to be'
Stunning levels of delusion from apologists.
What was noticable was that at the school where I work, parents were keeping kids home long before our shutdown. Teachers were furious about having to go in.
[Post edited 8 May 2020 20:24]
Remembering 8 weeks ago I was called every name under the sun for seeing the writing on the wall.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 15:10 - May 8 by factual_blue
Although appeasement was the only possible way forward in 1938.
Appeasement in 1938 was the only way for two governments whose only policy was appeasement at any cost. Germany in 1938 had 38 divisions, France over 100. The Czechs had 42 divisions, a relatively mechanised army and a difficult terrain in the Sudetenland for the Germans to attack.
What was lacking was will. Frances economy was in poor shape, it’s government unpopular and there was a desire to avoid another horror like 14-18 at any cost. The idiotic Maginot Line is good example of French attitudes. That they had an alliance with the Czechs and their whole defence strategy depended on support from France. It was ready to fight too (as was shown by those Czechs who made it to Britain in 1940). France’s support counted for nothing when it came to it.
As with France, for Britain appeasement was the only policy. A far off country in the middle of Europe? Britain with a tiny army and airforce? None of our business. That Russia had offered support in the event of German aggression? Let’s ignore them. With no will in France or Britain to stop Hitler, Europe was doomed. Chamberlain even believed that by giving the Sudetenland up, Hitler would never want the rest. The sell out of Czechoslovakia was a disgrace that’s kind of been lost in what followed.
The key point in time was the militarisation of the Rhineland in 1936. Hitler could have been stopped with ease then. He could have been stopped in 1938 too, albeit at greater cost.
0
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 08:20 - May 9 with 1999 views
personally i think that doesn't properly reflect the speed at which the understanding of this crisis developed. public / media / political discussion in the early stages did not have any of the foresight that article tries to imply.
from that article the first date on which SAGE issued guidance on not shaking hands was 3rd March - that there was emerging thinking about something as basic as shaking hands that late shows that the top level scientific understanding of the extent of the crisis was limited. if SAGE was first advising not to shake hands on 3rd March that puts the government's approach into some context. by 16th march the first step in the lockdown had been taken.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 09:53 - May 9 with 1931 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 01:52 - May 9 by monytowbray
Remembering 8 weeks ago I was called every name under the sun for seeing the writing on the wall.
And here we are.
You weren’t called all the names under the sun Callis.
You’ll remember that you said it could be the start of an online mental breakdown for you. Which was concerning that you thought that was going to happen.
There were definitely a few of us who showed concern for you.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 09:53 - May 9 by NewcyBlue
You weren’t called all the names under the sun Callis.
You’ll remember that you said it could be the start of an online mental breakdown for you. Which was concerning that you thought that was going to happen.
There were definitely a few of us who showed concern for you.
Quite. Not least because calling him every name under the sun would take up an awful lot of forum space and time, as the below post on Quora shows. I reckon we only managed 10% of names at best, and that's in English. Factor in other languages too and I reckon he got off lightly
How many nouns are there in English? 2 Answers Pat McCrae Pat McCrae Answered Nov 15, 2018 · Author has 244 answers and 206.8k answer views Wonderful question. Thanks for asking!
An academically adequate answer to this question could easily bcome an entire master thesis. For want of time, I‘ll cut many corners and will just provide a bare-bone reply. In particular, I won‘t get into the ‘what is a word‘ discussion. For simplicity, I‘ll assume that by ‘word‘ you mean ‘lemma‘, i. e., entry in a dictionary.
The first question then is: How many words in total are there in the English language?
“The Second Edition of the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use, and 47,156 obsolete words. To this may be added around 9,500 derivative words included.“ [Source]
So, roughly, there are 230,000 baseforms listed in the OED.
Other estimates by far exceed this figure, maybe also due to a potentially incongruous understanding of the concept of a word. Google estimated about one million words for English [Source].
The second question is: Which fraction of the words in English are nouns. There is a well-written blog article here suggesting that about 20% of all English words are nouns.
Combining the information from both parts, we obtain an estimate of 46,000 nouns in English.
Contrasting the obvious limitations of the dictionary-based estimate with the Google estimate I personally think it would be fair to assume the order of magnitude of 10^6 for the number of all nouns in English. Presumably 300,000 is a reasonable upper bound.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 09:37 - May 9 by lowhouseblue
personally i think that doesn't properly reflect the speed at which the understanding of this crisis developed. public / media / political discussion in the early stages did not have any of the foresight that article tries to imply.
from that article the first date on which SAGE issued guidance on not shaking hands was 3rd March - that there was emerging thinking about something as basic as shaking hands that late shows that the top level scientific understanding of the extent of the crisis was limited. if SAGE was first advising not to shake hands on 3rd March that puts the government's approach into some context. by 16th march the first step in the lockdown had been taken.
What it does show is that there was plenty of understanding of changing, rapidly evolving and potentially disastrous situation at clinical and local level which was roundly ignored and dismissed by an incompetent and ignorant government..
