|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On November 08 2022 05:26 Troutish wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 02:48 Troutish wrote:
Bj shouldn't give you the time of day for the way you talk down to him in #13054, Serm. I mean he's chill with calling other people mentally challenged and being "complete wastes of space". Hes not exactly briming with reasons to treat him any better then how he treats other people. So infantilizing him and mocking him for your own entertainment is justified, yes? That's going to get him to change his mind on COVID vaccine mandates? That's going to convince antivaxxers they're mistaken and should have a change of heart? I'm not being sarcastic it's an honest question, I don't see how crawling through this mud helps. If you recognize that this slogfest goes nowhere then we can ask more productive questions like how do we move on? What do we move on to? Where should our efforts be aimed going forward?
I don't think that there is any saving of people like him. The only thing you can do is challenge this kind of hate and show that they're not going to normalize ignorance and cruelty. If they reject basic concepts like figuring out why the things happen around them they will never get better.
We need to fight against this kind of anti intellectualism. Show kids that you can be wrong about things and then learn from the experience. That just relying on your feelings to get through the world leads to becoming like bj, where you can have a simple conversation with someone where you asks questions and respond with answers.
|
Cool story bro but most people come here to read up on the latest news on covid, vaccines and the pandemic not read 10 pages of half a dozen people piling on to a poster who holds contradictory viewpoints which have all been discussed to death anyway.
If there's no news just let this thread drop down.The rehashing of old arguments is tiresome.
|
On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
No, we're having this discussion here or we don't. I want people to see what both of us are saying, otherwise I'm not interested.
This is not about myocarditis, this is about you using definitions whichever way is temporarily convenient for you, and switching the definition when that becomes more convenient.
Why are you not questioning the claim of vaccine safety? Should they, according to your definition, not instead say "vaccines are almost safe"? And just to get ahead of potential goalpost moving: I'm obviously still talking about covid vaccines, more specifically Pfizer and Moderna. Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline. and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation.
These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics.
Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does.
I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are?
|
On November 08 2022 10:58 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 10:49 evilfatsh1t wrote:On November 08 2022 10:44 JimmiC wrote:On November 08 2022 10:37 evilfatsh1t wrote:its completely understandable that bj is frustrated about lack of mod action. sure, he himself is walking on ice but serm is straight up hostile against bj. On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.)
On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:
No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. The things he argues most passionately against is results from vaccination efforts or results from previous vaccination efforts.
I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. after 50 pages of shit flinging this is serms conclusion on bj's position. ive said it before, but serm is literally not even reading bj's posts, hes just looking for keywords that he doesnt like and going on a tirade. its not possible that anyone reading this thread in good faith can conclude that bj is an anti-vaxxer. not wanting a mandate is not the same thing as thinking vaccines are worthless. im pretty sure if this was the us pol thread and serm didnt have his post count number hed already be temp'd for his bad faith conduct. serm isnt disagreeing with bj's points, hes just disagreeing with bj. its tiresome as fuck to read Your post along with the 10 others and The mods all supporting BJ compeltely defeat his point. If he wants people to stop being an ass to him he should stop being an ass and using a ton of toneless sarcasim. If he wants to keep being the way he is he needs to stop crying so mucb about being a victim. what does my showing some support for bj's position have anything to do with mod action? there were plenty of right wing posters that had support from other users in the us pol threads; didnt stop any of them getting banned eventually. and if anything the reason why i post now and then to say something, despite my preference to just lurk, is exactly because they have been flinging shit at each other for 50 pages and im getting tired of it. sure, i could just let bj 1v9 and see if he gives up in exhaustion and the thread quiets down or changes topic, but when im of the view that he has legitimate points that are being attacked simply because the poster's name was his, then it would be wrong to just say nothing. BJ is calling for mod action not me. Serms posted for how long, how many of these with how many people has he had? How about BJ, every week its some one new or a repeat of and old fight. Hes basically always fighting when he posts. My point is not that BJ should be banned or Serm should be. It is that BJ should not whine so much because he is ALWAYS in these and if the mods dig into it they may notice that. He is not remotely a innocent victim. He picks fights then cries when someone hits back. Edit: basically BJ is TLs annoying little brother pissing people off then running to mommy and daddy when they hit back. If he wanted stop tgis he could have 50 pages ago, he loves it.
well i havent paid enough attention to this thread to recall the "other fights" bj has been in in the past, but it hardly surprises me. i imagine its a huge reason why he has referred to this place being an echo chamber; he brings up points that may or may not have been legitimate (this time they certainly are), and he gets completely shit on by a bunch of regulars that seemingly have a prejudicial agenda against him. perhaps its time for everyone in this thread to come to the realisation that just because a lot of people agree with you, it doesnt mean youre right. coming to the conclusion that bj has always been a bad faith shit poster because hes "always fighting" is a poor analysis.
