mike carey

Oh, I agree we have no idea of how old they were when posted, and also I would have thought it would be good marketing to post up-to-date ones now. The main reason I posted was to point out that he was resurrecting (given the day it is, that word use was deliberate) an old profile, not creating a new profile with old photos which in my view would have been worse.

It's an old indication in the forum that conversation in the thread is getting old and we'd be better off just having pizza. I disagree in this case as I think the discussion of Killian in past years is a separate issue to this new thread. If old hands are tired of the subject they are welcome to bake themselves a pizza, but some of us are content to wait a while before that meal.

In his previous incarnation we had never met but we had some banter on social media, and he always came across as smart and engaging. I messaged him on RM a couple of days ago, and he replied today. From the tone he seemed to remember me but that may only be because he might have inferred some sort of previous engagement from my message. I too was perplexed as to why he picked now to reactivate his ad. I seems a less than ideal time for that. It looks to me as if he has just reactivate a dormant ad, it has reviews from the years up to 2017 and he's listed as a member since 2014. The most recent photo is two years old, with most of them posted in 2016. It also reappeared in my buddy list when he reactivated it.

I wouldn't worry in the slightest about that. Hands are not intrinsically a problem, the issue is that they touch things and can transfer virus to other things that they touch. If you wear gloves (unless you change them every time you touch anything) you will still pick up virus on them, and I've heard suggestions that the virus adheres better to latex than it does to skin and survives longer. I hate the expression, but there's an element of virtue signalling in mandating wearing gloves, and there's also the risk that wearing them will generate a level of complacency. Hand sanitiser at the entry to the shop and again at the checkout is probably more effective. And contactless payment. For the last month the most common words I've heard have been, 'Wash your hands'. That said, if an establishment mandates gloves, just do what they say. And I would say if a shop does that they should supply gloves as you enter, and insist that you throw away any that you were wearing and use theirs.

There are a lot of gay stereotypes out there, those that have any validity don't apply broadly. I'm gay and I like to cook. That said, it's easy to default to applying them without intending any judgment, it's just a bit lazy. For those who don't want to cook, either at all or once in a while, the government here is telling people to buy take-away food. [MEDIA=twitter]1248755210673164288[/MEDIA] As I've mentioned before, one element of the government's wage support is directed at helping those businesses stay open.

The temptation for people to do this is underpinned by the comfortable middle class assumption that people have enough in the best of times to save anything. Not everyone does, and unless the person making the judgment knows the detailed circumstances of the person they are judging they really don't have any right to do so.

An interesting side effect has come to light here today. Along with the welcome news that the number of new infections is falling in Australia, the Deputy Chief Medical Officer reported today the the number of seasonal influenza cases has plummeted (his word).

Well, it's obvious. You're in the desert, so dress as Priscilla. Also, see my post 582 above.

So far, not too bad. I've been posting a bit in the 'other counrties' thread in the Politics Forum. We are currently at 54 deaths (three today) and just over 6,000 cases in total. New cases have dropped below 100 per day nationally for the first time since 16 March. A significant reason for the drop is we closed the borders (except for returning Australians) on 19 March so we have almost eliminated imported cases. The imminent arrival of winter is a great concern. New Zealand had its second death today, from 1200-odd cases. Lockdown measures have been extensive, and widely accepted with some initial reluctance at being told what to do. The intensity of enforcement has varied from state to state (cities and localities have no say, regulation is at state and territory level, not lower) but essentially the message is stay at home unless what you are doing is essential. Work, shopping and exercise are deemed essential, restaurants and cafes are open only for takeaway and delivery (some are using their providores to source supplies for customers), but pubs, clubs and bars are closed, church services are closed (or streamed on line) and most small non-food retailers have closed down. Gatherings, both outside and in private homes, are limited to two people apart from household members (with fines for non-compliance). Travel is severely restricted with some states having mandatory self-quarantine for people arriving from interstate. This has been reinforced for Easter. The Northern Territory Chief Minister's advice for Easter was stay at home and eat chocolate. Unemployment payments have been doubled (it's a social security payment not insurance, it's not limited to people who were employed beforehand) and when the day after that was announced and employers knew they weren't throwing people into poverty if they laid them off and did so, long lines at claims offices led the government to rethink. Within days they announced payments of $750/week for each employee, to businesses and non-profits that had lost a significant proportion of their business. They are entitled to the payment whether they keep the employees working or stand them down, as long as they keep them on their books ready to work when this is over. The employer has to pay the worker before they receive the money through the tax office. The latest measure is making childcare and early childhood education free to parents. All of these are essentially survival payments aimed at keeping services operating and money flowing in the economy. There are gaps in the coverage but it seems to be an appropriate response, and helps make it possible for people to stay at home.

[MEDIA=twitter]1248406874057142276[/MEDIA]

More a response than a preparation, but even for a response you have to prepare. Some put more effort into it than others. [MEDIA=twitter]1248378486533681159[/MEDIA]

They are restricting the number of people who can leave (max 1,000 per day to Beijing) and imposing stringent tests before allowing people to leave. Those going home to Beijing need clearance from their local district that they can quarantine in place once they return. So, easing rather than lifting.

Ok, so posting this here is a stretch, but children travelling or even seeing their grandparents are one of the groups who are waiting for it to end. The evening current affairs program put out a call last week, or maybe the week before, for people to send in videos of children sending messages to their grandparents. They are broadcasting a collection of these videos every few days. These are the ones broadcast tonight. [MEDIA=twitter]1247826687913365505[/MEDIA]

Unfortunately, no. But I couldn't resist it.

Yes, Lady Jane Gray was never accorded the title. I don't think Phillip's title was anything more than a courtesy whereas William and Mary were joint sovereigns and he remained king when she died.

For the British monarchy, males outranked females in the line of succession, but that was changed a few years ago (it required the consent of all the 'Commonwealth Realm', 15 of them IIRC). But there are no first-born females yet who benefit from the change. If anything happened to Prince George, Princess Charlotte would be William's heir apparent over her younger brother. Mary was the daughter of James II so was in the line of succession (but not the heir) and was chosen to replace James when he fled the country and was deemed to have abdicated. They got to ignore the actual heir, because it was basically a coup, and they just could. So she had a valid-ish claim on the throne. William of Orange led an invited invasion force that was what forced James to leave, and he insisted on sharing the throne.

Yes and no. Her title would have been Queen, as were Elizabeth's mother Queen Elizabeth and grandmother Queen Mary (they were the ones for whom the ships were named). Queen consort is not a title, it's a description. When you're talking about the wife of a current king, it's obvious what her status is. But Diana would have been a queen consort, as would Camilla or Kate be next, rather than queen regnant which is what the current queen is. The only queen regnant whose husband was king was Mary, Princess of Orange. She and William III were co-sovereigns.

Q. What is the difference between COVID-19 and Romeo and Juliet? A. One is a corona virus and the other is a Verona crisis.

I found a few airline amenity kits from long haul flights that I had thrown into the bottom of a cupboard. The eye masks in them aren't ideal but they'll work for the limited times I'll be out and need one.

Consider who you use as a pretext for your exercise. [MEDIA=twitter]1246927052785307650[/MEDIA]

This sorta qualifies as maintaining mental health or at least that of any significant others with whom you might share digs. [MEDIA=twitter]1246934509204824064[/MEDIA] Ok, I intended to post the list, but the dance bit to which it replied fits into the general theme of the thread.

David. Well, actually he was christened Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David but known as David to family and friends. The last four names are those of the patron saints of the four home nations.

All of us tend to adjust our lifestyles to match a reliable income at whatever level that might be, so reinvention after a sudden change of circumstances can be difficult especially with expenses that are fixed like mortgages and fixed expenses on properties. It's never impossible, but it can be difficult.

As @BSR noted, even allowing for generalised issues with counting there is a disparity between countries on what is counted. Some, like France, are playing catchup with some groups that they have recognised they missed. Some countries, like China, appear to be deliberately obscuring the extent of the casualty rate they face. These disparities make comparison between countries problematic and a lot of the time running a league table of infection rates is not all that helpful. Despite this, the figures for individual countries are useful as long as the criteria that are used are consistent over time (or when changes to methodology are noted and trends are adjusted for them). They provide an indication of how the pandemic is progressing in each country individually, and that is important in evaluating the precautions that each is taking. It's all part of a wider understanding of statistics, that you need understand how they are derived and what they are and are not useful for. In the case of COVID-19 their greatest value is to explain trends not to make comparisons between countries.