PT today
 

So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.

I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not to
be twirley.

Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and I
would have got a "free" ride.

Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"

There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required

Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.

Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at this
time

Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.

As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.

The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit only.

So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people such
that this is needed.

Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next train
indicators.

Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

tim

PT today
 

tim... wrote:
So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.

I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not to
be twirley.

Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and I
would have got a "free" ride.

Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"

There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required

Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.

Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

I trust you've invested in some suitably stylish examples, such as these, a
snip at under £105 each:
https://www.etsy.com/listing/794633459/hermes-facemasks


FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at this
time

Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.

As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.

The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit only.

So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people such
that this is needed.

Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next train
indicators.

Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.


In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

I think that's only at major stations. They also give out free masks for
those that need them, but probably only for the first couple of days.



The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


Ah, bad luck!

PT today
 

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

PT today
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.

I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not
to
be twirley.

Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going
one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and
I
would have got a "free" ride.

Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"

There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required

Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.

Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

I trust you've invested in some suitably stylish examples, such as these,
a
snip at under £105 each:
https://www.etsy.com/listing/794633459/hermes-facemasks

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at
this
time

Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.

As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.

The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit
only.

So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up
to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people
such
that this is needed.

Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As
per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next
train
indicators.

Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.


In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

I think that's only at major stations.

both stations in the 20 busiest in London list

both interchange with underground

I could have done the journey by Underground, NR + bus was quicker

PT today
 

On 16/06/2020 14:40, tim... wrote:

The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

You were clashing with their TikTok obligations.


--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Dirty Projectors - 2012 - Swing Lo Magellan

PT today
 

On 16/06/2020 16:46, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

Nor will I, fortunately they haven't introduced that ridiculous practice
up here, at least not yet. My condition (mild autism) means that I
cannot relate easily to people in a face-to-face situation unless I can
*see* their faces.

Not only that, they are worse than useless unless used *properly* which
rules out pretty much everybody except medical professionals.

Time was if someone had a mask on and they walked into a shop, they'd be
trying to rob the place..! In my motorcycling days I was regularly told
to remove my helmet when paying for petrol etc.


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.


In what sense?

PT today
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

PT today
 

In message , at 07:29:57 on Wed, 17 Jun
2020, tim... remarked:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

If you mean the DIY dust-masks with a knob on the front, that's a valve
not a filter. They do reduce condensation, and prevent the wearer
touching their mouth and nose.

Inward filtering (their original purpose) is to FFP2, and people will
argue until the cows come home whether that stops infected droplets
only, or also the semi-mythical naked viruses themselves.

Outbound they'll stop the worst of a sneeze or cough.
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

In message , at 08:37:26 on Wed, 17 Jun 2020,
Roland Perry remarked:
In message , at 07:29:57 on Wed, 17 Jun
2020, tim... remarked:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve
the condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

If you mean the DIY dust-masks with a knob on the front, that's a valve
not a filter. They do reduce condensation, and prevent the wearer
touching their mouth and nose.

Inward filtering (their original purpose) is to FFP2, and people will
argue until the cows come home whether that stops infected droplets
only, or also the semi-mythical naked viruses themselves.

Outbound they'll stop the worst of a sneeze or cough.

I note that the one I have, in addition to the metal strip over the
bridge of the nose, has a matching foam strip inside. That seems to seal
it off sufficiently that very little moisture ends up on glasses fitted
over the top.
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 18:20:21 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 16:46, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

Nor will I, fortunately they haven't introduced that ridiculous practice
up here, at least not yet. My condition (mild autism) means that I

Give Nicola her usual 2 week delay and she'll implement exactly the same rules
as Westminster including this no doubt.

cannot relate easily to people in a face-to-face situation unless I can
*see* their faces.

Not only that, they are worse than useless unless used *properly* which
rules out pretty much everybody except medical professionals.

Time was if someone had a mask on and they walked into a shop, they'd be
trying to rob the place..! In my motorcycling days I was regularly told
to remove my helmet when paying for petrol etc.

