Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
ok, but can you point out anywhere in this thread that anyone has actually done that? are you incorrectly inferring it? or consciously accusing people of it to discredit their points?

Never said it's on this thread.

And it is not to discredit their points. Actually, I can see why it exists - if things change and disrupt their comfortable life, it's obvious they'd become upset.

But you have to understand people's rightful fears to go back to the life "as it was" and being afraid of being infected - because it was the reason this virus spreads so quickly worldwide. Especially where the possibility of meeting people who don't care / think the virus is "not a big deal" and refuse to follow safety measures, which increase the chances of being infected that way, is far from being zero. There are points of view on this thread where it's pretty clear some people's "freedom" is way more important than keeping others safe.

You may hate the way it changes the world, but what's the alternative ? Keeping it the same way and let more people die ? And I know, some people will think "yes" in their head. Better they keep it in their thoughts, because saying it in front of people affected by this virus will make them look like monsters.

The discussion is grown too "hot" for me to join, sad to say.

Dukeofstuff wrote:
The problem is, social distancing saves time, not lives.

Actually the two are correlated. By saving time, you save lives that couldn't have been if you keep rushing things to go back to the life as it was. If social distancing wasn't there, hospitals would have been completely overwhelmed and more people would have died because they wouldn't have had the medical support that could save them.

Exactly, governments have been very forward that social distancing is about smoothing not removing the infection rate. It's about keepign the number of infections within a tolerance that health services can at least tackle without being completely overwhelmed.

It also buys time to get more equipment stocked up. You can't just order thousands of ventilators and have them appear tomorrow; it takes time. Especially when the whole world is wanting them and thus you can't even just make a rush order from overseas factories and stocks in other countries. Everyone wants the same stuff so often as not you've got to make new designs and redesign existing factories to produce a new product.


All this takes time. Furthermore the more time you buy the more scientific studies and data can be pooled and collated and produced. Meaning you might be able to increase survival rates; reduce infection periods etc..... All things that can save lives in the future by reducing the load on the system now.


Furthermore if you let it run rampant then even key workers can get affected. Lockdowns mean you can protect your key workers better - power stations, news agencies, health officials, police, armed forces etc.. Some of those roles have key workers you can't just replace on a whim. Some are critical to keeping the country functional. Imagine if you let it run wild and it got into a nuclear technician team and suddenly multiple key staff to run your power station are lost. Even if just for a few weeks suddenly you've got a potential power supply problem to all those medical facilities; whilst backup generators are only designed for short term support (and can have issues of their own when they kick in - such as knocking out long running machines or research devices )

Sarouan wrote:


Never said it's on this thread.

And it is not to discredit their points. Actually, I can see why it exists - if things change and disrupt their comfortable life, it's obvious they'd become upset.

But you have to understand people's rightful fears to go back to the life "as it was" and being afraid of being infected - because it was the reason this virus spreads so quickly worldwide. Especially where the possibility of meeting people who don't care / think the virus is "not a big deal" and refuse to follow safety measures, which increase the chances of being infected that way, is far from being zero. There are points of view on this thread where it's pretty clear some people's "freedom" is way more important than keeping others safe.

You may hate the way it changes the world, but what's the alternative ? Keeping it the same way and let more people die ? And I know, some people will think "yes" in their head. Better they keep it in their thoughts, because saying it in front of people affected by this virus will make them look like monsters.

Fair enough. I can understand their fears, to a point.. But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

I understand people don't want to infect other family members who may be in more vulnerable groups, that's fair enough, but that can be mitigated by performing your own personalised social distancing to whatever degree is required in your household.

This should be possible to implement. People (for the most part) are capable of doing these complex things. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. And It's not 'freedom vs safety' as some of the more simpler minded people on here have chosen to interpret it as. The police actions, in the UK, have been appalling, especially when you consider that most of the things they have done will have no bearing on virus spread whatsoever. Seriously, go and read the emergency powers report by big brother watch. https://t.co/9p2DJrqtSd?amp=1

There was and is no need for the draconian implementation of those powers, when the majority of the country are following the guidelines, whether through common sense, or media induced fear. Rights and freedoms are important, pandemic or no. You don't just throw them away for what is at best an illusion of safety.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sarouan wrote:

Dukeofstuff wrote:
The problem is, social distancing saves time, not lives.

Actually the two are correlated. By saving time, you save lives that couldn't have been if you keep rushing things to go back to the life as it was. If social distancing wasn't there, hospitals would have been completely overwhelmed and more people would have died because they wouldn't have had the medical support that could save them.

I don't think anyone is saying to just be done with it and back to normal. It wouldn't happen anyway, but theres no reason we can start implementing targeted approaches which consider all the factors, risk groups, hotspots, population densities, jobs, etc etc. They could also start targeting different groups with more targeted advice, eg, those in low risk groups vs those in higher risk etc. Credit people with a little initiative and get some things rolling again.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.

Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.