On November 08 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
No, we're having this discussion here or we don't. I want people to see what both of us are saying, otherwise I'm not interested.
This is not about myocarditis, this is about you using definitions whichever way is temporarily convenient for you, and switching the definition when that becomes more convenient.
Why are you not questioning the claim of vaccine safety? Should they, according to your definition, not instead say "vaccines are almost safe"? And just to get ahead of potential goalpost moving: I'm obviously still talking about covid vaccines, more specifically Pfizer and Moderna. Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline. and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation. These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics. Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does. I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are?
thats what hes been saying from pretty much the beginning. you just arent interested in reading his posts because youre so blinded by your hatred of him that you would rather resort to personal attacks like hes "self conscious" or some other ridiculous insult.
see this post from dpb in august.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 23 2022 04:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2022 02:59 Sermokala wrote:On August 22 2022 14:01 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:On August 22 2022 07:02 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2022 06:32 Magic Powers wrote:
And as we all know, people who don't want to work next to unvaccinated people can just quit their jobs, too. Because freedom is such a straight forward concept that it only goes in one direction and not also the other, right? People who don't want to work next to smokers can also just quit their jobs, right? And people who's neighbors play loud music at night can just move elsewhere. And when big companies build noisy roads in front of our doors, why don't we just plug our ears? And minors who have smoker parents can just leave their homes and become orphans, of course there's no problem with that. I wasn't aware how easy this whole freedom thing is, but now I'm enlightened. We don't have to make any rules for people who make life difficult for others, we can just leave their spaces and let them do whatever they want. This is going to go very well and make for a great society. I think we’ve been over this, we simply disagree. You feel threatened enough by the unvaccinated to ban them from your workplace and I don’t. Almost everyone in my workplace hasn’t had a COVID shot in 8 months or longer and as we’ve shown there’s almost no protection against Omicron at this point. Feeling safer around them than an unvaccinated person would just be irrational right now. This is getting repetitive BJ. How you continue to miss the basic premise of a vaccine and how it makes you safer against the thing you are being vaccinated for is just wild. It is irrational to reject basic logic and science. Why do you keep clinging to your defense of basic ignorance? Is that your question that you’ve said I’ve been dodging? Yes I have answered that. It doesn’t matter if something will save someone’s life they still have the choice to refuse it. This is a universally understood right of bodily autonomy that every medical establishment across the world agrees on. If a Jehova’s witness needs a blood transfusion or they will die but they say it’s against their religion to receive blood do you know what we do as a society? We let them die. Period. That’s the ethical approach. Again dodging the question by replacing what I said with what is convenient for you. People have the right to refuse treatment for their own body. they don't have the right to inflict harm on others. We have established in this country that actions that effect others are not protected. In your example, we have a Jehovah's witness deciding to end their own life based on their own actions. with the unvaccinated, we have people deciding to end others' lives based on their own actions. I have repeatedly given examples about how vaccination falls into this second category. So again we have to ask the question you keep dodging. what part of the covid vaccine do you find it worse than all the other vaccines people have been mandated to get and all the other mandates the government issues against inflicting harm on others? You can't claim to support the vaccine but also constantly cast doubt on and bash the use of the vaccine. My understanding of BlackJack's position (and BlackJack, please correct me if I'm wrong) is this: BJ believes that (1) covid has been bad enough and (2) the vaccines have been effective enough to convince him to become vaccinated and to recommend that others get vaccinated too, but not so extreme as to convince BJ that people should pay significant consequences (e.g., losing one's job, paying fines, requiring mandates that overrule the right to bodily autonomy, etc.) for remaining unvaccinated. For him to call for more significant consequences, either covid would need to be worse than its current state, or the vaccines would need to be more effective. Now, we might ask BJ something like "Well, how bad would covid need to be for you to think that those significant consequences are justified for remaining unvaxxed" or "Well, how effective would the vaccine need to be at dealing with covid (or for how many months would the efficacy need to last) for you to think that those significant consequences are justified for remaining unvaxxed". And it seems to be the case that BJ's response to questions like those would be "I'm not exactly sure where I'd draw the line for either of those, but I do know that at the present time (and maybe in the past?) we haven't arrived at those lines yet, because I still don't feel like we're justified to enforce those more significant consequences." I think a lot of it comes down to where each of us draws those kinds of lines, in terms of the dangers and effects of covid (on the individual; on their families, friends, and neighbors; on our hospitals) and how much the vaccine mitigates those risks. For me (DPB), I care less than BJ does about one's personal right to bodily autonomy in the context of vaccines and public health situations, so my line is drawn in a different place. I think a lot of the arguments with BJ boil down to the idea that our lines are drawn in slightly different places than where BJ has drawn his.
posters like myself, dpb, drone have generally understood what bj's position has been for months. this post above is a summary made by dpb and it is not that much different from this post.
