The Nightmare that is a Reality

espiegel123

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

CRAKROX

@Gravitas said:

@NeuM said:

@drcongo said:
@SimonSomeone There’s a massive thing you’re maybe missing here, which is that getting vaccinated will also largely stop you spreading it. To your immune-suppressed elderly neighbour, or relative. To the person you brush past in the street who is undergoing chemotherapy and cannot be vaccinated. Etc.

Some of us who have gotten the vaccine have done it for the greater good. Taking ivermectin, even if it was effective, which it isn’t, would help the taker only. Personally I can’t even begin to understand a thought process that amounts to “screw everyone else, I’m sorted”. I would hate to think I’d killed someone just because I’d rather take a drug that absolutely nobody is seriously saying has any effect on COVID, than take a vaccine that is conclusively proven.

That’s just not true. The “current wisdom” says even vaccinated can be carriers and spread COVID to others.

Agreed.

This has been proven here in the UK.
The current ,’vaccines’, are ineffective in regards to the Delta variant
and even before the delta variant was discovered there had been reports
of people who had received the vaccine and succumbed to the virus.
I personally know of three people who have had the vaccine and have been ill
with mild to severe coronavirus.

Right now a lot of people are asymptomatic and/or virulent and combined
with the Lockdowns which have damage the health of many people we are
looking at a very serious long term problem, for instance the U.K government
put out a contract a couple months ago asking for a company to provide
for excess deaths here in London covering the next four years.
Our city is designed to cope with ,’normal’, life and death for 15 million people.
For the government to prepare for a situation where the mortuaries
here in London cannot cope is a worrying situation.

This was just to replace a standing conteacr

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

I think you’ll find being vaccinated reduces your chance of becoming infected by covid as well as effecting it’s ability to reproduce and spread to others.

So whilst it’s possible for both vaccinated and unvaccinated people to catch and spread Covid to say they are the same is wrong.

AlmostAnonymous

A large thank you to everyone because when i walk away from the news, family, and don't wanna be bombarded with peoples fee fees and opinions and just want to tune that stuff out, come to my favorite music making site, and forget about COVID martyrs and naysayers for a while, Im so glad we don't have a thread at the op of the lists 99% of the time dealing with that shit

FFS....take this shit to CDC.gov

espiegel123

@AlmostAnonymous said:

....

FFS....take this shit to CDC.gov

You can choose not to read this thread which is clearly marked Off-Topic

NeuM

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

AlmostAnonymous

I could. Or one could choose a more appropriate website for COVID bitching

NeuM

@espiegel123 said:

@AlmostAnonymous said:

....

FFS....take this shit to CDC.gov

You can choose not to read this thread which is clearly marked Off-Topic

Remember when people were having conniption fits over the off-topic crypto thread?

simonnowis

as has been mentioned in this thread a number of times,

it's a story war
a difference of opinion over narrative

stats, and articles,
doctors 'n' doctored media

and yet at the same time,
an ever increasing increase in «control» of narrative through **********

the more you write another's story the more authoritarian you become

no matter how right you may feel your narrative to be

the Panglosh language is a code

simonnowis

add to this, the same «control» that criminalises plants & fungi
plants & fungi i believe can be healing

this same «control» wants to ***** us all with BRANDED™ chemicals?

i'm all for choice )

simonnowis

and coming to this thread is a choice ...

maybe it's a part of all of us like the drama, the grrrr, the breath rising in the body,
the electricity moving, the e-motions ...

maybe this is a safe space to consider the views and stories of others?

afterall it's the apps and music that brings us here
this is all offtopic
watercoilr talk

a big smile to @AudioGus and others for teh memes and lightness

like townes van zandt telling jokes between heartbreak

if Life is indeed a story, my vote is for a comedy )

espiegel123

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

Which statement do you find questionable?

I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece.

Do you question the statement that a vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person that hasn't had COVID?

AudioGus

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

Which statement do you find questionable?

I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece.

Do you question the statement that a vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person that hasn't had COVID?

Your commitment is astounding.

NeuM

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

Which statement do you find questionable?

I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece.

Do you question the statement that a vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person that hasn't had COVID?

Each point you've stated as fact. Provide your sources.

NeuM

@AudioGus said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

Which statement do you find questionable?

I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece.

Do you question the statement that a vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person that hasn't had COVID?

Your commitment is astounding.

We're having a conversation here, Gus.

AlmostAnonymous

espiegel123

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@espiegel123 said:

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

You are conflating a few things. They have been discussed here before,

It is true that IF a vaccinated person becomes infected that they can pass it on. That is NOT the same as a vaccinated person being AS LIKELY to pass it on.

1 - a random uninfected vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than a random unvaccinated person that has not been infected. Hence, when there are many unvaccinated in the population, a random unvaccinated person is more likely than to eventually spread the disease than a random vaccinated person because that unvaccinated person is more likely to become infectious)

2 - current data indicates that a vaccinated person that becomes infected remains infectious for a shorter duration than someone that has not been vaccinated and not had COVID

3 - there are pretty strong indications that a large percentage of unvaccinated adults are also resistant to masking...which would increase the likelihood that they would pass their infection on if they became infected

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources?