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 09:37 - May 9 by lowhouseblue
personally i think that doesn't properly reflect the speed at which the understanding of this crisis developed. public / media / political discussion in the early stages did not have any of the foresight that article tries to imply.
from that article the first date on which SAGE issued guidance on not shaking hands was 3rd March - that there was emerging thinking about something as basic as shaking hands that late shows that the top level scientific understanding of the extent of the crisis was limited. if SAGE was first advising not to shake hands on 3rd March that puts the government's approach into some context. by 16th march the first step in the lockdown had been taken.
I think your understanding would be very valid, if
Individuals hadn’t personally gone into self lock down Organisations hadn’t decide to close Other countries hadn’t taken measures
Before the U.K. government took similar action.
Unfortunately, individuals, organisations, and other countries did act sooner.
0
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 11:03 - May 9 with 1838 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 10:27 - May 9 by BlueBadger
What it does show is that there was plenty of understanding of changing, rapidly evolving and potentially disastrous situation at clinical and local level which was roundly ignored and dismissed by an incompetent and ignorant government..
but a government whose expert scientific advice - SAGE - was on 3RD MARCH that now is the time to stop shaking hands? other people may well have taken a different view but that was the advice of our leading expert epidemiologists on 3rd March. how does following that expert advice make the government incompetent and ignorant?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 11:27 - May 9 with 1805 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 11:03 - May 9 by lowhouseblue
but a government whose expert scientific advice - SAGE - was on 3RD MARCH that now is the time to stop shaking hands? other people may well have taken a different view but that was the advice of our leading expert epidemiologists on 3rd March. how does following that expert advice make the government incompetent and ignorant?
How is stating to the nation. “ I am shaking hands continuously..” yes on the 3rd, but also on the 5th. “Wash your hands. Business as usual”
Consistent with:
There was agreement that Government should advise against greetings such as shaking hands and hugging, given existing evidence about the importance of hand hygiene. A public message against shaking hands has additional value as a signal about the importance of hand hygiene. Promoting a replacement greeting or encouraging others to politely decline a proffered hand-shake may have benefit.
Being slow to react, is a form of incompetence.
0
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 12:10 - May 9 with 1766 views
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 10:04 - May 9 by Swansea_Blue
Quite. Not least because calling him every name under the sun would take up an awful lot of forum space and time, as the below post on Quora shows. I reckon we only managed 10% of names at best, and that's in English. Factor in other languages too and I reckon he got off lightly
How many nouns are there in English? 2 Answers Pat McCrae Pat McCrae Answered Nov 15, 2018 · Author has 244 answers and 206.8k answer views Wonderful question. Thanks for asking!
An academically adequate answer to this question could easily bcome an entire master thesis. For want of time, I‘ll cut many corners and will just provide a bare-bone reply. In particular, I won‘t get into the ‘what is a word‘ discussion. For simplicity, I‘ll assume that by ‘word‘ you mean ‘lemma‘, i. e., entry in a dictionary.
The first question then is: How many words in total are there in the English language?
“The Second Edition of the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use, and 47,156 obsolete words. To this may be added around 9,500 derivative words included.“ [Source]
So, roughly, there are 230,000 baseforms listed in the OED.
Other estimates by far exceed this figure, maybe also due to a potentially incongruous understanding of the concept of a word. Google estimated about one million words for English [Source].
The second question is: Which fraction of the words in English are nouns. There is a well-written blog article here suggesting that about 20% of all English words are nouns.
Combining the information from both parts, we obtain an estimate of 46,000 nouns in English.
Contrasting the obvious limitations of the dictionary-based estimate with the Google estimate I personally think it would be fair to assume the order of magnitude of 10^6 for the number of all nouns in English. Presumably 300,000 is a reasonable upper bound.
It’s weird how quiet these threads have gone lately though.
Almost as if those who ran in to defend the obvious sh1t show from March 12th onwards are struggling to swallow the truth.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 12:10 - May 9 by monytowbray
It’s weird how quiet these threads have gone lately though.
Almost as if those who ran in to defend the obvious sh1t show from March 12th onwards are struggling to swallow the truth.
What's the point, you won't change your mind and others won't change theirs.
Like most things you go on about in life your opinion is too simplistic IMHO and I am sure a lot of people have got better things to do on a glorious day like this.
If you dismiss all comments and reasons from the likes of Guthrum then that really is the end of things. It has been discussed to death.
I've only come inside for a moment to cool my balls down.
“Hello, I'm your MP. Actually I'm not. I'm your candidate. Gosh.”
Boris Johnson canvassing in Henley, 2005.
'It's easy to judge in hindsight' part 5476435252424 on 16:36 - May 9 by Lord_Lucan
What's the point, you won't change your mind and others won't change theirs.
Like most things you go on about in life your opinion is too simplistic IMHO and I am sure a lot of people have got better things to do on a glorious day like this.
If you dismiss all comments and reasons from the likes of Guthrum then that really is the end of things. It has been discussed to death.
I've only come inside for a moment to cool my balls down.
I’ve not dismissed anything by Gunthrum.
Your problem is you assume I’ve made my mind up when actually I am willing to change my mind for coherent and factual discussion over whatteraboutery (which there’s been a lot of lately).
It’s been 8 weeks and I’m yet to see much evidence my lack of trust in the ruling powers was proven incorrect. We are exactly where we expected to be.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