+ Show Spoiler +On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
No, we're having this discussion here or we don't. I want people to see what both of us are saying, otherwise I'm not interested.
This is not about myocarditis, this is about you using definitions whichever way is temporarily convenient for you, and switching the definition when that becomes more convenient.
Why are you not questioning the claim of vaccine safety? Should they, according to your definition, not instead say "vaccines are almost safe"? And just to get ahead of potential goalpost moving: I'm obviously still talking about covid vaccines, more specifically Pfizer and Moderna. Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline. and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation.
you cant pretend now that dpbs recent summary is some groundbreaking revelation. he made the same summary almost 3 goddamn months ago. yet here you are still going on about how bj is actually talking about some other shit and hes an anti vaxxer in disguise. has it ever occurred to you that you are just blinded and that maybe theres a reason some veterans such as drone or even dpb have been able to see it from bj's side? seriously, drop the victim bullshit. as far as i can tell youre the bigger instigator of this months long clown fiesta.
and to be clear, im not alleging that dpb or any of the other posters all agree with blackjack. the important part is they are at least able to discern what the hell blackjack is trying to say. you havent been able to do that even if other people are literally throwing their well worded summaries at you.
|
You attack your own credibility by saying you don't pay attention to the thread. You attack your own arguments constantly, how can you really argue bj is right calling tl an echo chamber when you try to use other posters that aren't bj to support your argument? How am I to drop the "victim bullshit" when bj is the one that even you're trying to frame as the victim of my hate? How can you go from trying to say that everyone agreeing with you doesn't make you right and then try to tell me that no one agrees with me and therefore I'm wrong?
I understand what you're trying to do but you need to keep your arguments straight to persuade people.
If drone doesn't think we shouldn't fight in the thread I'm okay to do that. I'm not one who lets feelings decide how I think and can move on. Maybe I'm wrong about bj I'm not too prideful to admit I'm never wrong. I just have not seen the kinds of arguments for the things that other people I respect in this thread are saying that bj is arguing for.
|
On November 08 2022 14:08 Sermokala wrote:
It's incredible how you can use so many words yet say so little. You attack your own credibility by saying you don't pay attention to the thread. You attack your own arguments constantly, how can you really argue bj is right calling tl an echo chamber when you try to use other posters that aren't bj to support your argument? How am I to drop the "victim bullshit" when bj is the one that even you're trying to frame as the victim of my hate? How can you go from trying to say that everyone agreeing with you doesn't make you right and then try to tell me that no one agrees with me and therefore I'm wrong?
You don't take yourself seriously how am I suppose to?
If drone doesn't think we should fight vaccine misinformation in the thread I'm okay to do that. I'm not the one who lets feelings decide how I think and can move on.
its actually amazing how bad at comprehension you are. if youre deliberately misinterpreting everyone's posts, then youre a troll and you should be banned. if youre not, then you should stop engaging in the thread because you lack the prerequisite linguistic ability to participate in conversations of this standard.
i said i didnt pay attention to the thread enough to recall previous instances of bj disputing with people in the past. that has nothing to do with the matter at hand. besides, im not even sure why my credibility even matters here lol.
i never said bj was right in calling tl an echo chamber, i said i could understand why he would make such a reference. theres a clear distinction between the two.
On November 08 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:
These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics.
Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does.
I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are?
this post is an attempt to make yourself look like a good faith poster that has been dragged through the mud by blackjack. youre playing the victim here.
i never said no one agreed with you, and i never implied that everyone being in agreement with you will always make you right. youre wrong because youre in the wrong. its as simple as that. and to be extra clear (because you obviously struggle with understanding what people are trying to say), what youre wrong about is what you think bj's position is and what hes trying to say.
your post is a classic example of you misinterpreting everything your opponent is saying by focusing on a few keywords and attacking them. you didnt even bother to comment on the main part of my post, which is the fact that there is clear evidence of multiple posters trying to explain to you what youre missing and you dont even bother to acknowledge it.
also i dont think the irony is clear on you complaining about bj's "gotcha" attempts when you're regurgitating "facts dont care about your feelings" lines like youre ben shapiro. its also funny that you dont even realise that that particular line is more applicable to your position than blackjack's. his argument is that there is a genuine discussion to be had about public safety vs individual freedom of choice. your position is "but people will die!! we must mandate vaccines for everybody!!". the position motivated by "feelings" isnt the former. once again, this is just another example of you failing to understand what youre even arguing about.
|
Twice he has referenced going “pro COVID in December” just so he can have more people to argue with or harass I’m guessing. I think we’re far past deciding whether he is posting in good faith or if he is a troll. The question that remains is why is this accepted here.
|
Oh, I think Serm is arguing in 'good faith' insofar as they believe the argument they're making wholeheartedly and are arguing for it as best they can... the problem is the argument they're making is basically a conspiracy theory (BlackJack is a planted Antivaxx agent masquerading as someone who isn't antivaxx to [nefarious plot here])
I see no path where banning one of the two of you, and not both, is any kind of fair. More likely you both get smashed with a thread ban, or are given something similar to whatever stipulation keeps GH and Jimmi apart.