Which statement do you find questionable?

I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece.

Do you question the statement that a vaccinated person is less likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person that hasn't had COVID?

Each point you've stated as fact. Provide your sources.

When you answer the question, we can proceed. I am trying to avoid the past pattern of my posting something and your expressing general dissatisfaction to my reply without being specific and then you posting a slew of links that distract from coming to a better understanding.

I am trying to understand what you believe to be true. Rather than post information that's irrelevant because you don't question it, let's have a conversation to better understand each other.

The place to start is simple: do you believe a vaccinated person is less likely to become sick from COVID than an unvaccinated person that has not already had COVID.

Gravitas

@CRAKROX said:

@Gravitas said:

@NeuM said:

@drcongo said:
@SimonSomeone There’s a massive thing you’re maybe missing here, which is that getting vaccinated will also largely stop you spreading it. To your immune-suppressed elderly neighbour, or relative. To the person you brush past in the street who is undergoing chemotherapy and cannot be vaccinated. Etc.

Some of us who have gotten the vaccine have done it for the greater good. Taking ivermectin, even if it was effective, which it isn’t, would help the taker only. Personally I can’t even begin to understand a thought process that amounts to “screw everyone else, I’m sorted”. I would hate to think I’d killed someone just because I’d rather take a drug that absolutely nobody is seriously saying has any effect on COVID, than take a vaccine that is conclusively proven.

That’s just not true. The “current wisdom” says even vaccinated can be carriers and spread COVID to others.

Agreed.

This has been proven here in the UK.
The current ,’vaccines’, are ineffective in regards to the Delta variant
and even before the delta variant was discovered there had been reports
of people who had received the vaccine and succumbed to the virus.
I personally know of three people who have had the vaccine and have been ill
with mild to severe coronavirus.

Right now a lot of people are asymptomatic and/or virulent and combined
with the Lockdowns which have damage the health of many people we are
looking at a very serious long term problem, for instance the U.K government
put out a contract a couple months ago asking for a company to provide
for excess deaths here in London covering the next four years.
Our city is designed to cope with ,’normal’, life and death for 15 million people.
For the government to prepare for a situation where the mortuaries
here in London cannot cope is a worrying situation.

This was just to replace a standing conteacr

@NeuM said:

@supadom said:

@Simon said:

@supadom said:
True. It’s a choice to play the lottery between no Covid, Covid and long Covid.

You left out "death" :-)

I guess the other aspect of this is that it might be ok for you to play the lottery with your own health, but it is not when you are playing the lottery with other people's health by possibly infecting them.

Or to look at it from the other direction: would you want to end up in hospital seriously ill just because someone else couldn't be bothered to take precautions?

Yep

I see you responded to a ridiculous comment which still needs to be refuted.

Vaccinated people can still get COVID. Vaccinated people can still transmit COVID to others. These are documented facts.

Given those two facts, it is the sole responsibility of those at-risk and their families to get vaccinated and to take whatever measures are appropriate to their situation.

An unvaccinated person has no greater chance of spreading COVID than a vaccinated person. They are both potential spreaders. Saying otherwise is just an uninformed position of propaganda.

I think you’ll find being vaccinated reduces your chance of becoming infected by covid as well as effecting it’s ability to reproduce and spread to others.

So whilst it’s possible for both vaccinated and unvaccinated people to catch and spread Covid to say they are the same is wrong.

As one member has said
on this forum previously.
There is no right or wrong.
Merely an opinion.

[Deleted User]

There seems to be something about the name Simon that is correlated with interest in this thread.

SimonSomeone, Simon, Simonnowis.

Conspiracy?

I have actually thought of deleting my account which I think would make this thread disappear. But maybe that's actually selfish, trying to hide from controversy to which I'm attracted and repelled, in phases. And often I find myself without any courage and would rather hide away. But people have put a lot of effort into writing here, for better or worse. And interestingly @michael hasn't decided to close it yet. For which I think he deserves a lot of credit. But maybe one day it will be time to. Most people have been pretty grown up in putting their points forward though, which is something to be pleased about.

Anyway, turns out you can't delete an account without requesting to do so, which makes it harder to do on whim.

AudioGus

@AlmostAnonymous said:

HAH!

AudioGus

@SimonSomeone said:
There seems to be something about the name Simon that is correlated with interest in this thread.

SimonSomeone, Simon, Simonnowis.

Conspiracy?

I have actually thought of deleting my account which I think would make this thread disappear. But maybe that's actually selfish, trying to hide from controversy to which I'm attracted and repelled, in phases. And often I find myself without any courage and would rather hide away. But people have put a lot of effort into writing here, for better or worse. And interestingly @michael hasn't decided to close it yet. For which I think he deserves a lot of credit. But maybe one day it will be time to. Most people have been pretty grown up in putting their points forward though, which is something to be pleased about.

