|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Jan 31, 2022 20:52:28 GMT -5
A totally real person is mad at me for posting totally real things that could get totally real people in trouble for doing this totally real thing in real life.
Sure, Jan.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcvball22 on Jan 31, 2022 22:34:28 GMT -5
This whole thing read like the Volleytalk version of Jonathan Swifts “A Modest Proposal”.
|
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Jan 31, 2022 23:05:08 GMT -5
My wife has forbidden me from posting any updates. But God I want to..... these volleyball people around here are crazier than s-house rats. My wife got several calls this evening and I got one from the freaking club director telling me to cease and desist.This whole thing read like the Volleytalk version of Jonathan Swifts “A Modest Proposal”. Dude...even if this is real (which I/ most here doubt)? Well, you did it to yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Jan 31, 2022 23:07:01 GMT -5
My wife has forbidden me from posting any updates. But God I want to..... these volleyball people around here are crazier than s-house rats. My wife got several calls this evening and I got one from the freaking club director telling me to cease and desist. This whole thing read like the Volleytalk version of Jonathan Swifts “A Modest Proposal”. You've done your job here. Your proposals were ridiculous and highly entertaining, and you unified VT in a way I have not seen since I've been a member of this board. Well done! I'll be looking forward to seeing how Frisco Have Germs Flyers do next year. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 31, 2022 23:19:01 GMT -5
Vaccines will only ever completely eradicate diseases in a very few instances - only viruses that evolve extremely slowly and to which immune responses are long lasting (e.g., measles, smallpox). There was a hope that we could eliminate COVID with vaccines, IF we brought the number of infected down and reduced the chance of a new strain evolving. It seemed reasonable. SarsCov2 does not actually evolve that fast compared to many viruses. But we didn't limit the spread in time and we let it accumulate mutations and eventually evolve in pretty large pool of unvaccinated people. Many of the new strains were controlled by the vaccine, but now we have a very deviant strain evading the vaccine. I'm afraid we are stuck with it into the foreseeable future. In that case, disease elimination is not the relevant measure of vaccine's success. They also help your immune system respond properly should you get infected, until we get an omicron-specific vaccine. Fully vaccinated and boosted people are 40-50x (!!!) less likely to be hospitalized or die from omicron. Of course, omicron is also wildly more contagious than previous SarsCov2 strains. So even though it is less lethal, it will still kill more people. Those people are overwhelmingly non-vaccinated - though there are always exceptions one can harp on. Every time one plays with the immune system, one has to balance risks. In this case one is balancing the extremely rare chance of developing side effects, with the likely protection against severe outcomes of a rapidly spreading disease. Not taking a vaccine is like choosing to drive full speed on into a wall to avoid the possibility of getting rear ended if you stop. Yeah, I guess you could get rear-ended, but I'd take my chances. This isn't a question of whether vaccines are good or bad, but whether they should be mandated. Yes. In this case, vaccine mandates with appropriate exceptions are definitely the way to go to reduce negative outcomes. Experiences shows that an exceedingly small (albeit vocal) minority won't comply with mandates when faced with consequences proportional to the harm their poor choices cause. The government should ease the costs to individuals by paying for vaccines (which it does) and providing tests/masks. In the meantime, hospitalization and death rates become much lower. The taxing of hospital resources becomes lower. People avoid complications from other problems that arise because they are not getting routine checkups. Devoted doctors and nurses don't quit because dying patients and their families mistakenly attack them. Long COVID becomes rarer and the expense of supporting those patients becomes less. Company, and state and fed budgets aren't ravaged by associated health care costs, or ancillary expenses. The argument against mandates seems based on an exceedingly narrow definition of individual freedom. I understand that people want to maintain individual choice. Who doesn't want that? And I get the distrust of collective concerns and action. However, society has to be a team sport in the end. We have to live together. There is no doubt that one person's individual choices sometimes fundamentally influence the choices available to others. That is why we have laws against robbery and murder and slavery and drunk driving. It's plain fantasy to think that doesn't apply when talking about an infectious disease that's killing thousands of people a day - way more than are murdered. If we don't recognize that the preservation of one person's individual freedom sometimes can come at the detriment of others' choices, then freedom is only available to those who are willing to exert power, regardless of evidence of broader good, to enforce their choices while limiting those of others. That is not freedom in any generally meaningful sense. That is not community or society. That is servitude to a philosophy at odds with how the natural world actually works, and to personal privilege at the expense of those without. It's fundamentally not democratic. So I guess I don't understand the rationale against mandates. |