How TL should be moderated IS an interesting discussion, but we should probably have that discussion where it's meant to be held.
|
@evilfatsh1t
"its not possible that anyone reading this thread in good faith can conclude that bj is an anti-vaxxer"
"well i havent paid enough attention to this thread to recall the "other fights" bj has been in in the past"
|
On November 08 2022 13:50 evilfatsh1t wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 10:58 JimmiC wrote:On November 08 2022 10:49 evilfatsh1t wrote:On November 08 2022 10:44 JimmiC wrote:On November 08 2022 10:37 evilfatsh1t wrote:its completely understandable that bj is frustrated about lack of mod action. sure, he himself is walking on ice but serm is straight up hostile against bj. On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.)
On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:
No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. The things he argues most passionately against is results from vaccination efforts or results from previous vaccination efforts.
I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. after 50 pages of shit flinging this is serms conclusion on bj's position. ive said it before, but serm is literally not even reading bj's posts, hes just looking for keywords that he doesnt like and going on a tirade. its not possible that anyone reading this thread in good faith can conclude that bj is an anti-vaxxer. not wanting a mandate is not the same thing as thinking vaccines are worthless. im pretty sure if this was the us pol thread and serm didnt have his post count number hed already be temp'd for his bad faith conduct. serm isnt disagreeing with bj's points, hes just disagreeing with bj. its tiresome as fuck to read Your post along with the 10 others and The mods all supporting BJ compeltely defeat his point. If he wants people to stop being an ass to him he should stop being an ass and using a ton of toneless sarcasim. If he wants to keep being the way he is he needs to stop crying so mucb about being a victim. what does my showing some support for bj's position have anything to do with mod action? there were plenty of right wing posters that had support from other users in the us pol threads; didnt stop any of them getting banned eventually. and if anything the reason why i post now and then to say something, despite my preference to just lurk, is exactly because they have been flinging shit at each other for 50 pages and im getting tired of it. sure, i could just let bj 1v9 and see if he gives up in exhaustion and the thread quiets down or changes topic, but when im of the view that he has legitimate points that are being attacked simply because the poster's name was his, then it would be wrong to just say nothing. BJ is calling for mod action not me. Serms posted for how long, how many of these with how many people has he had? How about BJ, every week its some one new or a repeat of and old fight. Hes basically always fighting when he posts. My point is not that BJ should be banned or Serm should be. It is that BJ should not whine so much because he is ALWAYS in these and if the mods dig into it they may notice that. He is not remotely a innocent victim. He picks fights then cries when someone hits back. Edit: basically BJ is TLs annoying little brother pissing people off then running to mommy and daddy when they hit back. If he wanted stop tgis he could have 50 pages ago, he loves it. well i havent paid enough attention to this thread to recall the "other fights" bj has been in in the past, but it hardly surprises me. i imagine its a huge reason why he has referred to this place being an echo chamber; he brings up points that may or may not have been legitimate (this time they certainly are), and he gets completely shit on by a bunch of regulars that seemingly have a prejudicial agenda against him. perhaps its time for everyone in this thread to come to the realisation that just because a lot of people agree with you, it doesnt mean youre right. coming to the conclusion that bj has always been a bad faith shit poster because hes "always fighting" is a poor analysis. Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]
Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!
Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline.
