Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: Covid-19 and politics

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,936
    Quote Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
    Is there any possibility for letting KenG back. I think he was banned while arguing for wearing masks.
    KenG's last infraction was for arguing moderation in thread and for ignoring moderator instructions; it just happened to be in the pandemic thread. He was banned for an accumulation of infraction points (4 infractions and 13 points in the last six weeks of his time on CQ; and 16 infractions over the years).

    Generally the first step in reversing a banning is for the banned to communicate that they wish to come back and that they have "seen the error of their ways" and will behave in the future. KenG has done none of that.

    Other members have asked about KenG being allowed back; the Moderation Team has discussed it, and there is no interest in doing so.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,114
    Hlafordlaes

    I reviewed the last year of posts in this thread (back to 3 Nov 2020) and the only person I could find who was banned for their behavior in this thread was Ely, who was not banned for the subject of their posts nor the science of their opinions (nor was he a 'long time member'), but for his "Rude, disruptive, trollish behavior". He also was not banned for his behavior just in this thread; he had five infractions in his entire 3 weeks as a member of this forum, and the first 4 were for behavior in other threads.

    The only other banned member posting in this thread I found over that period of time was infracted for behavior elsewhere on the forum.

    All - now, no more meta-discussion about the moderation of this thread. If you want to discuss such things, start a thread in Feedback.
    As instructed, switched to Feedback. Here is what I would argue:
    - For no relaxation regarding politics and religion.
    - For more mindfulness of what scientific methodology involves.

    On the second item, my point is that there can be cases, as with covid, of emerging science coinciding with health and other emergencies and generating public confusion, even mistrust in science. Regarding that, and following a fact check I visited here for, about a year ago I expressed my concern about a YouTube video to its poster on that platform. The fact check here had shown that the poster and her guest, both physicists, were quoting dubious medical science and straying beyond their field, at least as I understood matters and now recall. Fair enough they should debate, I argued, but my point was that such controversy should not be hashed out in social media with general public access, suggesting a preference instead for lobbying/convincing medical authorities (CDC et al) and the medical community of any new perspectives, always waiting for those authorities to then announce policy changes. In short, due diligence in peer review should take precedence over public debate in any matters affecting public safety, and perhaps in general, in order to foster trust in science, imo.

    In line with that, it does seem to me that the topic, say, of wearing masks, has generated a bit of heat here on CQ. Without attempting to debate the science thereof, but in light of continued consensus and statements by medical authorities in favor of wearing masks, it does seem to me to be a methodological faux pas to not insist here on CQ on supporting public guidelines, regardless even of the many merits of any counterargument posted here. Would not such a policy not comply with the rules more fully than does the contrary? After all, as a member of JQ Public, should I not guide myself so, trusting in the ongoing official recommendations and eschewing all else, lest as a non-spcialist I be misled? Just a thought for Feedback.

