• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6,675 Gaming the system


About coastal.view

  • Rank
    Canucks Star

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

5,669 profile views
  1. there are many things that people can do to reduce risk to tiny fractions of chance but we live in a real world where not all masks are equal and where the really good masks are in limited supply these quality and effective masks should be provided to and used in priority by medical people since they have a much much higher exposure to virus risk and are critical to our survival unless you are a medical person fighting this virus their survival is more important to society then you or i and they should have any quality masks we might possess in the grand scheme of things mask wearing to decrease virus transmission is actually not that effective it is not useless, but not a priority was is more effective is: if you are sick or have symptoms, stay home (don't wear a mask and go out) practice distancing in priority to wearing a mask hand wash regularly and properly and cover your mouth when coughing (and how do you know that someone who coughs carelessly over people in a crowd will be less careless simply because a mask has been placed on their face maybe they will carelessly install it and it will not really be effective? not sure why you assume a mask will help those who are careless coughers)
  2. so you are going to just insist on sticking to your narrative based on your opinion with limited critical thinking do you know how experts earn that title by mastering the entire field of their expertise and subjecting their views to peer review which hones the body of knowledge in a given area posting views of a so called expert you have found online as being definitive in your view of what is most important in a field of knoweledge is silly as you have no way of knowing if these views have been tested at all but you are content to uncritically just adopt these cherry picked tidbits you find online and then stand firmly behind them knowing no one on here has the expertise to adequately contextualize this information or knowledgeably critique them i warned against doing this a couple of weeks or more ago almost no one on here is capable of knowledgeably assessing information about this virus online in a sufficient manner to refute what local authorities are telling us it is important to select and remain informed from a few reliable sources i accept that our local authorities are experts are knowledgeable about the entire field in which they have expertise and as part of their professional requirements continually review emerging theories and other relevant information in their field if some online has valuable information our experts would have reviewed it and incorporated it it is foolish to somewhat randomly pick online sources and then stand behind them on the basis that they hold out some sort of :"truth" you are randomly guessing this is the case, you do not really know i think it is an unwise approach to use information in this fashion during a time of crisis trump regularly does this and he gains no respect for doing so
  3. this reporting cycle was less then 24 hours and noteworthy as well that all 3 hours missing from the 24 hour cycle were critical 3 business hours... i'd suspect many places process and report the previous day's data the morning after so when the update takes place at noon that really shortens up the time available to get that data out early enough so it can be included in time for the update so i just accept that number is low for valid reasons that really have little to do with flattening the curve (kinda how WHO regularly appears to manage better daily numbers by stopping the 24 hour clock earlier on days recently)
  4. i am curious why you keep repeating this thinly supported view point you have not responded to a previous post i made about this as i suspect you cannot please explain the current success in bc of managing the virus infection spread the bc strategy is noteworthy since few other countries are in the same range of success how do you account for this ? they have based their strategy on science the whole spectrum of reliable science relevant to this issue not the cherry picking approach you engage in
  5. that is a nasty unintended consequence of distancing ? that we have avoided normal death rates from the regular flu ? and so have stressed world population numbers ? darn i'm feeling i should be upset that more people then usual made it through flu season
  6. so this is on the WHO webpage i copied and pasted it The coronavirus COVID-19 is affecting 206 countries and territories around the world and 2 international conveyances. The day is reset after midnight GMT+0. and it is 6:30 pm now and i see again the 24 hour clock changed early why? why? why? what is the point of this there is some hidden agenda there
  7. i think one sensible solution to consider is to cancel all trades made at the tdl since those were made in contemplation of a playoffs that did not happen or to simplify this a bit maybe cancel all compensation made in these deals but still require the receiving team to pay any/all salary due to the player after the trade for this season as the receiving team still got some limited benefit from the player who joined their team
  8. i was going to scold you and doubt your explanation but i'll be damned sneed is actually a word
  9. a good example jimmy oh.. and stop trying to be trump like and create new words for the english language what is this "sneed" you refer to???
  10. who are you referring to? your statements are too often way too general they do not have as much value as they could as a result who is not being prepared? who is this everyone that you say this is on ?
  11. the benefit of wearing a mask is really to prevent you from spreading your illness to others it has marginal value in preventing you from getting it from someone else
  12. your choice of language is predictive of your views reactionary? really? how about "responsive" well worth the present priority given to this new problem facing the world this pandemic reactionary is a word i'd use about dramatic behaviour in relation to something trivial
  13. but i do think there is a distinct difference this is a new challenge that has a huge upside if tackled smartly and effectively many lives can be saved by not being idle or complacent about this one it is true that people die everyday but the causes are multiple and often due to complex societal issues which were being addressed in the normal sophisticated dull thorough way these things are done not dramatic or fresh i think the current attention and energy being spent on this novel virus is a very good investment and a good placement of priorities
  14. yes i get your point but it is sometimes sport to just quibble once in a while just for the sake of it i do agree it is a bit baffling what upsets some people clearly the virus is a big deal but so far it has been handled very well in bc too many do not appreciate that enough it provides a great deal of comfort to me and engenders confidence i am upset about other places though saddened about new york troubled about quebec (and there are many other places that engender upset)
  15. jimmy i beg to differ i am just sitting on my ass right now but maybe you were not clear regarding your definition of CDC