and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation. These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics. Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does. I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are? thats what hes been saying from pretty much the beginning. you just arent interested in reading his posts because youre so blinded by your hatred of him that you would rather resort to personal attacks like hes "self conscious" or some other ridiculous insult. see this post from dpb in august. + Show Spoiler +On August 23 2022 04:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2022 02:59 Sermokala wrote:On August 22 2022 14:01 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:On August 22 2022 07:02 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2022 06:32 Magic Powers wrote:
And as we all know, people who don't want to work next to unvaccinated people can just quit their jobs, too. Because freedom is such a straight forward concept that it only goes in one direction and not also the other, right? People who don't want to work next to smokers can also just quit their jobs, right? And people who's neighbors play loud music at night can just move elsewhere. And when big companies build noisy roads in front of our doors, why don't we just plug our ears? And minors who have smoker parents can just leave their homes and become orphans, of course there's no problem with that. I wasn't aware how easy this whole freedom thing is, but now I'm enlightened. We don't have to make any rules for people who make life difficult for others, we can just leave their spaces and let them do whatever they want. This is going to go very well and make for a great society. I think we’ve been over this, we simply disagree. You feel threatened enough by the unvaccinated to ban them from your workplace and I don’t. Almost everyone in my workplace hasn’t had a COVID shot in 8 months or longer and as we’ve shown there’s almost no protection against Omicron at this point. Feeling safer around them than an unvaccinated person would just be irrational right now. This is getting repetitive BJ. How you continue to miss the basic premise of a vaccine and how it makes you safer against the thing you are being vaccinated for is just wild. It is irrational to reject basic logic and science. Why do you keep clinging to your defense of basic ignorance? Is that your question that you’ve said I’ve been dodging? Yes I have answered that. It doesn’t matter if something will save someone’s life they still have the choice to refuse it. This is a universally understood right of bodily autonomy that every medical establishment across the world agrees on. If a Jehova’s witness needs a blood transfusion or they will die but they say it’s against their religion to receive blood do you know what we do as a society? We let them die. Period. That’s the ethical approach. Again dodging the question by replacing what I said with what is convenient for you. People have the right to refuse treatment for their own body. they don't have the right to inflict harm on others. We have established in this country that actions that effect others are not protected. In your example, we have a Jehovah's witness deciding to end their own life based on their own actions. with the unvaccinated, we have people deciding to end others' lives based on their own actions. I have repeatedly given examples about how vaccination falls into this second category. So again we have to ask the question you keep dodging. what part of the covid vaccine do you find it worse than all the other vaccines people have been mandated to get and all the other mandates the government issues against inflicting harm on others? You can't claim to support the vaccine but also constantly cast doubt on and bash the use of the vaccine. My understanding of BlackJack's position (and BlackJack, please correct me if I'm wrong) is this: BJ believes that (1) covid has been bad enough and (2) the vaccines have been effective enough to convince him to become vaccinated and to recommend that others get vaccinated too, but not so extreme as to convince BJ that people should pay significant consequences (e.g., losing one's job, paying fines, requiring mandates that overrule the right to bodily autonomy, etc.) for remaining unvaccinated. For him to call for more significant consequences, either covid would need to be worse than its current state, or the vaccines would need to be more effective. Now, we might ask BJ something like "Well, how bad would covid need to be for you to think that those significant consequences are justified for remaining unvaxxed" or "Well, how effective would the vaccine need to be at dealing with covid (or for how many months would the efficacy need to last) for you to think that those significant consequences are justified for remaining unvaxxed". And it seems to be the case that BJ's response to questions like those would be "I'm not exactly sure where I'd draw the line for either of those, but I do know that at the present time (and maybe in the past?) we haven't arrived at those lines yet, because I still don't feel like we're justified to enforce those more significant consequences." I think a lot of it comes down to where each of us draws those kinds of lines, in terms of the dangers and effects of covid (on the individual; on their families, friends, and neighbors; on our hospitals) and how much the vaccine mitigates those risks. For me (DPB), I care less than BJ does about one's personal right to bodily autonomy in the context of vaccines and public health situations, so my line is drawn in a different place. I think a lot of the arguments with BJ boil down to the idea that our lines are drawn in slightly different places than where BJ has drawn his. posters like myself, dpb, drone have generally understood what bj's position has been for months. this post above is a summary made by dpb and it is not that much different from this post. + Show Spoiler +On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
No, we're having this discussion here or we don't. I want people to see what both of us are saying, otherwise I'm not interested.
This is not about myocarditis, this is about you using definitions whichever way is temporarily convenient for you, and switching the definition when that becomes more convenient.
Why are you not questioning the claim of vaccine safety? Should they, according to your definition, not instead say "vaccines are almost safe"? And just to get ahead of potential goalpost moving: I'm obviously still talking about covid vaccines, more specifically Pfizer and Moderna. Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline. and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation. you cant pretend now that dpbs recent summary is some groundbreaking revelation. he made the same summary almost 3 goddamn months ago. yet here you are still going on about how bj is actually talking about some other shit and hes an anti vaxxer in disguise. has it ever occurred to you that you are just blinded and that maybe theres a reason some veterans such as drone or even dpb have been able to see it from bj's side? seriously, drop the victim bullshit. as far as i can tell youre the bigger instigator of this months long clown fiesta. and to be clear, im not alleging that dpb or any of the other posters all agree with blackjack. the important part is they are at least able to discern what the hell blackjack is trying to say. you havent been able to do that even if other people are literally throwing their well worded summaries at you.