    ETA: I don't get the use of my username at the start of the quoted moderation comment. Lends an unfortunate personal tone to it, almost rule-breaky.
    Last edited by Hlafordlaes; 2021-Nov-07 at 03:40 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,439
    If CQ were to have a policy of "supporting public guidelines", which public health guidelines would be chosen?
    This is an international forum, after all, and public health guidelines relating to Covid have differed considerably around the globe, particularly at the start of the pandemic when the available science was often of poor quality and consensus was absent. I don't remember much "heat" relating to the use of face coverings, but most of the discussion I do recall took place at exactly that inconclusive point in the development of the scientific evidence-base.
    So, for instance, we saw the USA suddenly adopting a masking policy at a time when many experts in the UK were advising caution, and experts in Scandinavia were advising against.
    That's an alarming situation for JQ Public, who might reasonably wonder who is "right" and who is "wrong". I'd suggest that CQ shouldn't be trying to choose sides in that sort of situation, but should be open to a discussion of the uncertain underlying science that leads to different experts holding diametrically opposed opinions. It also might lead to a better understanding of, and sympathy with, the public health authorities who are forced to make immediate life-or-death binary choices based on such poor-quality data. As someone who had to make that sort of decision frequently when the outcome affected only one person, I don't envy those who have to do it on behalf of millions.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,218
    Agreed. The mask issue has elements of political decisions. The science is complicated in that not all masks nor situations, are alike. You could equally call for a vaccine passport stance, and that remains politically contentious too. Personally I wear a mask as default, and find the French vaccine passport to enter restaurants, for example, reassuring when compared to the current UK test regime, but I can see why politicians have difficult choices to make about those things.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,439
    Well, we should set aside the politics.
    Stepping away from that, the fact remains that public health authorities around the world were faced with making life-or-death categorical choices based on insufficient data. It's no wonder different countries went dramatically different ways at the start of the pandemic. I recall public health policy in Sweden being criticized by various posters on this forum, simply because Sweden was doing things differently from accepted policy in the USA and much of the rest of Europe. Eighteen months later, Sweden has accumulated considerably fewer deaths per capita than the USA, the UK, or the EU. That's undoubtedly multifactorial, and it's likely Sweden could have done better than it has done, but it's a good demonstration that (to paraphrase Shaw) the public health policies of one's own country are not laws of nature.
    Which (getting back to the OP) is why I feel CQ shouldn't be filtering discussion on the basis of a single national public health strategy.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Gillianren View Post
    Ludicrous or not, the disease has been politicized in the US. Not being able to discuss that politicization means not being able to discuss important policy aspects at all in any substantive way.
    I agree. But scientifically speaking, it is a fact that some U.S. state policies minimize deaths from Covid, and other states' policies do not -- they result in unnecessary deaths from Covid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gillianren View Post
    As it happens, I don't tend to think the people most responsible are acting for political reasons....
    Oh, I think there are a lot of governors who are acting for purely political reasons (as opposed to humanitarian, ethical, and/or medical reasons). And it is a question of fact which political party most of those political-acting governors fall into. It seems silly not to be able to provide this data, but I will abide by the rule at this point....
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    I agree. But scientifically speaking, it is a fact that some U.S. state policies minimize deaths from Covid, and other states' policies do not -- they result in unnecessary deaths from Covid.



    Oh, I think there are a lot of governors who are acting for purely political reasons (as opposed to humanitarian, ethical, and/or medical reasons). And it is a question of fact which political party most of those political-acting governors fall into. It seems silly not to be able to provide this data, but I will abide by the rule at this point....
    Politics aside, there are more factors in this pandemic than early deaths. There is a balance between individual life changes and society changes, also between outcomes and incomes for individuals and nation states. Scientists have to focus on parameters, but there are always many more considerations making up the big picture, to use an overworked phrase.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,612
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    There is a balance between individual life changes and society changes, also between outcomes and incomes for individuals and nation states. Scientists have to focus on parameters, but there are always many more considerations making up the big picture, to use an overworked phrase.
    Yes, one would have thought the U.S. "partisan gap" might have been detectable prior to the vaccines becoming available, but the "parameters" apparently canceled each other out for the most part. That is, until the vaccines became available. I just received notification this morning (David Leonhardt) that the partisan gap in Covid deaths has grown larger. Since the following is factual data pinpointing a conspicuous correspondence for the difference in number of deaths, it ought to be permitted here: "In October, 25 out of every 100,000 residents of heavily Trump counties died from Covid, more than three times higher than the rate in heavily Biden counties (7.8 per 100,000)."

    I'm sure that most people here believe it is ridiculous that the question of getting vaccinated against Covid should have anything to do with American politics.

    [Edit to add: Sorry if this is behind a paywall: Re partisan Covid death toll]
    Last edited by Cougar; 2021-Nov-08 at 04:28 PM. Reason: link
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    32,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    Oh, I think there are a lot of governors who are acting for purely political reasons (as opposed to humanitarian, ethical, and/or medical reasons). And it is a question of fact which political party most of those political-acting governors fall into. It seems silly not to be able to provide this data, but I will abide by the rule at this point....
    To clarify, I think there are cynical personal reasons involved--it's about a decision to maintain power, not just because there is some political policy involved.
    _____________________________________________
    Gillian

    "Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

    "You can't erase icing."

    "I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    14,313
    Reminder, folks: this is a feedback thread for the discussion of a proposed rule change...and not for the kind of political discussions themselves that the proposal would allow.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •