so what are the rules now?
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9905
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Re: so what are the rules now?
Restrictions may have ended - but not ended. And lateral flow tests are no longer felt essential enough for the government to pay for them, so they really can't be particularly important in our lives from now on.
Except...... I am still being required to take a LFT test before I can join in a particular studio visit I am going on.
So, restrictions have not ended. Of course, the weasel word which was added after Johnson told us all restrictions would end, was legal. Pendantic or not, this enabled his initial lie to be converted to truth, but not before the newspapers had splashed the original across the headlines. "All restrictions to End!"
Arb.
Except...... I am still being required to take a LFT test before I can join in a particular studio visit I am going on.
So, restrictions have not ended. Of course, the weasel word which was added after Johnson told us all restrictions would end, was legal. Pendantic or not, this enabled his initial lie to be converted to truth, but not before the newspapers had splashed the original across the headlines. "All restrictions to End!"
Arb.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
Julian wrote:
Edit: Original reply missed the “in a performance with” bit so I initially thought didds was doing a slightly joking “asking for a friend” phrasing when it was actually him who was positive. Sorry for the misunderstanding due to not reading the original post carefully enough. I have attempted to correct the bits of my post that were thus inapplicable.
Hi julian - merely for the record...
all alst week I was in s atge perforamce.
We finished on Sat night.
Sunday a cast member announced he had teste +ve on Sunday morning.
Sun MT LFT showed negative.
Monday I was pinged that Id been near somebody on the 19th (Saturday)
Mon, Tue MT LFT showed negative.
Wed positive. I took a seocnd "to be sure" - also positive
This morning positive
thats the time line
![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5676
- Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
A number of pubs in my town have a "no trainers" rule. There is no government rule about footwear, but private establishments are allowed to impose restrictions outside of those imposed by governments.Arborbridge wrote:Restrictions may have ended - but not ended. And lateral flow tests are no longer felt essential enough for the government to pay for them, so they really can't be particularly important in our lives from now on.
Except...... I am still being required to take a LFT test before I can join in a particular studio visit I am going on.
So, restrictions have not ended. Of course, the weasel word which was added after Johnson told us all restrictions would end, was legal. Pendantic or not, this enabled his initial lie to be converted to truth, but not before the newspapers had splashed the original across the headlines. "All restrictions to End!"
Arb.
Are you suggesting that your studio shouldn't have the independence to impose its rules, such as with LFT, and that it must follow only diktats from a higher body? Or that Governments should have a say in every single part of everyone's life?
Personally I am happy that I have many freedoms of choice outside of government, and enjoy living in a country whose society has plenty of choice as to which establishments I can choose to avail myself of. Further I embrace that establishments have their freedom to establish there own rules and choices in how they run their businesses too.
If I wanted a life, and country, with fewer freedoms, or more restrictions, I have the choice to move there too.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5855
- Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
WHAT !!!dealtn wrote: A number of pubs in my town have a "no trainers" rule.
how posh are these pubs
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Re: so what are the rules now?
Wow, I thought "no trainer" rules had gone years ago.pje16 wrote:WHAT !!!dealtn wrote: A number of pubs in my town have a "no trainers" rule.
how posh are these pubs
It would be amusing to see Michael Jordan turn up wearing one of his own pairs and be refused entrance though.
John
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9905
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Re: so what are the rules now?
dealtn wrote:A number of pubs in my town have a "no trainers" rule. There is no government rule about footwear, but private establishments are allowed to impose restrictions outside of those imposed by governments.Arborbridge wrote:Restrictions may have ended - but not ended. And lateral flow tests are no longer felt essential enough for the government to pay for them, so they really can't be particularly important in our lives from now on.
Except...... I am still being required to take a LFT test before I can join in a particular studio visit I am going on.
So, restrictions have not ended. Of course, the weasel word which was added after Johnson told us all restrictions would end, was legal. Pendantic or not, this enabled his initial lie to be converted to truth, but not before the newspapers had splashed the original across the headlines. "All restrictions to End!"
Arb.
Are you suggesting that your studio shouldn't have the independence to impose its rules, such as with LFT, and that it must follow only diktats from a higher body? Or that Governments should have a say in every single part of everyone's life?
Personally I am happy that I have many freedoms of choice outside of government, and enjoy living in a country whose society has plenty of choice as to which establishments I can choose to avail myself of. Further I embrace that establishments have their freedom to establish there own rules and choices in how they run their businesses too.
If I wanted a life, and country, with fewer freedoms, or more restrictions, I have the choice to move there too.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5676
- Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
How so?Arborbridge wrote:dealtn wrote: A number of pubs in my town have a "no trainers" rule. There is no government rule about footwear, but private establishments are allowed to impose restrictions outside of those imposed by governments.
Are you suggesting that your studio shouldn't have the independence to impose its rules, such as with LFT, and that it must follow only diktats from a higher body? Or that Governments should have a say in every single part of everyone's life?
Personally I am happy that I have many freedoms of choice outside of government, and enjoy living in a country whose society has plenty of choice as to which establishments I can choose to avail myself of. Further I embrace that establishments have their freedom to establish there own rules and choices in how they run their businesses too.
If I wanted a life, and country, with fewer freedoms, or more restrictions, I have the choice to move there too.on several levels, especially the last sentence. This isn't just a man of straw post, but a whole hackstack.
The way I read your claim is the Government has said there are no restrictions, but in fact restrictions remain, namely those it doesn't impose. Exactly the same as in many other walks of life, as I have pointed out. (And which nobody appears to be attacking the government over).
So what exactly is your claim or grievance here, if my response is a "strawman" to it?
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9905
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Re: so what are the rules now?
I'm not going to both with an extended argument. It's a man of straw argument because what you've said sounds as though they are similar cases, but they aren't.dealtn wrote:How so?Arborbridge wrote:on several levels, especially the last sentence. This isn't just a man of straw post, but a whole hackstack.
The way I read your claim is the Government has said there are no restrictions, but in fact restrictions remain, namely those it doesn't impose. Exactly the same as in many other walks of life, as I have pointed out. (And which nobody appears to be attacking the government over).
So what exactly is your claim or grievance here, if my response is a "strawman" to it?
My point remains: Boris tried to claim a great victory by ending restrictions, but he didn't: it's just that he's laid the responsibility on other people. It was a political puff, as usual.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5676
- Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
No, I make no claim they are similar cases. where the similarity exists, and also exist for hundreds of examples in between, is that Governments aren't the sole introducer of restrictions. So any complaint or grievance on the relaxation or removal of Covid restrictions on the basis that the Government failed to mention any potential restrictions that aren't from them, is a strange, and weak one in my opinion.Arborbridge wrote:I'm not going to both with an extended argument. It's a man of straw argument because what you've said sounds as though they are similar cases, but they aren't.dealtn wrote: How so?
The way I read your claim is the Government has said there are no restrictions, but in fact restrictions remain, namely those it doesn't impose. Exactly the same as in many other walks of life, as I have pointed out. (And which nobody appears to be attacking the government over).
So what exactly is your claim or grievance here, if my response is a "strawman" to it?
My point remains: Boris tried to claim a great victory by ending restrictions, but he didn't: it's just that he's laid the responsibility on other people. It was a political puff, as usual.
I am consistent across the full spectrum, as in this case is the government, so this isn't a strawman by my recognition of what is meant by a that phrase.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:38 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
Are you sure what you claim to be non legal restrictions are not in fact guidance? Sweden managed the entirety of the pandemic with guidance. I don't see that as passing the buck, merely allowing people to make their own judgement calls.Arborbridge wrote:I'm not going to both with an extended argument. It's a man of straw argument because what you've said sounds as though they are similar cases, but they aren't.dealtn wrote: How so?
The way I read your claim is the Government has said there are no restrictions, but in fact restrictions remain, namely those it doesn't impose. Exactly the same as in many other walks of life, as I have pointed out. (And which nobody appears to be attacking the government over).
So what exactly is your claim or grievance here, if my response is a "strawman" to it?
My point remains: Boris tried to claim a great victory by ending restrictions, but he didn't: it's just that he's laid the responsibility on other people. It was a political puff, as usual.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9516
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Re: so what are the rules now?
Hope you're still OK.didds wrote: Wed positive. I took a seocnd "to be sure" - also positive
This morning positive
thats the time line
The fact you were fit to be here on Lemonfool suggests your symptoms as mild to medium. At the more severe end of regular lurgies you wouldn't want to expose yourself to a computer screen!
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Re: so what are the rules now?
My step son aged 33 big strong strapping lad, rugby player, 6ft 5in, 18 stone of muscle. Triple vaxxed, went out to an award dinner in London last week, now been in bed for the last four days with covid. Feels absolutely dreadful.
We did a PCR test on him and he had the highest viral load we have seen.
This is not over yet.
Stay safe.
John
We did a PCR test on him and he had the highest viral load we have seen.
This is not over yet.
Stay safe.
John