The problem isn't that BlackJack doesn't make points that are worth discussing, because he certainly does (even if I disagree with more than a few of them). The problem is those points make up a fraction of his total post volume, with the rest being (apparently intentional) misrepresentations of other people's arguments (not just Serm), misrepresentation of facts and sources and other bad-faith arguing.
It gets really tiring to wade through a bunch of bad faith nonsense to get to the point that's worth discussing, and then whenever you do try to discuss said point he just responds with more of the same 90/10 mix of misrepresentations/actual arguments.
And he then has the gall to complain that people don't take him seriously and/or struggle or refuse to engage with his actual points.
|
On November 08 2022 16:59 Fleetfeet wrote:
Oh, I think Serm is arguing in 'good faith' insofar as they believe the argument they're making wholeheartedly and are arguing for it as best they can... the problem is the argument they're making is basically a conspiracy theory (BlackJack is a planeted Antivaxx agent masquerading as someone who isn't antivaxx to [nefarious plot here])
I see no path where banning one of the two of you, and not both, is any kind of fair. More likely you both get smashed with a thread ban, or are given something similar to whatever stipulation keeps GH and Jimmi apart.
How TL should be moderated IS an interesting discussion, but we should probably have that discussion where it's meant to be held.
I just haven't engaged with him in years on my own volition. It's a unidirectional choice.
On COVID: I'm curious if anyone is still masking (N95) regularly (where appropriate) or plans to this winter?
|
On November 08 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
No, we're having this discussion here or we don't. I want people to see what both of us are saying, otherwise I'm not interested.
This is not about myocarditis, this is about you using definitions whichever way is temporarily convenient for you, and switching the definition when that becomes more convenient.
Why are you not questioning the claim of vaccine safety? Should they, according to your definition, not instead say "vaccines are almost safe"? And just to get ahead of potential goalpost moving: I'm obviously still talking about covid vaccines, more specifically Pfizer and Moderna. Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline. and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation. These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics. Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does. I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are?
BJ often uses gotchas and nitpicky semantics arguments and insults, yes. And so do you. But that doesn't mean he (or you) denies that covid vaccines save lives. And I've literally had those "great topics" of conversation with him, in this thread.
Find a quote from BJ saying that covid vaccines don't save lives. I could be wrong, but I don't think you'll be able to.
|
On November 08 2022 17:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 16:59 Fleetfeet wrote:
Oh, I think Serm is arguing in 'good faith' insofar as they believe the argument they're making wholeheartedly and are arguing for it as best they can... the problem is the argument they're making is basically a conspiracy theory (BlackJack is a planeted Antivaxx agent masquerading as someone who isn't antivaxx to [nefarious plot here])
I see no path where banning one of the two of you, and not both, is any kind of fair. More likely you both get smashed with a thread ban, or are given something similar to whatever stipulation keeps GH and Jimmi apart.
How TL should be moderated IS an interesting discussion, but we should probably have that discussion where it's meant to be held. I just haven't engaged with him in years on my own volition. It's a unidirectional choice. On COVID: I'm curious if anyone is still masking (N95) regularly (where appropriate) or plans to this winter?
A shrinking percentage of teachers and students in my school are staying masked (probably around 5-10% now). We still get weekly reports of how many new covid cases are sprouting up at school, and the data so far is looking encouraging, but with the holiday season coming up (colder weather = more time indoors around others + seeing more family and friends), a lot of us are wondering if we'll see an uptick in cases, especially in early January when school reopens after Christmas + New Years. If the cases continue to dwindle and if there's no craziness during December/January, then I'll probably talk to my wife about me potentially unmasking at the beginning of 2023.
My biggest concerns aren't for my own health - I got covid over the summer (early July, not during the school year) and I was mostly fine (an overnight fever that wasn't serious + a bad cough and sore throat for three days; the quarantining and staying away from my wife and pets was the hardest part). I primarily want to make sure that I don't cause my wife to get infected; she's a small business owner - she owns and runs her own veterinary clinic - and her having to close down her practice for a week or so would really suck for her. She also employs at least one high-health-risk person (her dad) and has other employees who live with high-health-risk family members, so we want to avoid an outbreak at the clinic. Secondarily, I really love teaching and I don't want to miss school.
|
On November 08 2022 17:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 13:20 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 03:45 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2022 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 08 2022 01:25 Sermokala wrote:On November 07 2022 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:38 BlackJack wrote:On November 07 2022 19:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2022 19:12 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]
Then yeah we're not having the discussion. You think I want to have to discussion while simultaneously putting up with that dimwit saying
HeY GuyS BJ OnLY wants TO talk abOUT MyoCarditis!!!! He DoESn'T evEN KnoW VaCCines SavE LivEs!!