Removed - Rule #1 please

For the second time in this thread, people are reading your posts, then they're choosing to disagree with what you're saying.


On another point, a lady from the WHO was just on the TV and had some interesting info which I'd not seen or expressed as explicitly before.

-Masks. Are largely pointless for most people. They have a recommendation that if you feel unwell then a mask can help prevent transmission, but they're not that useful in terms of preventing you catching it.

-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.

Reinfection news is quite welcome and its nice to see that its not just a false positive on tests, but particles of the virus once defeated being coughed up. A false positive, but from tests being reliable in terms of detecting the virus rather than from test results being erroneous.

 Azreal13 wrote:


-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.

That's potentially really good news. Hopefully former infected are also producing enough antibodies to give some resistance as well.

Latest I heard was some lab is trying to do a Frankenstein type approach.

They have sequenced coronas RNA and identified the segment that creates it's spike, the part is used to attach to a cell to begin replicating.

They've spliced just that part of the covid rna into a non harmful virus and have gotten immune system response to attack and kill it. They hope that since the spike is a prominent feature of covid the antibodies that attack a virus with it will hit covid itself.

A related article.


https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a32239783/when-will-a-covid-19-vaccine-be-available/


Here's hoping.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.


Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.

Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)

Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.

And so it was, on page 122, that Godwin's law was invoked.

Queen_annes_revenge, there is a point there, that you have ignored, while implying your opponent holds Nazi views. As I recall that is called an ad hominem, attack, right?

The young and healthy aren't staying home from personal fear of death and illness- but from social consciousness. Anyone can become an asymptomatic carrier, and spend 2 weeks spreading this disease. The mortality rate is lower than initially projected, which is wonderful. However this thing spreads like wildfire- and limiting your circle of infection is the best thing for you and your community. New York's randomized testing has found that it infected https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494324-27m-new-yorkers-have-had-coronavirus-preliminary-data-shows 20% of the city- and they locked down on May 2020. 20% infection rate with a lockdown. At some point, I imagine we'll see studies showing what would have happened if social distancing wasn't implemented.

Slowing the rate of infection for humanity as a whole is the goal of social isolation. The personal safety is just a bonus.

 Azreal13 wrote:

-Masks. Are largely pointless for most people. They have a recommendation that if you feel unwell then a mask can help prevent transmission, but they're not that useful in terms of preventing you catching it.

Well duh. It's been clear long time. Point isn't to prevent wearer to catch it. Point is to prevent you spreading it. Especially those who have no symptoms(not that insignificant amount) yet are spreading. You can be spreading long time before symptoms even become visible. If they ever come. Many carry the virus and inflect long time and never even know they had it. Those are the nasty spreaders as they are walking among general public spreading it and never have even idea they had it and wont know unless they are tested(and without symptoms won't really be tested...)



Automatically Appended Next Post:

GoatboyBeta wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.

That's potentially really good news. Hopefully former infected are also producing enough antibodies to give some resistance as well.

So far here tests have revealed very few people with weak resistance having built up. Hopefully just small sample.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.


Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.

Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)

Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.

With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.

And now going full tilt Godwin in response

 Gitzbitah wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.


Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.

Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)

Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.

And so it was, on page 122, that Godwin's law was invoked.

Queen_annes_revenge, there is a point there, that you have ignored, while implying your opponent holds Nazi views. As I recall that is called an ad hominem, attack, right?

The young and healthy aren't staying home from personal fear of death and illness- but from social consciousness. Anyone can become an asymptomatic carrier, and spend 2 weeks spreading this disease. The mortality rate is lower than initially projected, which is wonderful. However this thing spreads like wildfire- and limiting your circle of infection is the best thing for you and your community. New York's randomized testing has found that it infected https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494324-27m-new-yorkers-have-had-coronavirus-preliminary-data-shows 20% of the city- and they locked down on May 2020. 20% infection rate with a lockdown. At some point, I imagine we'll see studies showing what would have happened if social distancing wasn't implemented.

Slowing the rate of infection for humanity as a whole is the goal of social isolation. The personal safety is just a bonus.

I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.

and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nfe wrote:


With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.

And now going full tilt Godwin in response

To be fair, you are one of the few who does engage properly, and usually responds in the abstract without personal attack, and it may not seem it but that is appreciated, as I can infer from your other posts that we are on different wavelengths on most issues. I'm not sure where I've been proven wrong, so far no one has been able to give me any example of how the new police powers have helped stop the spread of this virus, other than 'thers a pandemic, you want people to die, you're selfish.' I conceded you on your point about national parks being busy, but it hasn't changed my mind about going walking, or that others should do so, as its good for your health and wellbeing.

And the debate about lockdown and easing of restrictions is still ongoing in public. I believe that a targeted approach is possible, but again, all I've had so far is.. 'youre not normal because some people can be asymptomatic carriers' end debate.

 Overread wrote:
Reinfection news is quite welcome and its nice to see that its not just a false positive on tests, but particles of the virus once defeated being coughed up. A false positive, but from tests being reliable in terms of detecting the virus rather than from test results being erroneous.