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Jan 31, 2022 23:58:15 GMT -5
So I get chewed out for causing problems and disunity and being a bad example and not being a team player. This is because a lot of people on our current team are jacking their jaws about us to management. This is all coming from someone that was telling the girls to go full keto because he looked like a self-propelled stomach and he lost a lot of weight. So he ate nothing but hot dogs (minus the bun) for a full year and ended up with butt hole cancer. Good advice there coach. Are you still sitting on a pillow driving all the way from Haslet to North Dallas? Chile, what is this? What are you saying? |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 1, 2022 2:58:08 GMT -5
This is such a weird timeline, I can't even tell if this is a troll account or not. Two words for you: Off Season Somebody got bored. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 10,721 
Member is Online
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 1, 2022 7:46:04 GMT -5
This isn't a question of whether vaccines are good or bad, but whether they should be mandated. Yes. In this case, vaccine mandates with appropriate exceptions are definitely the way to go to reduce negative outcomes. Experiences shows that an exceedingly small (albeit vocal) minority won't comply with mandates when faced with consequences proportional to the harm their poor choices cause. The government should ease the costs to individuals by paying for vaccines (which it does) and providing tests/masks. In the meantime, hospitalization and death rates become much lower. The taxing of hospital resources becomes lower. People avoid complications from other problems that arise because they are not getting routine checkups. Devoted doctors and nurses don't quit because dying patients and their families mistakenly attack them. Long COVID becomes rarer and the expense of supporting those patients becomes less. Company, and state and fed budgets aren't ravaged by associated health care costs, or ancillary expenses. The argument against mandates seems based on an exceedingly narrow definition of individual freedom. I understand that people want to maintain individual choice. Who doesn't want that? And I get the distrust of collective concerns and action. However, society has to be a team sport in the end. We have to live together. There is no doubt that one person's individual choices sometimes fundamentally influence the choices available to others. That is why we have laws against robbery and murder and slavery and drunk driving. It's plain fantasy to think that doesn't apply when talking about an infectious disease that's killing thousands of people a day - way more than are murdered. If we don't recognize that the preservation of one person's individual freedom sometimes can come at the detriment of others' choices, then freedom is only available to those who are willing to exert power, regardless of evidence of broader good, to enforce their choices while limiting those of others. That is not freedom in any generally meaningful sense. That is not community or society. That is servitude to a philosophy at odds with how the natural world actually works, and to personal privilege at the expense of those without. It's fundamentally not democratic. So I guess I don't understand the rationale against mandates. Ah - the question I am asking - does increasing the number of people vaccinated make it safer for those that are vaccinated? Or, are unvaccinated people putting vaccinated people at an increased material risk? The case against mandates: It has been a disaster in getting more people vaccinated. It has only embolden people to refuse to get vaccinated. If the goal was to increase the # of people vaccinated, this wasn't the way to do it. And that at this point - the decisions made by those not getting vaccinated isn't making it worse for those vaccinated. |
|
|
|
Post by moderndaycoach on Feb 1, 2022 8:59:11 GMT -5
Yes. In this case, vaccine mandates with appropriate exceptions are definitely the way to go to reduce negative outcomes. Experiences shows that an exceedingly small (albeit vocal) minority won't comply with mandates when faced with consequences proportional to the harm their poor choices cause. The government should ease the costs to individuals by paying for vaccines (which it does) and providing tests/masks. In the meantime, hospitalization and death rates become much lower. The taxing of hospital resources becomes lower. People avoid complications from other problems that arise because they are not getting routine checkups. Devoted doctors and nurses don't quit because dying patients and their families mistakenly attack them. Long COVID becomes rarer and the expense of supporting those patients becomes less. Company, and state and fed budgets aren't ravaged by associated health care costs, or ancillary expenses. The argument against mandates seems based on an exceedingly narrow definition of individual freedom. I understand that people want to maintain individual choice. Who doesn't want that? And I get the distrust of collective concerns and action. However, society has to be a team sport in the end. We have to live together. There is no doubt that one person's individual choices sometimes fundamentally influence the choices available to others. That is why we have laws against robbery and murder and slavery and drunk driving. It's plain fantasy to think that doesn't apply when talking about an infectious disease that's killing thousands of people a day - way more than are murdered. If we don't recognize that the preservation of one person's individual freedom sometimes can come at