Yeah sounds like a lot of fun but I politely decline.
and we can say vaccines are safe because billions have been given out now the the risks are very very small. Which is different than saying there are no risks. Again this is generally collectively understood language. A routine medical procedure like a colonoscopy can be called generally safe, nobody would call it risk-free. Who says that you're unaware that vaccines save lives? Serm? I'd be happy to disagree with whoever says that, as I believe you're quite aware that vaccines save lives. Nobody faults you for not reading his illegible drivel but his existence in this thread for 3 months now has been nothing more than to say that "BJ is an antivaxxer and he doesn't want anyone to get the vaccine because he is so hateful he wants them to die of COVID and if he says different he is lying" or something to that regard. Then he asks ridiculously stupid loaded questions over and over like "BJ why don't want want anyone to get vaccinated?" or "Why do you think people getting vaccinated is a bad thing?" Which I rightfully ignore then he repeatedly badgers me with "BJ why won't you answer the question!" Which evidently doesn't violate any forum rules. You're right that my eyes glaze over when the two of you resort to mudslinging and out-pettying each other, instead of having substantive discussions, so let me ask Serm: Serm, do you recognize that BlackJack knows that vaccines save lives? (A simple Yes or No can suffice; you don't need to go into any more detail if you don't want to, and we don't need to make this about any other covid-related topic that you and he may not agree about.) No I don't. He's shown constantly that he reacts violently when pressed on any part about how vaccines work or why they're used. I think he understands that he would look bad if he admitted that he doesn't think vaccines save lives and so tries desperately to find some justification for him being able to admit it in public. Okay. I don't agree with BJ on everything, and I think he's said other things that weren't very clear, but I also think he's made it clear that he understands that vaccines save lives. People can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work, or whether they think mandates could be effective, etc. I mean I agree that people can know that vaccines save lives even if they don't know how they work but I don't see his behavior of either. Hes been asked why he thinks that there shouldn't be mandates even though it would save lives and his answer was "people shouldn't be forced to get the vaccine". When he was told that people agree with him but that it isn't an argument against the mandates we've seen so far he doesn't have another reason. How many times have we seen him act like vaccine mandate support is the same as thinking that the disease can be eradicated? Or being against giving the vaccine to people due to the vaccine giving symptoms that are less than the disease itself? I asked him why he thought he got vaccinated as a kid and he steadfastly cannot answer it because he has no idea I believe. The arguments he makes just doesn't reconcile with knowing how vaccines work or belving that they save lives. Based on how many times you've just mentioned how BlackJack feels about vaccine mandates, it makes me think that your line of reasoning is "Why wouldn't someone support a vaccine mandate if they know vaccines actually save lives", but it's more complicated than that. Being against a vaccine mandate is not the same thing as not understanding that vaccines save lives. Each person has their own threshold for what kinds of freedoms they believe should be limited during different scenarios (the height of a pandemic, a year later when things are more manageable, etc.) and also considers other variables (the efficacy of the vaccine for the individual taking it, the decrease in infection rate month over month when a vaccinated person is around others, etc.). In other words, I think that the statement "Person X understands that covid vaccines save lives, but Person X is also against a legal mandate forcing everyone to get vaccinated" is a possible and not-inherently-contradictory position to have. I'm not saying that someone is necessarily right (or wrong) for having that position, just that the latter half of that position doesn't refute the former half. I think BlackJack might hold that position - that he is an example of Person X - one who recognizes that covid vaccines have saved lives and continue to do so, but also believes that mandating covid vaccines for everyone (especially now, at the end of 2022) isn't necessary. I apologize in advance if I've misunderstood your line of reasoning or BlackJack's position; I'm trying to sincerely interpret the situation. These are great topics that we could have been spending our times discussing. But bj is and has never been interested in having them. It's why I have been thinking of going pro covid in December so we can have those kinds of conversation a out real topics. Instead bj just isn't interested, he has gone so far out of his way to attack any sort of reasoning for people to get the vaccine or to attack anyone who advocates for others to get the vaccine. He lacks any sort of confidence in what he believes and thinks the only way he can look good in any way is by attacking other people. He's so self conscious about it that he repeatedly tries to appeal to other people for support and lambasts his performance on imaginary handicaps like him being in an echo chamber despite the fact that other people drop in to support him and you and drone keep trying to organize why he feels the way he does. I mean how many times does he have to fall back on gotchas or hindsight arguments before even he sees how tired they are? BJ often uses gotchas and nitpicky semantics arguments and insults, yes. And so do you. But that doesn't mean he (or you) denies that covid vaccines save lives. And I've literally had those "great topics" of conversation with him, in this thread. Find a quote from BJ saying that covid vaccines don't save lives. I could be wrong, but I don't think you'll be able to.