Agreed, makes sense too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nfe wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.

What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.


Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.

Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)

Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.

With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.

And now going full tilt Godwin in response

I believe Queen is playing devil's advocate to drive discussion, rather than out of fallacious reasoning. By my measure it has worked better than one would expect.

Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted it would only be ad hominem if I made that observation then used it as a way to suggest their proposition was false.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted.

You're right, pointing out someones arguments are consistently selfish on a message board for toy soldiers is just like the holocaust.

 Ouze wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted.

You're right, pointing out someones arguments are consistently selfish on a message board for toy soldiers is just like the holocaust.

Incorrect inference yet again, but whatever helps you sleep at night.

Yeah, I guess your 5D chess is too much for me. Have fun with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.

This is potentially the best news so far in terms of Covid, I think.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:


I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.

and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.

Indeed, the land of the free, so people should be able to do whatever they like.
Ever since we've had cures and prevention for diseases, we've mandated them, made them laws, and enforced them.

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/government-regulation

There's no difference from forced immunization and forced testing- heck, every year my kids were in childcare I had to produce proof of their immunizations. When I applied for my current job, I had to get vaccinated against Hepatits B. What's the difference between that and let's say a monthly Coronavirus test? So we have to carry around a license, proof of insurance, and a clean bill of health card if we want to go out of isolation?

You haven't had the right to run around without taking epidemiological precautions since the 1800s.

Social distancing needs to be held until we can track exposure through testing, if we want to avoid Coronavirus spreading all over the country. Alternatively, it needs to be kept at a level that doesn't overwhelm the medical service. There are plenty of very free countries that can track their virus spread- and have accordingly had extremely successful campaigns against the virus. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/20/understanding-what-works-how-some-countries-are-beating-back-the-coronavirus/ .

It's important to note that article is from March 20th- what works is known, and it is social distancing and virus tracking. We know what works to stop this virus spread, and let's us get back to work without killing .5% of our population. We should do that.

 Gitzbitah wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:


I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.

and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.

Indeed, the land of the free, so people should be able to do whatever they like.
Ever since we've had cures and prevention for diseases, we've mandated them, made them laws, and enforced them.

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/government-regulation

There's no difference from forced immunization and forced testing- heck, every year my kids were in childcare I had to produce proof of their immunizations. When I applied for my current job, I had to get vaccinated against Hepatits B. What's the difference between that and let's say a monthly Coronavirus test? So we have to carry around a license, proof of insurance, and a clean bill of health card if we want to go out of isolation?

You haven't had the right to run around without taking epidemiological precautions since the 1800s.

Social distancing needs to be held until we can track exposure through testing, if we want to avoid Coronavirus spreading all over the country. Alternatively, it needs to be kept at a level that doesn't overwhelm the medical service. There are plenty of very free countries that can track their virus spread- and have accordingly had extremely successful campaigns against the virus. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/20/understanding-what-works-how-some-countries-are-beating-back-the-coronavirus/ .

It's important to note that article is from March 20th- what works is known, and it is social distancing and virus tracking. We know what works to stop this virus spread, and let's us get back to work without killing .5% of our population. We should do that.

thats true. I support the right of businesses, childcare facilities etc to require employees or children to have vaccinations. that's just those rights working both ways. there is nothing forcing you to have them, you just dont get access to certain things without them, which is not the same thing.

so in Russia

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/coronavirus-third-russian-doctor-falls-21967688

That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.


I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

I believe Queen is playing devil's advocate to drive discussion, rather than out of fallacious reasoning. By my measure it has worked better than one would expect.

Mad respect for this.

 Ouze wrote:
On an unrelated topic, I feel bad for messing with Orlanth over that gas mask thing a while ago ITT. I was re-reading the thread from the beginning looking for something, and a lot of what he thought might happen back in January has totally actually played out.

 reds8n wrote:
so in Russia

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/coronavirus-third-russian-doctor-falls-21967688

That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.


I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...

The 3rd ?!?


Jesus what is going on there?!

You think that's bad...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/tired-mum-named-shamed-facebook-18143150.amp

Burn the heretic.

Rule 1 of virtue signalling club is make sure everyone knows what a good person you are.

Rule 2 of virtue signalling club is to make sure to make people who aren't as good a person know it and feel ashamed.

 reds8n wrote:
so in Russia

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/coronavirus-third-russian-doctor-falls-21967688

That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.


I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...

That's one heck of a coincidence I once heard Russia described as a gangster kleptocracy. At this point it wouldn't be surprising if Putin walks around cabinet meetings with a baseball bat.

Oh and on the subject of the clapping/virtue signalling, this story did make me snigger just a little bit.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52506114

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
You think that's bad...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/tired-mum-named-shamed-facebook-18143150.amp

Burn the heretic.

Hang on, did you just equate the potential attempted murder of a doctor for criticising the Russian government to a woman being criticised by some idiots for not joining in with the clapping?