Anyway, turns out you can't delete an account without requesting to do so, which makes it harder to do on whim.

Please do not delete this thread. This is vital research. I am pretty sure some new form of online psychosis will be discovered here.

Simon

@Gravitas said:
As one member has said
on this forum previously.
There is no right or wrong.
Merely an opinion.

Perhaps, but the real issue is: who's opinion do you believe?

Doctors, researchers and scientists, or armchair experts?

AlmostAnonymous

Dr. Kevorkians

Gravitas

@Simon said:

@Gravitas said:
As one member has said
on this forum previously.
There is no right or wrong.
Merely an opinion.

Perhaps, but the real issue is: who's opinion do you believe?

Doctors, researchers and scientists, or armchair experts?

Is it actually important for me to prove to you or anyone else what I believe?

This is a public forum and is going to be here
for a long time so when I read back on my words
these are my responses in this moment.
I have to live with that.

I can only interpret what you're saying or trying to convey.
I don't know whether your first language is English for instance?
Interpret what I write at will.

We're still free to think for ourselves.

Simon

@AudioGus said:
Please do not delete this thread. This is vital research. I am pretty sure some new form of online psychosis will be discovered here.

Yes, it's called "Chronic Gus Syndrome": the irrational act of entering and re-entering a thread simply to post messages saying that one thinks the thread that one is contributing to should not exist. :-)

Simon

@Gravitas said:
Is it actually important for me to prove to you or anyone else what I believe?

>

This is a public forum and is going to be here
for a long time so when I read back on my words
these are my responses in this moment.
I have to live with that.

I think that a lot of the posting in this thread is not about changing the other guy's view. People with deeply held views (on all sides) are not going to be changed easily, if at all.

The posts here have more to do with seeing something that we feel is not true and not being happy with letting it just be published without being challanged.

If someone said "COVID doesn't exist, it is just a media fabrication" I think most of us wouldn't be happy letting that go unchallenged. You let it go unchallenged and many people start to believe it must be true because nobody has challenged it.

Gravitas

@Simon said:

@Gravitas said:
Is it actually important for me to prove to you or anyone else what I believe?

>

This is a public forum and is going to be here
for a long time so when I read back on my words
these are my responses in this moment.
I have to live with that.

I think that a lot of the posting in this thread is not about changing the other guy's view. People with deeply held views (on all sides) are not going to be changed easily, if at all.

The posts here have more to do with seeing something that we feel is not true and not being happy with letting it just be published without being challanged.

If someone said "COVID doesn't exist, it is just a media fabrication" I think most of us wouldn't be happy letting that go unchallenged. You let it go unchallenged and many people start to believe it must be true because nobody has challenged it.

It’s my right to let it go unchallenged.

Why pick an argument on a topic when it’s been on everyone’s lips for the past how long???

Right now I’m having fun experimenting with a delay rack and buffer rescan modules.

For me this is merely a news update.

Simon

@Gravitas said:
It’s my right to let it go unchallenged.

Why pick an argument on a topic when it’s been on everyone’s lips for the past how long???

Right now I’m having fun experimenting with a delay rack and buffer rescan modules.

For me this is merely a news update.

Why do you even come into this thread if you don't like the discussion here?

It would seem you are the one trying to pick an argument. Just ignore the thread. There are lots of other threads you can read without getting annoyed.

Gravitas

@Simon said:

@Gravitas said:
It’s my right to let it go unchallenged.

Why pick an argument on a topic when it’s been on everyone’s lips for the past how long???

Right now I’m having fun experimenting with a delay rack and buffer rescan modules.

For me this is merely a news update.

Why do you even come into this thread if you don't like the discussion here?

It would seem you are the one trying to pick an argument. Just ignore the thread. There are lots of other threads you can read without getting annoyed.

Ermmmm.
No.

Actually I responded to being tagged after the thread had been closed.
I wasn’t trying to prove any point.

I shared what information I knew.
Other members of the forum responded.
I read the responses and headed off.

However long afterwards the thread was reopened as stated.

I wasn’t going to write anything because there is a lot of information here
to catch up on, hence news, someone tagged me I responded
and read the rest above.

So.

No argument.

Chill.

AudioGus

@Simon said:

@AudioGus said:
Please do not delete this thread. This is vital research. I am pretty sure some new form of online psychosis will be discovered here.

Yes, it's called "Chronic Gus Syndrome": the irrational act of entering and re-entering a thread simply to post messages saying that one thinks the thread that one is contributing to should not exist. :-)

Lol, yes I have not ruled out the possibility that I may be patient zero.

Although I would describe the neurosis differently. I don’t think I said the thread should not exist. Or did I?

Simon

@AudioGus said:
Although I would describe the neurosis differently. I don’t think I said the thread should not exist. Or did I?

Show your work. Where are your supporting sources? I don't understand where you are coming from. So, let's do this slowly, piece by piece. You are conflating a few things. Provide your sources or admit you are just wrong. Eat more vegatables. Look both ways before crossing the road. My brain hurts.