I mean I already proposed the solution to dealing with this. Since Serm repeatedly posts that I don’t want people to get vaccinated or I don’t think vaccines save lives or I want people to die of COVID all he has to do is quote a post of mine saying any of that and I will self-ban for 3 months. But if he can’t find a single post then that means he has been libeling and harassing me unrelentingly and then he should be banned for 3 months. Seems like a fair solution to me.
|
On November 08 2022 17:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 16:59 Fleetfeet wrote:
Oh, I think Serm is arguing in 'good faith' insofar as they believe the argument they're making wholeheartedly and are arguing for it as best they can... the problem is the argument they're making is basically a conspiracy theory (BlackJack is a planeted Antivaxx agent masquerading as someone who isn't antivaxx to [nefarious plot here])
I see no path where banning one of the two of you, and not both, is any kind of fair. More likely you both get smashed with a thread ban, or are given something similar to whatever stipulation keeps GH and Jimmi apart.
How TL should be moderated IS an interesting discussion, but we should probably have that discussion where it's meant to be held. I just haven't engaged with him in years on my own volition. It's a unidirectional choice. On COVID: I'm curious if anyone is still masking (N95) regularly (where appropriate) or plans to this winter?
I'm still wearing the mask, depends mostly on how crowded and/or (not) ventilated the area is. I have made some exceptions though when R was low.
During winter masking up is additionally convenient since it warms the face, but unfortunately I wear glasses which makes it very inconvenient. Will wear a mask more often if I get Lasik anytime soon.
|
On November 08 2022 17:20 Magic Powers wrote:
@evilfatsh1t
"its not possible that anyone reading this thread in good faith can conclude that bj is an anti-vaxxer"
"well i havent paid enough attention to this thread to recall the "other fights" bj has been in in the past"
surprise surprise, the other guy who also has trouble reading and likes to twist what people say to fit their agenda. i know i singled out serm in my recent posts but i was definitely thinking of you when i said to serm
On November 08 2022 14:49 evilfatsh1t wrote:
i never said no one agreed with you
|
On November 08 2022 17:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2022 16:59 Fleetfeet wrote:
Oh, I think Serm is arguing in 'good faith' insofar as they believe the argument they're making wholeheartedly and are arguing for it as best they can... the problem is the argument they're making is basically a conspiracy theory (BlackJack is a planeted Antivaxx agent masquerading as someone who isn't antivaxx to [nefarious plot here])
I see no path where banning one of the two of you, and not both, is any kind of fair. More likely you both get smashed with a thread ban, or are given something similar to whatever stipulation keeps GH and Jimmi apart.
How TL should be moderated IS an interesting discussion, but we should probably have that discussion where it's meant to be held. I just haven't engaged with him in years on my own volition. It's a unidirectional choice. On COVID: I'm curious if anyone is still masking (N95) regularly (where appropriate) or plans to this winter?
Still masking anywhere indoors except the lab and in larger spaces with few people. No COVID to date.
I find regional differences really fascinating. We still have some voluntary masking in western Germany but put one foot on Dutch territory and you'll be hard pressed to find one person wearing a mask. Eastern Germany is quite the same, maybe a bit more aggressive as I've been outright asked "what's wrong with you?" at a hotel breakfast buffet.
Currently staying in southern Spain and it's a bit more mixed here. Flying in a packed plane full of coughing people without masks was a horrible feeling, though.
|
On November 08 2022 17:20 Magic Powers wrote:
@evilfatsh1t
"its not possible that anyone reading this thread in good faith can conclude that bj is an anti-vaxxer"
"well i havent paid enough attention to this thread to recall the "other fights" bj has been in in the past"
Ooh, was that a subtle dig to call me an anti-vaxxer?
Ironically I think the only person in this thread that has said they would not encourage people to get vaccinated is you.
You were so strongly against the vaccine mandate for the general public in your country that "Out of protest, and until the vaccine mandate is lifted, I will not encourage any more people to get vaccinated."
Going on to say "No government should ever have the power to do this. This is a more important cause than ending the pandemic and saving lives in the present time."
Like damn. I actually agree with your position in opposing that vaccine mandate but I would never go so far as to not encourage people to get vaccinated. I just argue against it on a starcraft forum. That's pretty hardcore.
But this reminds me, I do owe you an apology. Many months later I erred in remembering this post and I stated that you opposed "any" vaccine mandates. After re-reading this it's quite clear you're specifically talking about a general vaccine mandate. So sorry about that.
Btw only 2 pages after you came out against this vaccine mandate and received the wrath of the mob here you had to call it quits:
On November 20 2021 09:22 Magic Powers wrote:
Alright then, time to unsubscribe from another thread where nuance and context don't matter anymore. I hope the remaining people enjoy playing ping pong with their oversimplified arguments.
Gee, it almost seems like you know how I feel there. Try doing it for 2+ years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