the detriment of others' choices, then freedom is only available to those who are willing to exert power, regardless of evidence of broader good, to enforce their choices while limiting those of others. That is not freedom in any generally meaningful sense. That is not community or society. That is servitude to a philosophy at odds with how the natural world actually works, and to personal privilege at the expense of those without. It's fundamentally not democratic. So I guess I don't understand the rationale against mandates. Ah - the question I am asking - does increasing the number of people vaccinated make it safer for those that are vaccinated? Or, are unvaccinated people putting vaccinated people at an increased material risk? The case against mandates: It has been a disaster in getting more people vaccinated. It has only embolden people to refuse to get vaccinated. If the goal was to increase the # of people vaccinated, this wasn't the way to do it. And that at this point - the decisions made by those not getting vaccinated isn't making it worse for those vaccinated. The answer is no, it doesn't. The same way we know that using that filthy dirty single use mask that sits in your jacket pocket or coffee stained cupholder in your car every single time you need it until the string breaks is not doing much to prevent a spread....especially when half the people wearing it around you don't have it tight to their face or even above their nose. You had people on tv like rachel maddow come out and very boldly tell everyone that once vaccinated covid can not use your body as a host....wrong. But was she disciplined or suspended for spreading disinformation on national tv? You are going to be hard pressed to convince vaccination to the people that lived their lives as normal as possible the last two years without contracting covid, or getting it and recovering in the same time period as a common cold while also naturally obtaining antibodies. Especially when the CDC comes out every other day changing what they know or how to treat the policy, or NFL and college stadiums getting filled for playoff games while miraculously having zero positive tests in either set of playoffs. It is pretty obvious it is seasonal and that will lead others to perhaps think about it a year from now when more studies are made available to them or they decide they want to do it out of precaution. Creating a mandatory totalitarian state will do nothing but incite a riot, especially when you are using exaggerated or inaccurate data to make your point. Toni Preckwinkle just a couple weeks ago justified Chicago's vaccination passport law with an example of 3 gyms from Hawaii in 2020 when reporters asked what data they used in making their decision. She also cited the success of using the passport in New York City, where we know they have unsuccessfully limited the spread in public places since it was put in place August 4th. Not to mention most of these people making the rules do it for thee but not for me, Eric Gercetti and Gavin Newsom were pictured all over the place at SoFi staidum this weekend without masks as they made kids up the street in a large AAU tourney play with masks on, you simply can not win any argument when the people that are forcing these outrageous rules refuse to follow them. People will get tired of the doom and gloom every time someone mentions what will happen if you aren't vaccinated, and all they hypocrites will have no where to hide when restrictions are lifted again this summer so all out door businesses in cold climates and start recouping their money and they choose to still associate in public where there will likely be maskless, unvaccinated individuals. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 1, 2022 9:13:33 GMT -5
- the question I am asking - does increasing the number of people vaccinated make it safer for those that are vaccinated? Yes. Also yes. This is blatantly untrue. Places with vaccination requirements for dining, indoor activities, gyms, etc have extremely high vaccination rates. Our local university has over 98% of students and staff vaccinated because they required it. That's more than 30,000 people in a place where, if they followed the local vaxx rates, barely half that would have been vaccinated otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Feb 1, 2022 10:14:00 GMT -5
I see the OP has deleted all of his/her posts.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 10,721
Member is Online
|
Post by bluepenquin on Feb 1, 2022 11:03:05 GMT -5
- the question I am asking - does increasing the number of people vaccinated make it safer for those that are vaccinated? Yes. Also yes. How? |
|
|
|
Post by mervynpumpkinhead on Feb 1, 2022 11:08:43 GMT -5
More unvaccinated means more chance of infection means more chance of hospitalization, death, and long term issues, not to mention mutation and further infection. |
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Feb 1, 2022 11:10:47 GMT -5
So I get chewed out for causing problems and disunity and being a bad example and not being a team player. This is because a lot of people on our current team are jacking their jaws about us to management. This is all coming from someone that was telling the girls to go full keto because he looked like a self-propelled stomach and he lost a lot of weight. So he ate nothing but hot dogs (minus the bun) for a full year and ended up with butt hole cancer. Good advice there coach. Are you still sitting on a pillow driving all the way from Haslet to North Dallas? This might be my favorite post of all time. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 1, 2022 11:19:40 GMT -5
Haven't we been over this like 30 times in the last two years? |
|
