LogFAQs > #945531306

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, Database 7 ( 07.18.2020-02.18.2021 ), DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Donald Trump is spreading COVID: Part 2
ClarkDuke 10/06/20 3:59:43 PM #221:	adjl posted... A few weeks ago, RedPixel made a post to the effect of "Covid's overall death rate is like 0.05% you're all idiots for trying to avoid it," to which I replied with a hypothetical game in which the player rolled 4 dice, and if they all came up as 1 (a 0.07% chance), the player would be killed. He refused to answer me when I asked if he would be willing to gamble his life in such a game, but you were quite happy to chime in and say "that's not really analogous because you aren't factoring in the fact that you probably won't be exposed" (though also avoiding giving an answer to the actual question), relying on that logic to continue disapproving of precautions. Well, it's time to break out that analogy again, only this time you can't hide behind vague "you probably won't be exposed" defenses. Every person working anywhere close to Trump right now is being forced to play that game. Again, I ask you: Would you play a game in which you rolled four dice and would be killed if they all came up as 1? By extension, can you really say it's reasonable, safe, or anything short of self-absorbed evil for somebody to force every person that works for them to play that game when they have the option of not going into the office? it's quite coincidental they fervently defend one another, whilst the other disappears into the background, ok? RCtheWSBC posted... Why even have in-person debates at all, honestly? It's an unnecessary risk for both parties to travel. Set them up in via live videoconferencing and then enforce debate time limits with mute functionality from a central studio. rhandi, you know that's too simple of an answer, ok? OhhhJa posted... You have me mixed up with someone else. But, in my opinion, it is beyond stupid to bother having an "event" and only allowing 10 people in or whatever. Maybe he couldn't get that many people excited to come out to his events anyway? you rely on a lot of speculation in your defenses, it's a sign of a very flaccid argument, ok? Jen0125 posted... They have absolutely not encouraged riots. Stop conflating the two. he's a compulsive liar, it's a shame he has to rely on personal insults and falsehoods to feel important, ok? but, he'll assuredly mark my post, just as he's done with all the others. for calling him out for exactly what he is. --- https://imgur.com/qL0DHFI https://imgur.com/JL9rRLt https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ <cite>ClarkDuke posted [p:945531306] in Donald Tru... [t:79021622]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>A few weeks ago, RedPixel made a post to the effect of "Covid's overall death rate is like 0.05% you're all idiots for trying to avoid it," to which I replied with a hypothetical game in which the player rolled 4 dice, and if they all came up as 1 (a 0.07% chance), the player would be killed. He refused to answer me when I asked if he would be willing to gamble his life in such a game, but you were quite happy to chime in and say "that's not really analogous because you aren't factoring in the fact that you probably won't be exposed" (though also avoiding giving an answer to the actual question), relying on that logic to continue disapproving of precautions. Well, it's time to break out that analogy again, only this time you can't hide behind vague "you probably won't be exposed" defenses. Every person working anywhere close to Trump right now is being forced to play that game. Again, I ask you: Would you play a game in which you rolled four dice and would be killed if they all came up as 1? By extension, can you really say it's reasonable, safe, or anything short of self-absorbed evil for somebody to force every person that works for them to play that game when they have the option of not going into the office?</quote>it's quite coincidental they fervently defend one another, whilst the other disappears into the background, ok? RCtheWSBC posted... </cite> <quote>Why even have in-person debates at all, honestly? It's an unnecessary risk for both parties to travel. Set them up in via live videoconferencing and then enforce debate time limits with mute functionality from a central studio.</quote>rhandi, you know that's too simple of an answer, ok? OhhhJa posted... </cite> <quote>You have me mixed up with someone else. But, in my opinion, it is beyond stupid to bother having an "event" and only allowing 10 people in or whatever. Maybe he couldn't get that many people excited to come out to his events anyway?</quote>you rely on a lot of speculation in your defenses, it's a sign of a very flaccid argument, ok? Jen0125 posted... </cite> <quote>They have absolutely not encouraged riots. Stop conflating the two.</quote> he's a compulsive liar, it's a shame he has to rely on personal insults and falsehoods to feel important, ok? but, he'll assuredly mark my post, just as he's done with all the others. for calling him out for exactly what he is. --- https://imgur.com/qL0DHFI https://imgur.com/JL9rRLt https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1