Yes, that is certainly a factor that the No10 muppets have overlooked - once a
lot of people are back out on the streets its going to be a criminals paradise.
Muggers and shoplifters in particular will have a field day.

PT today
 

On 16/06/2020 20:59, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.


In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 20:59, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.


In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Of course it will. The purpose is simply to significantly reduce the
distance that droplets from an infected person are projected. It's not
intended to filter them all out. And they aren't claimed to protect the
wearer.


Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.


The hands of an infected person are almost certainly contaminated anyway,
so the masks won't make things worse.

PT today
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 20:59, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.


In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use the
correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't going
to be any use.

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

HTH

tim

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

PT today
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?



--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.



--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

In message , at 11:50:29 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

You are addressing the wrong function. Masks for travellers aren't PPE,
they are to stop coughs and sneezes *BY THE WEARER*, spreading the
disease. Also by the wearer not so easily touching their mouth/nose and
then wiping their snot on the surroundings.

This is, incidentally, why a DIY dust mask with a valve in it is "the
wrong way round". But they are still better than nothing.
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?


I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

PT today
 

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

PT today
 

In message , at 13:19:13 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

On public transport at the moment, not at all. Who would they be
lip-reading, anyway?
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

In message , at 13:03:03 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:
"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.
You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve
the condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

No they aren't. The majority are DIY dusk-masks, and the vent is to let
the moist air out.
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

In message , at 13:20:21 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.
--
Roland Perry

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?

And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 14:31, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:19:13 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

I cannot deal with people face toÂ* face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

On public transport at the moment, not at all. Who would they be
lip-reading, anyway?

The person they're speaking to..? Don't you talk to people..?

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 13:24, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:50:29 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

Â*In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

You are addressing the wrong function. Masks for travellers aren't PPE,
they are to stop coughs and sneezes *BY THE WEARER*, spreading the
disease. Also by the wearer not so easily touching their mouth/nose and
then wiping their snot on the surroundings.

This is, incidentally, why a DIY dust mask with a valve in it is "the
wrong way round". But they are still better than nothing.

Oh believe what you like, I give up.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.



--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

On 17/06/2020 14:36, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:20:21 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are
useless.

Â*On what basis did you reach that conclusion?Â* As long as they're at
leastÂ* two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless. If you think
they work then wear one, but don't come anywhere near me with it on.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

PT today
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they
certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face. And
how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

but you are not speaking to me when I am sitting on the bus, in the seat
behind you

PT today
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 12:50, tim... wrote:

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?


An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they
certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured, or
protected or whatever.

Oh, I agree that there are people who will think that wearing a basic mask
protects them

despite being told more than once that it doesn't

how's the staying go:

"you can't fix stupid!"

HTH

tim

PT today
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 13:20:21 on Wed, 17 Jun
2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are
useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

+1

PT today
 

"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2020 14:36, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:20:21 on Wed, 17 Jun
2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are
useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless.

but you are wearing it to protect *me*!

(and I am wearing mine to protect you)

It might be completely unnecessary for this mutual protection out in the
street, but on PT it's going to be necessary when we get back to even 50%
loadings

so we are all practicing now

PT today
 

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:20:21 on Wed, 17
Jun 2020, MissRiaElaine remarked:

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing bed wetters
who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for the other person?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

PT today
 

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:16:27 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

I saw some paranoid with a mask take it off to cough yesterday. You have to
laugh :)

PT today
 

wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:16:27 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

I saw some paranoid with a mask take it off to cough yesterday. You have to
laugh :)

Yup, that's pretty dumb.

PT today
 

MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 13:57, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 17/06/2020 13:11, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/06/2020 07:29, tim... wrote:


"MissRiaElaine" wrote in message
...
On 16/06/2020 16:56, tim... wrote:

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

How do you know what the majority of the public think?